Casinos

Casinos By Status

Popular Filters

By Banking Options

Games

All Games

Bonuses

Popular Bonus Filters

Forums

Popular Forums

Forum User Features

Complaints

Submit A Complaint (PAB)

PAB Rules and Guidelines

Browse PABs

Gambling News

Popular News Sections

About Us

About Us

external image

Statues

Bit on the nose from Grosvenor; don’t know if they’re trying to goad me to steal one or login



7EAED07F-AEC8-40C8-918F-E1CD151D2819.webp
 
Eat the Rich!

Sorry, the mob spray painted it on one of the shops in Beverley Hills where the elite hollywood actors shop, thinking about it still cracks me up.
 
slotplayer said:
Click to expand...


And in the 1960s both parties basically switched their ideology. Even though there were already different factions in the Democratic party way before that.

It's not an inconvenient truth but a big part of the history of the USA. It's cute that it gets brought up every time there's discussions about racial injustice tho.
 
sufferinsilence said:
And in the 1960s both parties basically switched their ideology. Even though there were already different factions in the Democratic party way before that.

It's not an inconvenient truth but a big part of the history of the USA. It's cute that it gets brought up every time there's discussions about racial injustice tho.
Click to expand...

Don't have time right now but seriously, wasn't Black Wall Street/Tulsa brought up and all the statues of slave holders? So its selective history that can only be brought up during the racial debate?

I didn't fact check it but this is how someone recalled it. Its easily verified for those that want to.

Let's not forget that in 1964, it was the Republicans who out voted the Democrats by 34% forcing president Linden B Johnson to sign the Civil rights act that year July 2 1964... And in 1965, the Dems took a major ass whooping as the Republicans out voted the Dems by a whopping 56% forcing President Jonson to sign the "Unrestricted Rights to Vote Act", August 6 1965... Now let's define "Irony"... The 1st Civil Rights Act was legislated during the 1957 Dwight D Eisenhower congress... The Republicans had the House Majority, and the Democrats had the Senate... The legislation passed right through the House, but shot down immediately in the Senate, signed off by then Senate Majority Leader... Wait for it... Linden B Johnson just 5 years before he was sworn in as President after the JFK assassination. He was 49 when he was Senate Majority Leader in 1957 and a major racist... Proving that President Linden B Johnson was as phony a president as they come... Funny how none of this is mentioned in this documentary. But it is in all the history books... Just look it up..
 
Got to say the scenes last night in Brixton were disgusting, 22 police injured and a direct result of the BLM
shit in London,They never cracked down on the crowd then, ignored social distancing, blamed the whites
for causing the problems.All that sent the message that certain sectors were above the law and it could be
excused by the killing of a black man in the UK.All the police were doing was trying to break up an illegal party and they were subjected to this craziness.Totally sure we will have major riots this year.
 
US independence day coming this weekend, on a Saturday night to boot. We'll see what the little Radical Marxists have planned if anything.
 
Appropriate Yes, to meet the kneeling demands for the thugs. Fire meets fire. I thought you could already tell that I'm no part of the #offendedmovement and Am rather on the free your mind spectrum.
 
Steviedoo said:
Are you here on this forum to free our minds...
Click to expand...
That's how it worked in the democracy while it lasted. Freeing our minds with little decorum, a precursor for intelligent debates or if that doesn't worked... shoot-out with words, a time before people took to the streets dead set on destroying public goods.

The photo is not offensive one bit, it's just that you anticipate with your imagination the outcome depicted in the photo. You may also attribute the BLM tag to the ordinary people, not the movement as in an abstract. BLM is not the name of any person or group of persons, is just a representation of them. There are no victims in the photo seen or unseen and no follow up, just 18th Century British red coat soldiers shooting in a battle. Soldiers are protecting the country and if given the orders - the public order that was disturbed by BLM violent protests as it was meant to mean in the photo. Think outside the box and don't be offended by anything that is not rainbowish.
 
Noekk said:
That's how it worked in the democracy while it lasted. Freeing our minds with little decorum, a precursor for intelligent debates or if that doesn't worked... shoot-out with words, a time before people took to the streets dead set on destroying public goods.

The photo is not offensive one bit, it's just that you anticipate with your imagination the outcome depicted in the photo. You may also attribute the BLM tag to the ordinary people, not the movement as in an abstract. BLM is not the name of any person or group of persons, is just a representation of them. There are no victims in the photo seen or unseen and no follow up, just 18th Century British red coat soldiers shooting in a battle. Soldiers are protecting the country and if given the orders - the public order that was disturbed by BLM violent protests as it was meant to mean in the photo. Think outside the box and don't be offended by anything that is not rainbowish.
Click to expand...
 
Noekk said:
That's how it worked in the democracy while it lasted. Freeing our minds with little decorum, a precursor for intelligent debates or if that doesn't worked... shoot-out with words, a time before people took to the streets dead set on destroying public goods.

The photo is not offensive one bit, it's just that you anticipate with your imagination the outcome depicted in the photo. You may also attribute the BLM tag to the ordinary people, not the movement as in an abstract. BLM is not the name of any person or group of persons, is just a representation of them. There are no victims in the photo seen or unseen and no follow up, just 18th Century British red coat soldiers shooting in a battle. Soldiers are protecting the country and if given the orders - the public order that was disturbed by BLM violent protests as it was meant to mean in the photo. Think outside the box and don't be offended by anything that is not rainbowish.
Click to expand...
complete and utter bollox. You know what the picture is representing along with the text, how else can anyone interpret this scene from Zulu when the " Zulu hordes" charge?
Or am I misinterpreting your intention? Maybe you need to brain train me?
 
cncas2123 said:
complete and utter bollox. You know what the picture is representing along with the text, how else can anyone interpret this scene from Zulu when the " Zulu hordes" charge?
Or am I misinterpreting your intention? Maybe you need to brain train me?
Click to expand...

The picture represents what YOU wants to represent, it is full of charge and is up to the viewer to discharge it how they see fit. It's like judging a book by its cover in the photo variant, or seeing a tough looking guy full of tattoos that in your subconscious automatically may fall in a sordid category of people just by the look. Is like how you would react now seeing the word ISIS within the Middle East context, will you think at the Egyptian goddess? It's a great photo with multiple meanings, you seem to take the most obvious one like... what's the deal of Mona Lisa? It's a portrait of a woman... I've seen better, if you take it for what it is at first sight... instead of analyzing the details of it :)
 
Noekk said:
The picture represents what YOU wants to represent, it is full of charge and is up to the viewer to discharge it how they see fit. It's like judging a book by its cover in the photo variant, or seeing a tough looking guy full of tattoos that in your subconscious automatically may fall in a sordid category of people just by the look. Is like how you would react now seeing the word ISIS within the Middle East context, will you think at the Egyptian goddess? It's a great photo with multiple meanings, you seem to take the most obvious one like... what's the deal of Mona Lisa? It's a portrait of a woman... I've seen better, if you take it for what it is at first sight... instead of analyzing the details of it :)
Click to expand...
Tough looking guy with tattoos??
dont bring me into this politics nonsense, had my fill! Haha
 
Yeah basically there are myriad of examples of.. human psychology picking what the eyes see combining look and meaning for the most immediate suitable explanation.
 
Noekk said:
The picture represents what YOU wants to represent, it is full of charge and is up to the viewer to discharge it how they see fit. It's like judging a book by its cover in the photo variant, or seeing a tough looking guy full of tattoos that in your subconscious automatically may fall in a sordid category of people just by the look. Is like how you would react now seeing the word ISIS within the Middle East context, will you think at the Egyptian goddess? It's a great photo with multiple meanings, you seem to take the most obvious one like... what's the deal of Mona Lisa? It's a portrait of a woman... I've seen better, if you take it for what it is at first sight... instead of analyzing the details of it :)
Click to expand...
Bollox, you knew exactly what you were posting, you made the context with the line " me and my boys kneeling for BLM".
Or am I just to dumb to realise your true meaning?
 
Mao and many others would have statues erected (!) as a sign of their rule, not to just be revered. Same as Saddam Hussein et al, or many a Roman emperor etc.......so when a new 'era' is ushered in there's nothing inherently wrong with removing these statues

Whilst other statues may simply cite that person's one or two great life deeds, not to praise their all-round wonderful personalities. Because as we know many of these leaders had one or two skeletons in their closet....

But really what we're seeing now is a feelings-based agenda-driven campaign to remove all links to the past, which some believe means these things never happened then.

Which is undoubtedly a mistake, as however illustrious, indifferent or ugly history was, it serves to remind. Mainly so that generations don't keep repeating the same mistakes going forward!

Of course it's foolish to destroy monuments of the past and put them all under the same label. All these people had flaws no doubt. So do we tear down Martin Luther King's statues as he was an adulterer and Communist, amongst other things? No, it seems this goes one way in this current climate of shaming

It's essentially no different to the burning of books, which is undoubtedly next on the menu!
 
cncas2123 said:
Bollox, you knew exactly what you were posting, you made the context with the line " me and my boys kneeling for BLM".
Or am I just to dumb to realise your true meaning?
Click to expand...

You really don't want to get it, there is no 'true' meaning, this is why it has multiple facets worth of picking, it's just a contextual meaning you seem to convince yourself to be while disregarding any other explanation.

Let's take it on your ill chosen meaning. Ancient soldiers shooting at BLM(nowhere to be seen in any sort of representation outside the text), kneeling for them sarcastically to cover their demands. For something 'worse' than this Charlie Hebdo team were shot dead, for real. You see... in this imperfect world we can't depict only rainbows and ban everything else. In the given case you seem to already have a whole scene developing in your head, which is healthy for your imagination but... think more positive please. Think that it were warning shots instead of seeing a massacre in a innocent photo.
 
Noekk said:
You really don't want to get it, there is no 'true' meaning, this is why it has multiple facets worth of picking, it's just a contextual meaning you seem to convince yourself to be while disregarding any other explanation.

Let's take it on your ill chosen meaning. Ancient soldiers shooting at BLM(nowhere to be seen in any sort of representation outside the text), kneeling for them sarcastically to cover their demands. For something 'worse' than this Charlie Hebdo team were shot dead, for real. You see... in this imperfect world we can't depict only rainbows and ban everything else. In the given case you seem to already have a whole scene developing in your head, which is healthy for your imagination but... think more positive please.
Click to expand...
No, you chose the context with your reference to BLM and you and your boys kneeling.
You chose the picture that only a few people wouldnt recognise, the picture is of soldiers preparing to fire on black people, and your words create the context of your support for the shooting of black people.
But @Kroffe is correct, you are just another keyboard warrior troll who is most likely sitting in his mummy's basement posting crap on here between breaks in FIFA 20, trying to make yourself look intelligent.
 
Kroffe said:
Any changes from 20 making it worth a buy?
Imo some years its hardly worth upgrading because there is barely any changes.
Click to expand...
I haven't read the reviews, but you're right. Yearly updates are negligible differences

I'd wait for '22 in all honesty. '21 probably just has new step-over animations and 2 extra lines of commentary
 
cncas2123 said:
No, you chose the context with your reference to BLM and you and your boys kneeling.
You chose the picture that only a few people wouldnt recognise, the picture is of soldiers preparing to fire on black people, and your words create the context of your support for the shooting of black people.
But @Kroffe is correct, you are just another keyboard warrior troll who is most likely sitting in his mummy's basement posting crap on here between breaks in FIFA 20, trying to make yourself look intelligent.
Click to expand...

If only we have had early access to Elon Musk's Neuralink technology... recording this scene straight from your thoughts would make for a great highlight in a American civil war movie. Frightening what you're seeing here so I reiterate, think more positive. There really isn't flammable fuel in any depiction that is not up your alley. As for the name calling, you're pretty much returning what I've said in the North Korea thread, except that you're wrong.
 
I am much of the feeling that all lives matter however there is a lot of work to be done to address the balance re equality as well as a reform in how the police,especially in America,are trained and conduct themselves.
This however also needs to be taken into account while reflecting on past treatment of ALL humanity.

 
geordiecolin said:
Anyone dare to remove the statue of Sir Bobby from outside St James Park then there would be hell to pay! :mad: It appears that he very rarely lifted a finger at home.
Click to expand...
Replace it with Bryan robson, Gazza or juninho... I’d be all for that mate lol
 
geordiecolin said:
I am much of the feeling that all lives matter
Click to expand...

Hey you... easy there. You may have to look after 'highly' educated people threatening your well being...

444.png


This reminds me of this...

WTF_Is_That_Thing.jpg.fea2c380f81898e5a8d9436d42583627.jpg


Before @cncas2123 starts to make imaginary drama movies, the photo it's a stereotype about white people, a very derogatory one at that and spot on, that they don't know the differences between Chinese, Japanese and Korean cultures among others, for them looking the same and 'strange'. Of course you can make something else out of it to fit a racial narrative. I felt the need to mention the true meaning this time together with the photo... photo with instruction how to use.
 
ternur said:
This is a statues thread? Yes? No?

I'd like to post a couple of pictures of my favourite statues. I have no idea when this comp ends and how the winning entry is chosen (my guess is our resident panel of 3 judges make a ruling on this).



View attachment 135807

View attachment 135808
Click to expand...
Not a bad entry.
But when it comes to great statues, i think the ones in Frognerparken in Oslo are hard to beat.


fdfd.webp
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top