England has been rebuilt repeatedly. It can be rebuilt again. If it takes losing a landmark to get rid of demons, IMO it might be worth it, especially given the crime, and real future which will happen if not stopped.
What does burning a building do to stop people housed in buildings scattered all across the country?
The French Revolution did not have a good outcome. America was blessed to have one, and we tried to keep ours peaceful. They forced it, not us. A Parliament House doesn’t get burned out of desperation but out of impudence and chest-thumping.
The meek shall inherit the earth. The vandals sacked Rome. How’s their name recorded? Sack the buildings and leave the people, and they will rebuild. Go at the people unlawfully, and they will infiltrate and go into hiding and remain in control.
Use righteous law and righteous judgments against them and they lose.
Does mighty England have no lawful respite from these criminals but a match?
Take Control. Arson is the tool of the weakling coward. Be strong.
Go raise up more Martin Geddeses and Christine Grabs. They can’t beat all of us.
If this was true you would be without issue. So would Napal.
You are attempting to muddle (corrupt?) Good advice with missapropriated platitudes.
.
Is good architecture worth preserving? Of course, always if possible. However, a building is still just a building. Buildings can be rebuilt (Notre-Dame, for example) and they are all the time. Repairs can be done. The US white house and Capitol building have both been rebuilt.
My point is, for the love of a building, the acceptance of evil or corruption should be unacceptable, and a singed building is a small price too pay for freedom.
Those who revolt against tyranny could be seen as impudent to the bystander, but are the heroes of history who stood up to the dictator, the tyrant, and who helped reshape their country.
.
From what I've heard on the news, England and her laws have been ravaged by globalists and the lackeys of evil. Foreigners roam your halls of parliment, and have a stranglehold on your citizens.
The citizens themselves are being arrested just for speaking up, or calling for government action against injustice.
It was the same for Nepal. I would not begrudge either of you to take up and defend your freedoms and very lives. Even if it meant losing a building or two. People are much more important!
If you think England can be saved yet by her own laws, I BEG you to get out from in front of your computer and DO IT.
I would hazard to say better people than both of us have already tried, and failed to do so.
If a match is the only recourse to save the island I'd rather see that than it to be finally and utterly conquered with nary a fight. Are the people so complacent and brow beaten they won't stand for God, king and country?
I had a response, then I fat fingered, and I’m not writing it again.
In short, burning down your own history is not the way to save a nation, and it won’t stop the criminals from continuing to do criminal stuff. Ask Guy Fawkes about it and for both yourself and everyone else, please stop being intensely stupid.
Here’s a silly idea for you - how about lawfully putting the criminals in prison, lawfully taking possession of the parliament, creating a warning to future generations against what they’ve done, and then proceeding to rule rightly?
Wouldn’t that be a better outcome?
If you can’t put them in prisonwithoutburning buildings, you aren’t going to do itwithburning buildings, either.
For crying out loud man, go drink some ginseng and think for a second.
Rooks 38 minutes ago +1 / -0
If this was true you would be without issue. So would Napal.
You are attempting to muddle (corrupt?) Good advice with missapropriated platitudes.
.
Is good architecture worth preserving? Of course, always if possible. However, a building is still just a building. Buildings can be rebuilt (Notre-Dame, for example) and they are all the time. Repairs can be done. The US white house and Capitol building have both been rebuilt.
My point is, for the love of a building, the acceptance of evil or corruption should be unacceptable, and a singed building is a small price too pay for freedom.
Those who revolt against tyranny could be seen as impudent to the bystander, but are the heroes of history who stood up to the dictator, the tyrant, and who helped reshape their country.
.
From what I've heard on the news, England and her laws have been ravaged by globalists and the lackeys of evil. Foreigners roam your halls of parliment, and have a stranglehold on your citizens.
The citizens themselves are being arrested just for speaking up, or calling for government action against injustice.
It was the same for Nepal. I would not begrudge either of you to take up and defend your freedoms and very lives. Even if it meant losing a building or two. People are much more important!
If you think England can be saved yet by her own laws, I BEG you to get out from in front of your computer and DO IT.
I would hazard to say better people than both of us have already tried, and failed to do so.
If a match is the only recourse to save the island I'd rather see that than it to be finally and utterly conquered with nary a fight. > Are the people so complacent and brow beaten they won't stand for God, king and country?
If you read the article, there's more going on (if the article or 'news' is in any way accurate, which cannot be guaranteed) than just the burning of a building or two. Politicians are being beaten up, their houses burned, some people apparently burned alive in their home (wife of former PM), etc. And a lot more.
I tend to agree with Sunnywindows "Watch, England and learn"
Not the people, tho. Amateur has a point: be better than mob violence. But the British government and ruling class? Absolutely. Watch and learn, because tyrants who push a people too far will suffer pushback that often leads to violence.
When a people feel they have no other recourse, they will push to violence.
I think the argument rooks and amateur are having is essentially quibbling. Two perspectives with the same end goal in mind.
Whether England can avoid what <seems to be> happening in Nepal seems doubtful. But, it doesn't mean that this is the best or only alternative.
Obviously best to avoid violence. If England can be saved through civilized means, that is the best outcome by far and I support it 100%.
I only worry that, if it is beyond a civilized solution, Brits may no longer possess the wearwithall to save themselves without help. Even with open revolt it may be too late to be effective. Just depends on how the situation really is compared to what the news is saying.
One important clarification - I was not asserting that you are that, but intended emphasis on “being”, as in, “in the immediate present”, and for a specific reason that I don’t want to detail. It was not intended as an insult, but as “be aware of the things you’re writing”, and I want to be clear on that. Apologies if I was not clear then, or here. I do not want to be too explicit here, but it was absolutely not meant as an insult.
I think the issue here is the impression that, given the reality of what is happening in England, you are under the impression that if you wave the flag, go and protest, and call on the law to the face of your corrupt parlement they will all of a sudden realize their malfeasance and either self correct, or turn themselves in to the nearest police officer. Im not saying violence is always the answer by any means, but if this is what you truly believe, then I would have to say it is more than a little unrealistic.
The reality is, when bad people are in charge, they will almost never give it up without force of some type. When the evil is the government, how do you force them out?. What all these countries are dealing with is not one or two or three bad apples. You are dealing with dozens, if not hundreds of evil doers collaborating with each other, protecting each other. The citizenry won't be able to march in there and demand anything without the riot police being turned on them. The scope of this is too big.
In the US, for example, there are hundreds of democrats and Republicans who are in on this, and that is just the federal congress. They are drunk on power and wealth and have body guards, and are very good at twisting words and actions.
Even an armed rebellion here would get bloody, very quickly turning deadly and and into a massacre. They do not give up without a fight.
Do you really believe you could root out the evil in government without collateral damage? That is the real issue. Forget the buildings. These evil leaders are murdering citizens with their actions.
Im sorry to say that the fact you seem more worried about the buildings than the people, raped and murdered by these villains is a bit alarming, and really not realistic.
If I had to fight to keep my daughters from being raped by the thugs they allow to roam the street without punishment, things would get escalated real fast. The least of things I would be worried about is collateral damage, like buildings.
I do pray for the UK. I can only think of one or two other times when it was in such dire peril as now. As is the entire world. I pray others gain the will to fight the tyrants. And overthrow the oppressors and demonic forces which seek to end all that is right and moral.
People misunderstand the American Revolution. It was a war of defense. Burning down parliament is neither war nor defensive.. just gives the cabal reasons for police states
I’m getting ratio downdooted for saying “let’s not be like the mostly peaceful protestors in Kenosha.” Hey remember when they also tried to burn down that courthouse in Portland or whatever? Two years ago everyone would have agreed. I remember we thought those “protestors” at the courthouse were… didn’t we call them “terrorists”?
There’s no good argument for it. It’s not being manly, it’s being an unlawful mob.
What’s different? Oh we’re in power now, “but ‘It’s ok when we do it’ is ok when we do it”, right? “ Equal justice under the law means the law is applied to everyone equally, doesn’t it?
“Nah, it’s all just about what feels good!”
sigh.
TO BE THE PARTY OF LAW AND ORDER, WE HAVE TO BE LAWFUL.
England has been rebuilt repeatedly. It can be rebuilt again. If it takes losing a landmark to get rid of demons, IMO it might be worth it, especially given the crime, and real future which will happen if not stopped.
What does burning a building do to stop people housed in buildings scattered all across the country?
The French Revolution did not have a good outcome. America was blessed to have one, and we tried to keep ours peaceful. They forced it, not us. A Parliament House doesn’t get burned out of desperation but out of impudence and chest-thumping.
The meek shall inherit the earth. The vandals sacked Rome. How’s their name recorded? Sack the buildings and leave the people, and they will rebuild. Go at the people unlawfully, and they will infiltrate and go into hiding and remain in control.
Use righteous law and righteous judgments against them and they lose.
Does mighty England have no lawful respite from these criminals but a match?
Take Control. Arson is the tool of the weakling coward. Be strong.
Go raise up more Martin Geddeses and Christine Grabs. They can’t beat all of us.
If this was true you would be without issue. So would Napal.
You are attempting to muddle (corrupt?) Good advice with missapropriated platitudes.
.
Is good architecture worth preserving? Of course, always if possible. However, a building is still just a building. Buildings can be rebuilt (Notre-Dame, for example) and they are all the time. Repairs can be done. The US white house and Capitol building have both been rebuilt.
My point is, for the love of a building, the acceptance of evil or corruption should be unacceptable, and a singed building is a small price too pay for freedom.
Those who revolt against tyranny could be seen as impudent to the bystander, but are the heroes of history who stood up to the dictator, the tyrant, and who helped reshape their country.
.
From what I've heard on the news, England and her laws have been ravaged by globalists and the lackeys of evil. Foreigners roam your halls of parliment, and have a stranglehold on your citizens.
The citizens themselves are being arrested just for speaking up, or calling for government action against injustice.
It was the same for Nepal. I would not begrudge either of you to take up and defend your freedoms and very lives. Even if it meant losing a building or two. People are much more important!
If you think England can be saved yet by her own laws, I BEG you to get out from in front of your computer and DO IT.
I would hazard to say better people than both of us have already tried, and failed to do so.
If a match is the only recourse to save the island I'd rather see that than it to be finally and utterly conquered with nary a fight. Are the people so complacent and brow beaten they won't stand for God, king and country?
Well.
I had a response, then I fat fingered, and I’m not writing it again.
In short, burning down your own history is not the way to save a nation, and it won’t stop the criminals from continuing to do criminal stuff. Ask Guy Fawkes about it and for both yourself and everyone else, please stop being intensely stupid.
Here’s a silly idea for you - how about lawfully putting the criminals in prison, lawfully taking possession of the parliament, creating a warning to future generations against what they’ve done, and then proceeding to rule rightly?
Wouldn’t that be a better outcome?
If you can’t put them in prison without burning buildings, you aren’t going to do it with burning buildings, either.
For crying out loud man, go drink some ginseng and think for a second.
If you read the article, there's more going on (if the article or 'news' is in any way accurate, which cannot be guaranteed) than just the burning of a building or two. Politicians are being beaten up, their houses burned, some people apparently burned alive in their home (wife of former PM), etc. And a lot more.
I tend to agree with Sunnywindows "Watch, England and learn"
Not the people, tho. Amateur has a point: be better than mob violence. But the British government and ruling class? Absolutely. Watch and learn, because tyrants who push a people too far will suffer pushback that often leads to violence.
When a people feel they have no other recourse, they will push to violence.
I think the argument rooks and amateur are having is essentially quibbling. Two perspectives with the same end goal in mind.
Whether England can avoid what <seems to be> happening in Nepal seems doubtful. But, it doesn't mean that this is the best or only alternative.
Well put, and I agree.
Obviously best to avoid violence. If England can be saved through civilized means, that is the best outcome by far and I support it 100%.
I only worry that, if it is beyond a civilized solution, Brits may no longer possess the wearwithall to save themselves without help. Even with open revolt it may be too late to be effective. Just depends on how the situation really is compared to what the news is saying.
One important clarification - I was not asserting that you are that, but intended emphasis on “being”, as in, “in the immediate present”, and for a specific reason that I don’t want to detail. It was not intended as an insult, but as “be aware of the things you’re writing”, and I want to be clear on that. Apologies if I was not clear then, or here. I do not want to be too explicit here, but it was absolutely not meant as an insult.
Thank you for the clarification, I appreciate it.
I think the issue here is the impression that, given the reality of what is happening in England, you are under the impression that if you wave the flag, go and protest, and call on the law to the face of your corrupt parlement they will all of a sudden realize their malfeasance and either self correct, or turn themselves in to the nearest police officer. Im not saying violence is always the answer by any means, but if this is what you truly believe, then I would have to say it is more than a little unrealistic.
The reality is, when bad people are in charge, they will almost never give it up without force of some type. When the evil is the government, how do you force them out?. What all these countries are dealing with is not one or two or three bad apples. You are dealing with dozens, if not hundreds of evil doers collaborating with each other, protecting each other. The citizenry won't be able to march in there and demand anything without the riot police being turned on them. The scope of this is too big.
In the US, for example, there are hundreds of democrats and Republicans who are in on this, and that is just the federal congress. They are drunk on power and wealth and have body guards, and are very good at twisting words and actions. Even an armed rebellion here would get bloody, very quickly turning deadly and and into a massacre. They do not give up without a fight.
Do you really believe you could root out the evil in government without collateral damage? That is the real issue. Forget the buildings. These evil leaders are murdering citizens with their actions.
Im sorry to say that the fact you seem more worried about the buildings than the people, raped and murdered by these villains is a bit alarming, and really not realistic.
If I had to fight to keep my daughters from being raped by the thugs they allow to roam the street without punishment, things would get escalated real fast. The least of things I would be worried about is collateral damage, like buildings.
I do pray for the UK. I can only think of one or two other times when it was in such dire peril as now. As is the entire world. I pray others gain the will to fight the tyrants. And overthrow the oppressors and demonic forces which seek to end all that is right and moral.
People misunderstand the American Revolution. It was a war of defense. Burning down parliament is neither war nor defensive.. just gives the cabal reasons for police states
I’m getting ratio downdooted for saying “let’s not be like the mostly peaceful protestors in Kenosha.” Hey remember when they also tried to burn down that courthouse in Portland or whatever? Two years ago everyone would have agreed. I remember we thought those “protestors” at the courthouse were… didn’t we call them “terrorists”?
There’s no good argument for it. It’s not being manly, it’s being an unlawful mob.
What’s different? Oh we’re in power now, “but ‘It’s ok when we do it’ is ok when we do it”, right? “ Equal justice under the law means the law is applied to everyone equally, doesn’t it?
“Nah, it’s all just about what feels good!”
sigh.
TO BE THE PARTY OF LAW AND ORDER, WE HAVE TO BE LAWFUL.