[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I think it's well established that here is better than other places in the world, nobody is disputing that.
Nobody is suggesting Christianity is done away with, personally I can't see any christian values in the current government... therefore I can only conclude they are using the cover of the KJV which has been advocated by both the PM and the queen as a moral authority.
And in many respects it is, and yet they don't abide by it, it's a case of 'do as I say not as I do'.

The democracy we have at the moment is in a state of flux, as legislation is changed to ensure maximum compliance to the state and if you question the powers that be, demonstrate, protest, then you risk falling foul of the law when doing so.
This democracy is therefore becoming less and less 'perfect'.
“a lawyer with a briefcase could steal more money than a hundred men with guns”
They can, and a politician with a banker can steal much more, perfectly legally...
And the public bail out the banks, and institutions fail in their duty of care aided by the government as in historic abuse cases, and the public are the ones to pay making many a victim twice over.

Some governments are corrupt all the time,
all governments are corrupt some of the time,
But let's just not kid ourselves that ours at the moment couldn't be better, or that they exhibit the virtues they demand because they very much do not.

Whilst I agree with some of the points you raise in this response, I do find other of your points totally redundant.

For example, considering Whitehall is the centre of Government and that Threadneedle Street is the location of The Bank of England, then I think that when I wrote:

1) "that neither Christianity or our Democracy is perfect."

2) "I will continue to use any intelligence and talents that GOD has blessed me with, and utilise any of the many freedoms which this great country has afforded me - including my vote - to try to CHANGE the 'men with briefcases' in Whitehall and Threadneedle Street who corrupt the system"

3) “a lawyer with a briefcase could steal more money than a hundred men with guns” and from politicians to heads of corporations, this is true of all men in authority not just lawyers. Which is exactly why our Democracy has never been, and still isn't, 'perfect'.

renders totally redundant your statements:

1) ...a politician with a banker can steal much more, perfectly legally... "

2) "But let's just not kid ourselves that ours (government) at the moment couldn't be better.."

Further; believe me, that I am not 'kidding' myself (and never have) about any of the corruption which has always been rife in both the Local Governments and Governments of this country in addition to the institutional and historic corruption in our Banking Systems, Judicial System, Benefits and Welfare Systems and Taxation systems, and just about every other system and institution we have.

But I still maintain that the way forward is not to try to replace Christianity as our 'State' Religion, nor to seek to dismantle our Democracy - as some people wish - but to change the people who hold office and have the authority in all our institutions, and to fight the corruption 'en masse until we have men of integrity in such positions.

I genuinely understand the points you make about the stripping away of our historic liberties and rights by stealth, but there is a way to combat and defeat those who are responsible - we did it with the 'Poll Tax' and we can all do it again.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Whilst I agree with some of the points you raise in this response, I do find other of your points totally redundant.

For example, considering Whitehall is the centre of Government and that Threadneedle Street is the location of The Bank of England, then I think that when I wrote:

1) "that neither Christianity or our Democracy is perfect."

2) "I will continue to use any intelligence and talents that GOD has blessed me with, and utilise any of the many freedoms which this great country has afforded me - including my vote - to try to CHANGE the 'men with briefcases' in Whitehall and Threadneedle Street who corrupt the system"

3) “a lawyer with a briefcase could steal more money than a hundred men with guns” and from politicians to heads of corporations, this is true of all men in authority not just lawyers. Which is exactly why our Democracy has never been, and still isn't, 'perfect'.

renders totally redundant your statements:

1) ...a politician with a banker can steal much more, perfectly legally... "

2) "But let's just not kid ourselves that ours (government) at the moment couldn't be better.."

Further; believe me, that I am not 'kidding' myself (and never have) about any of the corruption which has always been rife in both the Local Governments and Governments of this country in addition to the institutional and historic corruption in our Banking Systems, Judicial System, Benefits and Welfare Systems and Taxation systems, and just about every other system and institution we have.

But I still maintain that the way forward is not to try to replace Christianity as our 'State' Religion, nor to seek to dismantle our Democracy - as some people wish - but to change the people who hold office and have the authority in all our institutions, and to fight the corruption 'en masse until we have men of integrity in such positions.

I genuinely understand the points you make about the stripping away of our historic liberties and rights by stealth, but there is a way to combat and defeat those who are responsible - we did it with the 'Poll Tax' and we can all do it again.

Whilst you labour to attempt to define my opinion as redundant may I remind you that it is simply my opinion and you are under no obligation to agree to it.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Whilst you labour to attempt to define my opinion as redundant may I remind you that it is simply my opinion and you are under no obligation to agree to it.

No, you obviously labour to understand my posts - despite the lucidity with which I write.

I clearly did not attempt to define your post or your opinion as redundant - merely the relevant parts of it which clearly were, and which I clearly defined. The rest of your post I actually said that I "agreed with" and "genuinely understood" and I even underscored the word genuinely.

I only took you off my ignore list because despite us agreeing to ignore each other's posts you breached that agreement by responding to one of my posts and obviously addressing that response to me, even though you did not use my name. What's more, my post which you responded to was neither directly addressed to, or directed at you - and still I answered your response very civilly and with clarity as I always do, but already you are starting again with the misrepresentation and the thinly veiled edge in your response so I see that taking you off my ignore list was a great mistake.

Now before you report this innocuous and reasoned response and have it removed - I will ask you again not to respond to my posts and quote them and to please put me on your ignore list and I will immediately put you back on mine.

Thank you.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, you obviously labour to understand my posts - despite the lucidity with which I write.

I clearly did not attempt to define your post or your opinion as redundant - merely the relevant parts of it which clearly were, and which I clearly defined. The rest of your post I actually said that I "agreed with" and "genuinely understood" and I even underscored the word genuinely.

I only took you off my ignore list because despite us agreeing to ignore each other's posts you breached that agreement by responding to one of my posts and obviously addressing that response to me, even though you did not use my name. What's more, my post which you responded to was neither directly addressed to, or directed at you - and still I answered your response very civilly and with clarity as I always do, but already you are starting again with the misrepresentation and the thinly veiled edge in your response so I see that taking you off my ignore list was a great mistake.

Now before you report this innocuous and reasoned response and have it removed - I will ask you again not to respond to my posts and quote them and to please put me on your ignore list and I will immediately put you back on mine.

Thank you.

Kirk, Kizzy didn't quote your post (so i don't know how you saw her post if you had her on ignore?) But even if she had, this is the serious debate section, everyone is perfectly entitled to quote anyone they wish, if they want to make a point. You of course, are under no obligation to respond to that post.

[bots]

Democracy is just a vision that counties aspire to. There is not a single country in the world that truely practices democracy. Among the worst offenders are the USA and UK who maintain they have wonderful democracies when they are nothing of the sort.

Democracy is a matter of degree. Each country practices democracy as it best fits their needs and objectives. It truely angers me when the USA and UK set themselves up as the standard bearers of democracy when their corruption is hidden from view. At least with the likes of Russia, there is no pretence, everyone knows what they are dealing with.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Kirk, Kizzy didn't quote your post (so i don't know how you saw her post if you had her on ignore?) But even if she had, this is the serious debate section, everyone is perfectly entitled to quote anyone they wish, if they want to make a point. You of course, are under no obligation to respond to that post.

Thank you Niamh.

I often browse Tibb without logging in and that's when I saw Kizzy's post which clearly - because of what she writes and comments upon - was a response to my post. She did actually quote directly from my post with "Lawyers with briefcases etc", and the fact that I posted at 8.43 am and then Kizzy posted directly after my post at 9.16 am is also telling.

But the above is not the problem Niamh. What is the problem is that although I responded to Kizzy's response, civilly and reasonably, her reply was nothing more than a deliberate misrepresentation of my response and that very thing is what caused most of the trouble between us before - something I do not wish to undergo again.

Anyone checking what I wrote against what Kizzy alleges what I wrote will clearly see just what I am talking about.

I realise that this is the Serious Debate section Niamh and that everyone is perfectly entitled to quote anyone they wish, if they want to make a point, but continual misrepresentation of what one has said in a post is not debate at all, and neither is it fair.

As for me being under no obligation to respond to that post, I am compelled to respond to any post which misrepresents what I have said, if only to redress the misrepresentation, because no one likes to be falsely quoted - especially on a Serious Debate section.

Anyway, I am not falling out with anyone, merely politely and reasonably requesting someone who seems incapable of understanding what I write and who therefore continually misrepresents me, to please put me on her ignore list and refrain from quoting my posts in the interests of forum harmony and I will reciprocate.

I do not believe that I am asking too much or that I am wrong to ask.