People are going to be very upset when they find out what’s already been planned for the 2024 Olympics…
10 days later and this is all over Conservative twitter accounts… so very predictable.
This should be the focus of your outrage this week until we find something else for you next week.
Don't remember there being any fuss about the London 2012 kit. We have become less tolerant and more divided as a nation and an awful lot of it has drummed up by the media
There is one glaring reason we are a divided nation. The reason that dare not speak its name. You only have to think about it for 48-52 seconds to know.
There is one glaring reason we are a divided nation. The reason that dare not speak its name. You only have to think about it for 48-52 seconds to know.
There is one glaring reason we are a divided nation. The reason that dare not speak its name. You only have to think about it for 48-52 seconds to know.
Totally agree Seth - I used those 48-52 seconds to ponder what the reason could be and I can trace the fractures back to the SNP’s officially stated desire to divide the nation.
The complete irony of that attempt at humour, is that Palestinians had to hang pictures of watermelons as there flag was banned. Anyway, wtf this thread has to do with Palestine and mocking that situation I dont know.
IMO this is one of the best England shirts in years.
But there’s a few upset snowflakes over the artistic license used for incorporating blues and purples in the St George’s cross on the collar… personally I think it’s more scandalous that it’ll cost £85 minimum for an adult size.
But its not a St George's cross Is it so why is it on the shirt in the first place
A 'professional' in marketing probably thought it would sell more shirts.
I imagine there are lots of fans who buy each new top and they change every season.
International shirts change every 2 years, as they are released to coincide with each tournament.
Still doesn't hide the fact the prices are a joke though.
That is probably deliberate on the basis of every two years you are having a start of a new 'season', Euros or World Cup qualifiers and makes more money that way?
The complete irony of that attempt at humour, is that Palestinians had to hang pictures of watermelons as there flag was banned. Anyway, wtf this thread has to do with Palestine and mocking that situation I dont know.
Their flag banned? That will be why so many of the Pallywood flag fetishists are arrested every weekend on their marches in London, then. Oh, sorry that doesn't happen because it's not illegal at all. My bad.
As shown in the top image, you can see loads of them being clung onto by the anti-Semitic, sorry anti-Zionist flag shaggers that like to demonstrate their sympathies for murderous rapists whilst chanting their genocidal hatred slogans every weekend (everybody needs a hobby). But I know, hummus brained students have a bit of a fetish for the particular flag in question. I think it's because terrorists are a bit edgy, and/or there's a particular ethnicity that it's fashionable not to like and it's great virtue-signalling fodder on social media. It must be that, because the marches have and will accomplish precisely fuck all and are about as constructive a contribution to actually achieving some kind of peace as breaking wind.
And I'm not surprised that you can apparently not see a link between a thread about a flag and its alteration and the flag and altered flag that I posted. As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
The complete irony of that attempt at humour, is that Palestinians had to hang pictures of watermelons as there flag was banned. Anyway, wtf this thread has to do with Palestine and mocking that situation I dont know.
Their flag banned? That will be why so many of the Pallywood flag fetishists are arrested every weekend on their marches in London, then. Oh, sorry that doesn't happen because it's not illegal at all. My bad.
As shown in the top image, you can see loads of them being clung onto by the anti-Semitic, sorry anti-Zionist flag shaggers that like to demonstrate their sympathies for murderous rapists whilst chanting their genocidal hatred slogans every weekend (everybody needs a hobby). But I know, hummus brained students have a bit of a fetish for the particular flag in question. I think it's because terrorists are a bit edgy, and/or there's a particular ethnicity that it's fashionable not to like and it's great virtue-signalling fodder on social media. It must be that, because the marches have and will accomplish precisely fuck all and are about as constructive a contribution to actually achieving some kind of peace as breaking wind.
And I'm not surprised that you can apparently not see a link between a thread about a flag and its alteration and the flag and altered flag that I posted. As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
Anyway, I'm off to Waitrose now.
And now it's time for the thread to end.
Proper weird stuff. People were talking about a football strip if you were too busy shoehorning to notice.
The complete irony of that attempt at humour, is that Palestinians had to hang pictures of watermelons as there flag was banned. Anyway, wtf this thread has to do with Palestine and mocking that situation I dont know.
Their flag banned? That will be why so many of the Pallywood flag fetishists are arrested every weekend on their marches in London, then. Oh, sorry that doesn't happen because it's not illegal at all. My bad.
As shown in the top image, you can see loads of them being clung onto by the anti-Semitic, sorry anti-Zionist flag shaggers that like to demonstrate their sympathies for murderous rapists whilst chanting their genocidal hatred slogans every weekend (everybody needs a hobby). But I know, hummus brained students have a bit of a fetish for the particular flag in question. I think it's because terrorists are a bit edgy, and/or there's a particular ethnicity that it's fashionable not to like and it's great virtue-signalling fodder on social media. It must be that, because the marches have and will accomplish precisely fuck all and are about as constructive a contribution to actually achieving some kind of peace as breaking wind.
And I'm not surprised that you can apparently not see a link between a thread about a flag and its alteration and the flag and altered flag that I posted. As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
I don't know who I think are sadder, the people getting wound up about the flag being "messed with" or people rubbing their hands with glee, desperate to mock people who are upset by it.
As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
Anyway, I'm off to Waitrose now.
Why does the football shirt or Team GB design concern you but the adaptations of the flag that are actually political don’t?
You say you find that the sports designs are “suspiciously political” (I disagree) while I’d suggest the below uses are inarguably political in nature.
So why do the sports shirts bother you but these examples don’t? I personally couldn’t give a toss about either because it’s not that serious in my opinion.
If you’re a Union Jack purist you’d surely be against all forms of using its design for political gain… trying to understand where the line is drawn.
As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
Anyway, I'm off to Waitrose now.
Why does the football shirt or Team GB design concern you but the adaptations of the flag that are actually political don’t?
You say you find that the sports designs are “suspiciously political” (I disagree) while I’d suggest the below uses are inarguably political in nature.
So why do the sports shirts bother you but these examples don’t? I personally couldn’t give a toss about either because it’s not that serious in my opinion.
If you’re a Union Jack purist you’d surely be against all forms of using its design for political gain… trying to understand where the line is drawn.
If you don't understand the difference between a flag on a shirt (I was discussing the St George's cross, not the Union flag, btw, but I'm sure you knew that) worn by a national team meant to represent all the nation regardless of politics and the logo of a partial, independent political party, then there's little point engaging with you, although maybe I should have realised that in the first place?
I remember one prime example a few years back when the 'taking the knee' at football matches was being debated. A well known member of the CL bien pensant actually told me that taking the knee at football matches had "absolutely nothing to do with BLM" (in fact, he wasn't the only one, as others saw that this was the 'correct' line to take and followed suit). This was despite me pointing out that I had recently watched an Arsenal match where the commentator informed us that the players were taking the knee in solidarity with the BLM movement. Also BLM flags were all around the stadium, which was empty due to covid. And the players literally had the BLM slogan on the back of their jerseys in big letters where their names usually were. Add to this that, in an amazing coincidence, the practice had suddenly been adopted by footballers in the immediate aftermath of that particular organisation coming to prominence due to the George Floyd murder. So, whether it was down to delusion or dishonesty, either way, debate was pointless, I might as well have attempted an intelligent conversation with a woodlouse. It actually brought the infamous Iraqi spokesman 'Chemical Ali' to mind, so at least I was able to have a laugh about it.
If the opposite side is not debating in good faith, or is too dense to sensibly debate in any case, then what's the point? I do not necessarily assume to put you in either category, but I wouldn't really say the same about a couple of others further up the page.
As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
Anyway, I'm off to Waitrose now.
Why does the football shirt or Team GB design concern you but the adaptations of the flag that are actually political don’t?
You say you find that the sports designs are “suspiciously political” (I disagree) while I’d suggest the below uses are inarguably political in nature.
So why do the sports shirts bother you but these examples don’t? I personally couldn’t give a toss about either because it’s not that serious in my opinion.
If you’re a Union Jack purist you’d surely be against all forms of using its design for political gain… trying to understand where the line is drawn.
If you don't understand the difference between a flag on a shirt (I was discussing the St George's cross, not the Union flag, btw, but I'm sure you knew that) worn by a national team meant to represent all the nation regardless of politics and the logo of a partial, independent political party, then there's little point engaging with you, although maybe I should have realised that in the first place?
I remember one prime example a few years back when the 'taking the knee' at football matches was being debated. A well known member of the CL bien pensant actually told me that taking the knee at football matches had "absolutely nothing to do with BLM" (in fact, he wasn't the only one, as others saw that this was the 'correct' line to take and followed suit). This was despite me pointing out that I had recently watched an Arsenal match where the commentator informed us that the players were taking the knee in solidarity with the BLM movement. Also BLM flags were all around the stadium, which was empty due to covid. And the players literally had the BLM slogan on the back of their jerseys in big letters where their names usually were. Add to this that, in an amazing coincidence, the practice had suddenly been adopted by footballers in the immediate aftermath of that particular organisation coming to prominence due to the George Floyd murder. So, whether it was down to delusion or dishonesty, either way, debate was pointless, I might as well have attempted an intelligent conversation with a woodlouse. It actually brought the infamous Iraqi spokesman 'Chemical Ali' to mind, so at least I was able to have a laugh about it.
If the opposite side is not debating in good faith, or is too dense to sensibly debate in any case, then what's the point? I do not necessarily assume to put you in either category, but I wouldn't really say the same about a couple of others further up the page.
Anyway, best leave it there, goodnight.
I understand the difference between a sports team and a political party logo quite well. Perhaps it is you that is unable to see the possible damage of an independent political party attempting to assume ownership of a flag that is supposed to represent us all? Let’s say I don’t support that particular party. Would I not be allowed to feel British in that case? Suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree on which is the most flagrant use of the flag, if any.
No idea where the BLM tangent has come from but you’re definitely ticking all the boxes tonight. I’m fully aware of the BLM organisation as I am fully aware of the BLM movement and sentiment. That such a complex civil rights movement seems to still exist, in your world, as a single entity under a banner of evil conspiracy is enough for me to stop there too.
Comments
Don't remember there being any fuss about the London 2012 kit. We have become less tolerant and more divided as a nation and an awful lot of it has drummed up by the media
You only have to think about it for 48-52 seconds to know.
Thats the purview of a GB symbol.
I prefer this version anyway:
The above flag shows how far LGBTQ rights have advanced in the Gaza strip.
Mainly because there's not many tall buildings left in Gaza for them to get thrown off of, but it's progress of a sort, I suppose.
A 'professional' in marketing probably thought it would sell more shirts.
That is probably deliberate on the basis of every two years you are having a start of a new 'season', Euros or World Cup qualifiers and makes more money that way?
Plenty of Kuntz though
Their flag banned? That will be why so many of the Pallywood flag fetishists are arrested every weekend on their marches in London, then. Oh, sorry that doesn't happen because it's not illegal at all. My bad.
As shown in the top image, you can see loads of them being clung onto by the anti-Semitic, sorry anti-Zionist flag shaggers that like to demonstrate their sympathies for murderous rapists whilst chanting their genocidal hatred slogans every weekend (everybody needs a hobby). But I know, hummus brained students have a bit of a fetish for the particular flag in question. I think it's because terrorists are a bit edgy, and/or there's a particular ethnicity that it's fashionable not to like and it's great virtue-signalling fodder on social media. It must be that, because the marches have and will accomplish precisely fuck all and are about as constructive a contribution to actually achieving some kind of peace as breaking wind.
And I'm not surprised that you can apparently not see a link between a thread about a flag and its alteration and the flag and altered flag that I posted. As for the mocking, well this thread is full of the usual right-on bien pensant types labelling others who object to the altering of our flag (and in a suspiciously political manner - a flag that is supposed to represent all of us in this country) in the context of a football kit as snowflakes, so couldn't resist responding in kind to the kind of groupthink increasingly seen on what appears to have become the Grauniad of Charlton fansites.
Anyway, I'm off to Waitrose now.
Proper weird stuff. People were talking about a football strip if you were too busy shoehorning to notice.
You say you find that the sports designs are “suspiciously political” (I disagree) while I’d suggest the below uses are inarguably political in nature.
If you’re a Union Jack purist you’d surely be against all forms of using its design for political gain… trying to understand where the line is drawn.
I remember one prime example a few years back when the 'taking the knee' at football matches was being debated. A well known member of the CL bien pensant actually told me that taking the knee at football matches had "absolutely nothing to do with BLM" (in fact, he wasn't the only one, as others saw that this was the 'correct' line to take and followed suit). This was despite me pointing out that I had recently watched an Arsenal match where the commentator informed us that the players were taking the knee in solidarity with the BLM movement. Also BLM flags were all around the stadium, which was empty due to covid. And the players literally had the BLM slogan on the back of their jerseys in big letters where their names usually were. Add to this that, in an amazing coincidence, the practice had suddenly been adopted by footballers in the immediate aftermath of that particular organisation coming to prominence due to the George Floyd murder. So, whether it was down to delusion or dishonesty, either way, debate was pointless, I might as well have attempted an intelligent conversation with a woodlouse. It actually brought the infamous Iraqi spokesman 'Chemical Ali' to mind, so at least I was able to have a laugh about it.
If the opposite side is not debating in good faith, or is too dense to sensibly debate in any case, then what's the point? I do not necessarily assume to put you in either category, but I wouldn't really say the same about a couple of others further up the page.
Anyway, best leave it there, goodnight.
No idea where the BLM tangent has come from but you’re definitely ticking all the boxes tonight. I’m fully aware of the BLM organisation as I am fully aware of the BLM movement and sentiment. That such a complex civil rights movement seems to still exist, in your world, as a single entity under a banner of evil conspiracy is enough for me to stop there too.
I logged back on and thought my Kuntz 'gag' had upset people, phew!
Not sure for what exactly just yet, but will think of something. Getting this thread closed, probably.