- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, TXT, Maximum:11000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 2858 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [First 100 posts][ Reply ]
56 posts omitted. First 100 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 418316
So The Tangerine Tyrant is gracing us with his presence, on the 13th of July. Friday the 13th in fact.
Coordinated mass protests are predicted and the met has drafted in reinforcements to "balance" free speech and security.
There's the admirable "Show your rump to trump", the coordinated mooning will if nothing offend POTUS, who is a self-confessed "germa-phobe".
Then there's the venerable "giant Trump Baby balloon". Though are Sadiq has forbidden its flying. Watch this space.
Buckle up, it's going to be one helluva ride.
|>>|| No. 418318
I will be marking the occasion by being self-obsessed, smothering myself in fake tan, making inappropriate and contradictory comments, and grabbing my female coworkers by their pussies.
Though if by some miracle I manage to shake his hand, I shall make sure to swipe it through my arse crack first.
|>>|| No. 418320
This. It'd be far more effective to simply ignore his visit. Then again, most protestors seem to be doing it for pure vanity.
|>>|| No. 418321
Why? What will this do other than further the negative stereotypes about us?
Besides, Trump isn't even particularily disliked anymore.
|>>|| No. 418324
That's so true. From everything we know about the nature of the man, it'd be absolutely devastating for him to be met with empty streets and tumbleweeds.
|>>|| No. 418325
I don't understand why showing your arse to a germaphobe would upset them, outside of the presumed unpleasantness of seeing lots of arses. Unless someone manages to launch a liquid projectile shit at him, I think he'll just call them some names and not be the least bit bothered.
|>>|| No. 418326
>Why? What will this do other than further the negative stereotypes about us?
Demonstrate that his presence is not wanted. As opposed to assuming we are entirely tacit though our inaction.
>Trump isn't even particularily disliked anymore.
|>>|| No. 418327
> It'd be far more effective to simply ignore his visit.
How could that possibly be true?
Ignoring is easily confused with silent approval. Boos and jeers aren't.
|>>|| No. 418328
Trump is a textbook narcissist. He'll enjoy crowds of people getting worked up about him regardless if it's positive or negative.
|>>|| No. 418329
Then you need to turn him in on himself. Calmly standing there with signs like "You are the worst President" I think would probably get under his skin, screaming and shouting would feed him.
|>>|| No. 418330
Ignoring him will piss him off much more. Whatever happens during his visit, he will claim that thousands of us came out to see him.
|>>|| No. 418332
Wasn't Trump already effectively deterred from visiting in the past by threat of demonstrations?
It would seem the OP is right, kicking up a fuss is the better course of action, regardless of whether it affects Trump personally. It expresses disapproval to our own government, which is the one we actually have the greatest degree of influence over.
|>>|| No. 418333
>Wasn't Trump already effectively deterred from visiting in the past by threat of demonstrations?
I don't believe so. I can't find any reference to this, at least.
You're right though - we should be protesting our own government. We already got him knocked down from an official state visit.
|>>|| No. 418335
>The American President is said to have told Theresa May he does not want to come if people do not welcome his visit.
Something that could have also been achieved by ignoring him, then. That would have also made him feel unwelcome. Trump has largely waited for the furore to die down following his comments about the London Bridge/Borough Market daft militant wog attack last year.
Anyway, people want to protest about Trump because it's fashionable. They want to go out and protest largely so they can let people know they're protesting and to take selfies of them doing so. They didn't protest about the Saudi state visit because it wasn't cool to do so and they'd earn few brownie points for it. Protesting Trump is a bandwagon they want to jump on.
|>>|| No. 418340
Because Trump is a narcissist, he literally cannot perceive criticism of him. Calling him a massive bell end would just sounding like garbled gibberish to him. That's why he forces his staff to say nice things to him in meetings, because he can't properly perceive anything that doesn't congratulate him.
|>>|| No. 418341
But if you read the thread you'll notice there is already a psy-ops campaign to convince those inclined to demonstrate not to show up. Because not showing up apparently sends a clear message as opposed to being assumed to be silent consent like it has every time in the past.
|>>|| No. 418343
I don't think people shouldn't demonstrate, paranoia lad, I just think getting your bum out is a bit silly. One of the biggest criticisms of Trump is that he doesn't appear to take anything seriously, so we should moon him? It doesn't make sense to me.
|>>|| No. 418349
Yeah, he'll throw in a couple of "disgustings" and "shamefuls" too, but he won't actually care. Has no one noticed that yet? Just simply doesn't give a monkeys.
I think the slightly twee "hehe, rump" thing put me off too. Obviously they called it that because it rhymes, but if I properly hate someone, I want them to have to look deep into my Thai birthday suprise and never, ever forget it.
|>>|| No. 418350
> if you read the thread you'll notice there is already a psy-ops campaign to convince those inclined to demonstrate not to show up
WAKE. UP. SHEEPLE.
|>>|| No. 418352
How influential do you imagine Britfa.gs is? I know we used to be one of the top Google results for a certain beefy phrase, but people calling your protest ideas vacuous on here isn't going to result in thousands of people deciding not to do it.
|>>|| No. 418353
Is there anything happening for us who want to show our support for him?
|>>|| No. 418354
Christ this is embarrassing. Shall we have a large, dignified protest? Perhaps one with an echoing silence that would perfectly display how little we think of this childish, petulant, offensive, incompetent boor? No, let's call up the Rentamobs and show the world that when Brits make a point we like to do it like toddlers. Am I the only one who sees the irony in this?
I have been to two protests in my life. Both were well-behaved and somewhat successful, since we were, ya know, trying to raise awareness of issues that local politicians could actually do something about. And on both occasions I saw the same twat wearing a rubber pig mask calling himself 'Hardcastle' who had nothing to do with either and who just liked going along to any demo he could find if it gave him an excuse to yell at policemen and be all revolutionary innit. And also presumably to dribble on about it to his mates afterwards as a proud Anti-Whatever Warrior.
As stated above the perfect form of protest would be for nobody to show up. Trump is exactly the sort of person who thinks that if he's riling people up in large numbers then he must be doing something right and he won't distinguish between positive and negative responses; that kind of ego cares only for more, louder, more strident attention. Alternatively a large crowd standing in complete silence would definitely unsettle him and make a point far louder than screaming 'FUCK DRUMPF' while pointing buttcracks at the watching world.
What we'll get instead is the usual bunch of paranoid drugged-up shouty refuseniks and obese shrieking acrobat harpies with badly dyed-hair. It will be humiliating for exactly the wrong people and won't change a fucking thing. Except of course, it will give these sorts of idiots the warm, comforting glow of Doing The Right Thing. I don't seem to recall them out in force when America's last president was committing extra-judicial killings on an industrial scale across the Middle East.
But what do I know, I'm just a junior officer in the YMCA's Psy-Op Division, carefully monitoring the hive of organised sedition that is .gs.
|>>|| No. 418355
Maybe we should go to the protests waving a banner with the letters ".gs/b/" on it.
So here is your challenge: Attend the protests, with a banner with ".gs/b/" on it, and then try to make it into the mainstream media's photo coverage of the event.
Make sure that it reads ".gs/b/" and not just "/b/". The
paedos good people of 4chan can make their own banner.
|>>|| No. 418356
Just leave out the /b/ entirely. If we need a slash in there, use /IQ/ or /SHED/ instead.
|>>|| No. 418361
Still too on the nose.
I'll only be happy if I see a real deep cut britfa reference. "BAN TRUMP FROM THE CHIP SHOP" "ORANGE DONNY FELT MY MUSCLES" "JUSTICE FOR TEACOCK", that sort of thing.
|>>|| No. 418364
Now that I think about it Teacock might be, but Chipshop is from here, and are Aki is either from here, or simply so transcendent that it doesn't matter.
I'm fully supportive of a "don't let anyone dull your sparkle" sign, or maybe something to do with axe grinding. Or just half past two.
|>>|| No. 418365
Psy ops, or the genuine opinion that a reasonable, peaceful demonstration against an unreasonable, violent man is not a good option?
Either shoot him or stay at home ffs.
|>>|| No. 418366
How about this whole site's motto...
>"annoyingly elitist, reassuringly expansive"
I was going to say it's a good description both of this site and of Trump, but now that I think about it, in the case of Trump, being a big mouthed senile cunt with shedloads of money doesn't automatically make you elitist. However annoying you may be.
|>>|| No. 418368
>I was going to say it's a good description both of this site and of Trump
...and ARE STELLA of course.
|>>|| No. 418369
Provided you want to talk about coding, being a chef or hate on womenfolk.
|>>|| No. 418376
I felt all flushed with fever embarrassed by the crowd.
I felt he found my letters and read each one out loud.
I prayed that he would finish but he just kept right on.
Strumming my pain with his fingers
singing my life with his words
killing me softly with his song
killing me softly with his song telling my whole life
with his words killing me softly
with his song.
|>>|| No. 418386
Or that time a bunch of reprobates on an internet messageboard egged you on into shagging your auntie.
|>>|| No. 418411
I'm predicting US secret service will shoot it down, and will spark a national controversy just as insane as the current presidency.
|>>|| No. 418413
They have a permit from the Mayor of London, and the U.S. Secret Service has no jurisdiction in the UK. All it is allowed to do is avert immediate threats to the safety or well being of the President. Its powers while they are here in Britain do not go beyond a citizen's arrest.
|>>|| No. 418419
And this is why I can't feel sad anytime the grooming gangs routinely violate the local Chavette slags. Britain needs someone like Trump or Enoch Powell.
|>>|| No. 418450
Is he? You don't need rivers of blood to correct police handling of situations it shouldn't be that hard of concept for the police to grasp the idea of applying the law as it currently exists.
The most bewildering thing to me is that they don't in these situations.
|>>|| No. 418451
Do you know anything about Enoch Powell other than his name and 'rivers of blood sounds scary'?
|>>|| No. 418459
I've got a pair of glasses here for you, mate.
I hate that that speech got the name that it did. Lefty propaganda wins again "but he wants rivers of blood, running in the streets no doubt". Commie bastards, Thatcher should have had them all deported to France.
|>>|| No. 418466
Is it time to get into a cunt off about Enoch Powell?
Incidentally, here's his infamous speech in full:
Which he made in reaction to the race relations bill. Powell was kicked out of the Tory cabinet following this speech.
|>>|| No. 418474
>I hate that that speech got the name that it did. Lefty propaganda wins again "but he wants rivers of blood, running in the streets no doubt".
"As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see the River Tiber foaming with much blood" -from the rivers of blood speech.
Yes it was a total misrepresentation it should be called "the preexisting river filled with blood speech" calling it the rivers of blood speech is a totally inappropriate.
|>>|| No. 418476
It didn't help that having developed a solid argument he proceeded to jump off the deep end around two-thirds of the way through, and despite being one of the foremost classicists of his time he got the reference completely wrong.
|>>|| No. 418481
Cleverly scheduled for the day before the World Cup final. Not so cleverly arranged to visit Scotland. I can see the football chant already.
HEEEEY HEY DONALD
I WANNA KNOOOW
WHY YOU'RE SUCH A CUNT
|>>|| No. 418484
> "As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see the River Tiber foaming with much blood" -from the rivers of blood speech.
> Yes it was a total misrepresentation
The misinterpretation is all yours, Are Enoch was just being metaphorical, lad. What he really meant was "like the man in Rotherham, I seem to see the River Dearne foaming with much blood of deflowered virgins raped by organized gangs of immigrants that you lefty wankers are letting in".
I'm not saying I'm happy that he was right. I too wish we could all live together in peace and harmony but we can't, because the world is made up of two kinds of people; cunts and mugs. Old Enoch might have been a cunt but it's a damn sight better than being a mug.
|>>|| No. 418490
> Back to the other /pol/
> the other /pol/
This implies that we are on a /pol/ to begin with. What I think you were trying, in your simian way, smashing your keyboard with your ape like fists, was "Get back to /pol/ on the other place, lad.", but never mind, lad. Some of us have to be mugs, I guess.
Anyway, as you can't even form a sentence correctly I hereby veto any opinion you have on anything else.
There would be little point in going to /pol/ on the other place anyway, because even if I did want to discuss Enoch Powell with a bunch of ignorant yanks and fourteen year old idiots shitposting in between rounds of whatever online video game is flavour of the week, I wouldn't do it there.
|>>|| No. 418491
>This implies that we are on a /pol/ to begin with.
No, it implies that your dreck is so devoid of substance that it falls below the already low standards of our /pol/.
|>>|| No. 418493
No, there is only one true Scotsman taunt for the clothesless Emperor comes a calling.
|>>|| No. 418512
I might just be a top lad*, but can you explain exactly which goalposts I'm moving and how?
* Now let's see who remembers that one
|>>|| No. 418530
"It shouldn't be called the rivers of blood speech, that's just left wing propaganda"
Quote from the speech where he describes a river filled with blood
"Oh you don't understand that's just a metaphor"
Seems to me the name rivers of blood is a perfectly reasonable title and not left wing propaganda. And that my understanding of the metaphor is entirely irrelevant to that point.
|>>|| No. 418539
> Seems to me the name rivers of blood is a perfectly reasonable title and not left wing propaganda.
Then you're a fucking idiot. There's no other way to say it. Calling a speech "Rivers of blood" gives the impressionable 90% who will never read it the convenient impression that it was an impassioned call to violence, when in fact the words "river Tiber" and "blood" were merely part of a throw-away reference at the end of the speech that had almost no impact at all on its overall message or content. A man of Enoch's education probably thought it added weight and gravitas to his words, while the average spanner who wouldn't have known the Tiber from his Khyber Pass cack-handledly calculated "conservative" + "rivers of blood" + "the word 'negro'" = "racist nazi brown shirt, boooooo".
And that, sir, is your basic definition of propaganda. The fact you are here and it is now and you are still under the its spell all these years later, despite posting on an internet full of academic explanations of why / how the name "rivers of blood" was used to deconstruct and ridicule ideas that were actually legitimate concerns only goes to show us all how powerful such propaganda is and that all Freuds should be put to the sword .
Anyway if you'll excuse me I've got to go and finish shaving my head in my limited edition Jimmy Saville shaving mirror and polishing my granddad's Dr Martins so I can kick some laplander heads in when England lose in a couple of hours.
Possibly the best name for a grime track never recorded, "they tell me the Thames is just white folks and mud but all I can see is just rivers of blud [base drops] / Got yats in my yacht while I'm smoking my blunt / an all I can see is just rivers of blud"......
|>>|| No. 418543
>WHY IS IT CALLED RIVERS OF BLOOD/THE ST CRISPINS DAY/ I HAVE A DREAM/NEVER HAS SO MUCH BEEN OWED BY SO MANY TO SO FEW SPEECH! IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A RIVER OF BLOOD/ST CRISPIN/SLEEP/OWING PEOPLE THING IT IS JUST A REMEMABLE LINE FROM THE SPEECH NAMING IT THAT IS A DELIBERATE TACTIC TO MISLEAD THE SHEEPLE, YOU ARE SO STUPID FOR NOT KNOWING THAT!
I see. Firstly I doubt Powell or anyone of the same inclination ever had an issue, with that name for the speech otherwise he would have never used that imagery, clearly it was his intention to portray unchecked immigration as having horrific consequences i.e. rivers of blood, and secondly I have never misunderstood what the intent of the metaphor was, nor do most people who talk negatively about it, they and I, aren't spooked by the idea rivers of blood like what he is suggesting is a violent solution but disagree with the philosophy contained within you long term Dunning–Kruger sufferer.
If you have an issue with the title you should have taken it up with Powell at the time, because no one gives a shit now on either side of the fence apart from you since you got your infowars tinfoil hat and supplements in the post and decided it is a conspiracy 50 years after the fact.
|>>|| No. 418544
> you long term Dunning–Kruger sufferer
The irony here is palpable. I understand it's match day and you're probably 8 tins down but come back tomorrow when you're sober and try to 1) not use 4chan style "meme quoting" 2) make proper use of paragraphs and punctuation. Now go have a nap. There's a good lad.
|>>|| No. 418545
> Firstly I doubt Powell or anyone of the same inclination ever had an issue, with that name for the speech otherwise he would have never used that imagery
Then, again, you're a total idiot. Just because you make one reference doesn't mean you expect for your speech to be referred to by it any more than you would expect it to be referred to be any other aspect or part of the speech. Why wasn't it referred to as the "I spoke to a member of my constituancy speech"? Well, because that doesn't scare the mugs.
> and secondly I have never misunderstood what the intent of the metaphor was, nor do most people who talk negatively about it, they and I, aren't spooked by the idea rivers of blood like what he is suggesting is a violent solution but disagree with the philosophy contained within [SIC]
What a glorious snippet of a long and powerful run-on sentence that is!
> they and I, aren't spooked by the idea rivers of blood like what he is suggesting is a violent solution but disagree with the philosophy contained within
This part is almost parsable. We disagree. You think that he was suggesting "rivers of blood" as a violent solution. I think that that is what the popular use of that name was meant to make people think, and that what he actually would have preferred was a much more sensible solution; only that no one was doing anything to help bring that about. His reference to the river Tiber was more of a warning of what could come to pass (and has come to pass) if more sensible immigration policy was not put in place (which it wasn't, and hasn't been).
> If you have an issue with the title you should have taken it up with Powell at the time
You honestly think that Powell got to decide on the popular name given by the media to his speech, and yet I'm the one who suffers from the Dunning–Kruger effect? Christ on a bike, lad.
> decided it is a conspiracy 50 years after the fact.
You honestly manage to conflate propaganda and conspiracy, and yet I'm the one who suffers from the Dunning–Kruger effect? Two Christs on the same bike, lad.
Have a word.
|>>|| No. 418546
YOU'RE ALL ON BRITFA BEING YEASTY CUNTS
WASTING SUNSHINE BEING YEASTY CUNTS
|>>|| No. 418547
>Why wasn't it referred to as the "I spoke to a member of my constituancy speech"?
That wouldn't distinguish it from the dozen or so such things that happen during almost every sitting in Parliament.
|>>|| No. 418548
I'll give you that, but the speech was utterly full of differentiating remarks and anecdotes, not to mention imagery. A more conservative media could easily have branded it the "Great betrayal" speech, for example.
|>>|| No. 418550
>You honestly manage to conflate propaganda and conspiracy, and yet I'm the one who suffers from the Dunning–Kruger effect? Two Christs on the same bike, lad.
We call believing something must be a piece of political propaganda with no evidence a conspiracy theory.
|>>|| No. 418551
>His reference to the river Tiber was more of a warning of what could come to pass (and has come to pass) if more sensible immigration policy was not put in place
His reference to the river Tiber was a quote from the Aeneid, referring to a prophesy that the Trojan immigrant Aeneas would see violence and war before peace and prosperity in what would become Rome. It's the complete opposite of what Powell was trying to use it to express.
|>>|| No. 418552
HEY GUYS, HOW DO I GET LEFTY WING VIRTUE SIGNALS, NO BEHEADED WOMAN BALLOON WHEN I ARRIVE, IS IT BECAUSE I'M BROWN
AAGH i SEE YOU ARE IGNORANT, LIKE pale demons from beyond the ice STUPID, LIKE WOMEN.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]