Should Arsenal boycott Social Media to show Zero Tolerance?

Should Arsenal Boycott Social Media by Dan Smith

In the same week Roman Abramovich wrote to his Chelsea players promising the club would do more to fight racism, Ian Wright was left asking what we have long pondered on Justarsenal, ‘I can only wonder what deterrent there is for anyone else who spouts this kind of vile racist abuse.’

The Arsenal legend was responding to the news that a judge had ruled ‘nothing would be gained‘ by sending a racist to jail.

When an 18-year-old openly admits to sending 20 racial messages to a stranger (including wishing death on Wright) and just walks away from court, then England can no longer say they have zero tolerance to discrimination.

The teenager’s lawyer’s explanation that his client deserved remorse because grades showed he has a bright future makes me sick.

I’m not sure anyone who sends the words he did, based on losing on FIFA, should be implied as intelligent. I would much rather every student get an E but be a decent human compared to being intellectual and a racist.

That’s the point, this young man will go to university, open another social media account and will have people protecting his identity (the way his face was being hidden from the cameras you would think he was the victim).

It’s Wright who has got to live with the abuse and just accept it.

Yet this weekend the majority of clubs will take a knee, and say ‘black lives matter’ just to look good.

Sky Sports will get various sports people to say ‘I’m in’ to give the positive image that they are committed to kicking out racism.

All empty gestures that mean nothing.

In fact it’s offensive to Ian Wright, Rashford, Reece James and others who are being abused on social media, to then hear and read their profession acting like they are trying to fight the problem when they do nothing

I would rarely compliment how Chelsea run their football club, but their owner choosing racism as a topic to make a rare statement about gives slight hope. He’s said to be disgusted by the tweet James was sent and has instructed his board to make an action plan.

What makes the Russian different from other talking heads who give lip service to the problem, is he’s so rich he has the power to make the Premiership listen. As a billionaire he has the resources to order those at the Bridge to do more than just a knee to tick a PR box.

Even if the FA or Premier league disagreed with his approach, are they going to have the gumption to challenge one the most influential names in English Football for nearly two decades?
The question is what can he do and preferably what could other owners of clubs do?

I read an idea the other day and thought this was the closest way to enforce change. Like most things it involves a company reacting if they lose money.

What if every time a player was attacked on the internet Clubs boycotted social media for a week, a month, however long? Yes, clubs would be hurting their own revenue streams by not being on Facebook or Twitter, but zero tolerance is zero tolerance.

I like to think by Abramovich’s letter that his players welfare is more important than money (not that he speaks for his peers).

Clubs have in house channels and players as individuals who make a lot of money for the likes of Facebook. Look how Ozil was his own brand online.

Imagine if Messi and Ronaldo (two of the most trended sports people in the world) suddenly told Twitter and Facebook they would be shutting down accounts. Imagine the bad PR if Messi informed the world, he was on a strike due to Facebook not taking racism seriously?

That’s how you get companies to act.

Because social media is just as guilty as football for not acting when things happen under their watch.

Over the last few weeks a worrying trend has become the norm.

Morons (I refuse to call them fans) think it’s acceptable to racially abuse a human being if they deem that he or she hasn’t played well.

These are cowards who take football way too seriously, hiding behind their computers knowing they wouldn’t dare say these vile words to a person’s face. The question is, why let these cowards hide behind a screen?

For too many years the likes of Mark Zuckerberg has made too many excuses why his platform can’t provide better security checks for users.

Have you ever noticed you might type something in a message (or – I swear – even say something on the phone) and magically advertisements are popping up of the very item you might have been referring too?

So of course if they really wanted to, they could screen every account (no different to online betting). It might have something to do with the business worth over 500 billion? Why change a model that is making money?

Again though Facebook and Twitter can’t claim zero tolerance if they don’t act. It’s hard to totally judge any genre. How can we expect sport to have zero tolerance if the law makers in this country allow someone who admits to racism, to just walk away?

We are therefore relying on someone to step up and be the inspirational crusader that you find every few decades.

I think we have had enough of a society who accept if nothing changes, things will stay the same.

What do you think of the idea of Arsenal boycotting social media in protest to racism online?

Be kind in the comments


READ MORE: “I was really shocked” – Arsenal ace aims parting dig at Mikel Arteta


        1. Southampton have taken action against Mike Dean due to his officiating against Manchester United.

  1. Never been a fan, and I don’t partake.

    But one thing we can ALL unite behind is those who use such platforms for their disgusting and uneducated “views” actually need help.

    Their filth actually says far more about them, than our society as a whole.

    1. Hi Wyoming.

      Crossed my mind.

      However, I think most users (not marijuana by the way) on here will take the article at face value and think along the lines of Facebook, Twitter etc which my comment was of course referencing.

      I’m sure if such comments were posted on here, admin would be very swift to act.

      Take care.

    2. JustArsenal is a blog, and comments are moderated and filtered to hopefully stop any personal abuse of any kind. In fact my blog is one of the FEW that don’t even allow swearwords….

      1. Brilliant Pat, thanks for that.

        F.A.O. Wyoming, the following definition ;

        “Unlike social media posts, blog posts provide longer-lasting content for websites. Social media posts are often situational and event-driven, so the content becomes irrelevant quickly. Blog posts are self-contained experiences and can continue to be relevant as long as the topic of the post is still relevant.”

        Perhaps I wasn’t being so “dopey” after all.

    3. I bet if there were racial abuse site owners would act ?

      Plus show me On here where you can send a direct message to Ian Wright ?

    4. Plus arsenal have a Twitter account and Facebook page
      They don’t profit off this site
      So if your going to try and trip peeps up , be knowledgeable first

  2. The guy who abused Wrighty was in Ireland and was brought to court in Ireland. England had ZERO to do with the lack of a conviction in this case

    1. If all the fans who have abused players at games, online or in private were prosecuted we would need prisons which could hold 10 million inmates.
      If everyone in England who has ever abused anyone for any reason political social cultural racial religious to name but a few forms was prosecuted it would take ten thousand years to process probably longer. The judge handled the Wrighty issue perfectly. In the 1980’s Black players like John Barnes Paul Davis Cyril Regis and co were too scared to complain and any such complaints would have been laughed at. If Wrighty had spoken out in his day may be we would not be having this conversation today. The fact that we are having this conversation is testament to how things are changing for the better.

    2. Well said and noted Joy.
      I find ANY abuse offensive and there has been plenty of that on Just Arsenal…. no need to go into details, but we ALL know who by and against whom.
      Until the human race is educated from an early age and encouraged to report these morons (so aptly described by Dan) then it will continue.
      Just look across the pond and see how one sick individual, namely Trump, can arouse such base instincts.
      As a s/t holder, I am proud that our club has zero and tolerance to these idiots and have witnessed them being escorted out in the past, much to the delight of those who have suffered their ignorant and vile words. Wrighty knows how much he is regarded across our multi racial fan base – it must be sickening to be harassed by these neanderthals on a regular basis.
      Companies such as Facebook should /could do more, but we should also be aware of the abuse going on at every level and continue to call out those who think they can do it themselves, while claiming the moral high ground.

    3. Cheers Joy , depends what part of Ireland as uk ( apart from Wales ) would have same laws for this
      Let’s see what happens to those who abused rashford and James

      Oh and you know that fan who Chelsea banned for racially abusing Sterling
      Police couldn’t take I further
      So I maintain England don’t have zero tolerance on racism

      Still doesn’t explain social media allowing people to do this ?

      1. the fool who sent those vile messages to our hero wrighty lives here in the republic of ireland, unfortunately. i am sickened and saddened by that clowns irish person sending racist and hate messages is the absolute limit. we irish should,and,do, know better than that. i know i do not have to say this,but, not all irish people are racist, that bast”d does not represent any decent irish person.

  3. Grreat sentiments DAN and shared by ALL human beings. Those sub humans – only human anatomically – don’t count as HUMANS at all, in my book, as real humans have souls!

    The only way that we are ever going to force change on these grotesquely misrun social media giants is to hurt them in the pocket and that can be be done by government legislation AND by all of us as individuals starving them of our funds too.

    I am though now, for the first time, very hopeful of a real lasting change in society where all come together to force concerted action against this sub human species in our midst. The Covid horrors though has moved forward the general acceptance that we are all one race, apart from the sub race of soulless, anatomical only, “humans” who masquerade as PROPER people.

    I have a related point on anti racism rhetoric that pertains to JA though. In recent times I have tried to write such posts and not been able – simply because of the spam filter on this site which holds back free expression words- to use in humane context, words that describe the people who were fighting against freedom back in 1935-39!

    You see how long winded I need to be to have to avoid ordinary but properly used words which the spam filter foolishly bans. I URGE AD PAT TO CHANGE THIS IMMEDIATELY!

      1. Jon – I think 35-39 is just as relevant and in terms of developing the later prejudice perhaps even more so! Pre modern day social media it was radio broadcasts, rallies, leaflets that hoodwinked not only Germans but also those in many other countries into believing that extreme views were not only acceptible but were the new norm in society.

    1. So, I should un-ban the word N*zi? What about Y*D? C*nt?
      All these could be used as racist or sexist insults. Where should I draw the line?
      Or just maybe, Lord Jon, I should discuss my website policies with you before implementing anything else?

      1. Ad Pat, I was trying for helpful reasons to make a serious point that would aid sensibly used free speech. I never use swear words and never would, as you know.
        Disappointing then, to be called LORD JON, in this context, though in normal banter I am totally cool with your Lord nickname. What your response means is that I and others are unable to talk freely, even in a humane way, and to use your banned words in such a way as to discredit those who are them. Such as N*ZI.

        THOUGH, AS YOU HAVE ALLOWED THAT VERSION OF IT FOR YOURSELF, DO I GET THE SAME PRIVILEGE? I would like a proper (non facetious) answer to this serious question please!

        1. Jon, you made me smile – much welcome right now.

          ” Disappointing then, to be called LORD JON, in this context”

          But yes, at all other times please use my correct title “Lord Jon Fox”.

    2. Jon…

      Your words are not only encouraging but full of truth and wisdom! My respect goes out always to you! My respect goes out also to all who have commented prior to yours on the need to eradicate such vile acts of racism throughout humanity in its entirety, including in football.

      However, it is widely accepted, and by myself as well, that problems of such social origin are typically rooted in the possession of “free will”. The gift of “free will” to man has been utterly misused and the struggle to eradicate its erroneous use is a struggle in futility for now. Put clearly, our best efforts as human beings can only minimize, but unfortunately, in reality, total eradication is typically impossible to achieve.

      However, in virtual spaces, such as within many social media platforms, the minimization or “eradication” of vile acts of racism or “gross insulting” words may only be realized via the use of “extremely conservative filters”. For example, racist or provocative words are minimal on JA simply due to the use of strong filters, and for those cases that may bypass the filters, then the admins become responsible. These are possible solutions within the virtual space.

      Essentially, virtual spaces such as social media platforms can be rid of acts of racism via the use of algorithms, however, the human being(s) working behind the scene may still remain racist(s).

      Thus, the reality is we can only continue to educate disciples and those close to us on the need to use our gifts of free will for good and to tramsmit positivism, and hope that such messages touch the hearts of many and result in a change of attitude. Any other means of enforcing such may minimize but not eradicate the problem.

      Summarily, our little space here can be used to educate ourselves on the need to be considerate of other human beings, particularly in the use of our words, and in our hearts!

      And to Dan, great respect! He always preaches “be kind in your comments”, and this always brings a smile to my face, thank you! Change begins with the individual. Even in our inflamed minds, often after a loss of football game, we can always be rationale in our communication to others including the players that may have underperformed, be respectful, and strive for a healthy society.

      Sorry for the lengthy piece! *smiles*

      Please stay safe and remain positive!


      1. Fire I totally take the point you make about not ever totally eradicating racists, even though we CAN eradicate their racist posts via filtering.

        But the power these creeps have and crave is being denied them when they are, by technology, prevented from vile speech on a public platform.

        The problem comes though , when good people are also equally disavantaged by the same filter, from using those banned words in such a way as to drum up support for anti racist attitudes. I have a series of articles I want to send about racism and how it has affected many, both against and for being racists.

        SOME OF MY EXAMPLES ARE FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF FIGHTING BIGOTRY AT STREET, SOCIAL AND PARLIAMENTARY LEVELS. But I am equally disadvantaged by those same spam filters on this site from being able to use my comments, even for good and helpful reasons.

        A dilemma which COULD, were there a will to do so by this site, be overcome. But Ad PAT is not willing to co-operate, sadly , as my post above this one outlines. Suggestions please ?

        1. Jon…

          Again, I really do understand your point of view and I share in your passion to fight off such persons and acts at all levels. Credit must go to you and many others for the courage being shown!

          The challenge, if I understand it correctly, lies in being able to distinguish accurately between persons who intend to use the same words either for good or for bad before such words are even used. This implies developing algorithms that are intelligent enough to preempt a person’s intention(s). This is not impossible to achieve, at least in the wake of artificial intelligence, but presently not achievable since so much more information will be required to realize such a feat.

          Consequently, the work will lie with the human administrator, who needs to take the extra pain to manually review such posts to be sure such words have not been used for negative purposes. In this regard, I can understand the huge demands such manual reviews will place on the admins, and their subsequent reluctance (or lack of will) to accept such a proposal.

          On the other hand, the platform can always be reprogrammed to allow for special submissions, which will limit the number of reviews that needs to be done. But again, I feel access to the back-end codes may be outside the Admin’s control.

          Following the above, we are only made to settle for our limited solutions at the moment until better ones are devised. I feel for now, it may be better to rid (filter) negative acts from surfacing because of the adverse effects they create, even though it may be at the expense of some positive acts as well.

          I am glad Dan has constructed a great article in this regard, and I hope your article will soon follow, and maybe Admin Pat may align with some of the solutions being proposed, and maybe things may change for the better.

          Once again, it is always gratifying to share intellectual discussions with you Jon! The above are just my limited ideas. I trust you are hail, healthy, and hearty!


          1. Fire So grateful for your full and thoughtful reply!

            I feel that as Ad Pat knows all the regulars on here he should trust those he considers bright and who will not betray his trust. I firmly believe in trusting people and am against unnecessary censorship, PASSIONATELY.

            With new people on here I DO SEE HIS DIFFICULTIES, BUT SHOULD ALL people be treated the same, irrespectiveof intention! I think you know MY answer to that!

  4. I agree the owners of these platforms need to come to the party. Another thing I would like to disagree with is that it is not the clubs and stars that make social media platforms profitable. They only take advantage of it. It is the people like you and me that need to put them under pressure to remove these idiots.

  5. I rarely use social media although to not even have a Facebook account makes life difficult as it is often a prerequisite to access other sites that I need. Many younger people use social media and do not seem to worry that their whole life is out there for others to peruse. So I do believe that many users to an extent invite problems.. That however in no way excuses the abuse that is aimed at others, in particular those that need a social media presence as part of their work – I put Wrighty in that category.
    National laws need to be rewritten to allow sanctions, fines and punishment for ALL excessive personal abuse – not just racism, and Social media, who make billions from interraction, must be made accountable for policing their own industry, or else…
    Punishment? I am not sure that putting everybody in prison who does wrong is the solution. Society’s almost obsessive desire these days to judge without context, and take away the freedom of everybody who does any wrong, is a worrying trend. What has happened here IS abhorrent, and. I really don’t understand why perpatrators can remain unnamed. The guy needs to be publicly named and shamed by society, for me thats more affective than locking him up.

    1. But guy, then you are infringing on his “human rights” as an individual!!!
      What a sick way to determine that a moron can remain unknown – our country has become a place of Snowflakes and patsys.

      1. Ken you’re way ahead of me on the jargon – what’s a patsy?
        Society has changed. It worked when most of us knew the value of right and wrong, we self moderated to conform to the traditional values of the society we lived in. Tolerance was preached, but now it is seen as a weakness. Polarisation and hatred are the new norm. Trump is just a high profile example of that.

        1. A”patsy” is someone who is easily led or manipulated guy and that’s how so many become a target for these right wing organisations in my opinion.

    2. I have now edited the post to give his full name and address as requested….

      Not that I am going to encourage anyone to abuse the abuser.

      Two wrongs don’t make a right!

    3. guy, I totally agree with naming and publicly shaming, Prison for non physically violent offences, mostly, is counter productive in that it builds resentment and hardens wrong attitudes!

      1. And for young offenders is inherently dangerous. Jon, what I find hard to understand is why the judge didn’t use the “community service” option for the young man to work with minority groups?
        To get off with no sanction is not good for “justice”.

  6. A word in support of Pat – we can’t have it both ways. We are condemning personal abuse here – in this case racial but it could also be for other reasons.
    Moderators have to walk a thin line between encouraging debate and preventing as far as possible the likelihood of that abuse happening on this site. Prevention is far better than trying to prepare damage after it’s been done. I fully support the level of word-censorship used here. I have been frustrated many times on other sites, not able to post due to over-zealous censorship.. And let’s not forget, This IS a football site!

  7. Social media is a problem but it is in danger of being seen as the only problem when football itself has a poor record of dealing with racism. The FA,PL and clubs themselves so often brush racism under the carpet with comments such as “nor representative of our fans” or “ he is not that sort of player” etc ban a couple of people and get on with it without actually addressing the problem.

    I agree that clubs could do more to influence social media giants but I think broadcasters should do more as well, when the next round of bidding for the tv rights begins it should be written into every contract that should any clubs supporters /players / employees be found to be racist/homophobic/ discriminatory on social media platforms or in person at a ground the broadcaster reserves the right to not show that clubs matches

    The financial hit to clubs would be huge and it would encourage fan bases to police themselves and weed out those elements

  8. Very Few things are as vile and abhorrent as Racism…
    What’s more worrying for me is this racist is only 18yrs old..
    I would have thought they world was (Although very slowly ) wiping racism from among humans..Seeing it in the younger generations is quite disturbing…May be a pointer to the fact that we need to do more…More education on tolerance and respect for human dignity..

    I’m curious @ThirdmanJW ..why will you call BLM movement racist?..

  9. Along with a couple of other people here Im a relatively aged supporter. So much has changed in our lifetime:
    We can no longer say certain words because the meaning has changed
    We can no longer use words that whilst still not abusive, are no longer the “politically correct” way to say something
    We can no longer make what we believe are harmless witty or tongue in cheek comments, as we risk being accused of some kind of “ism”.
    We cannot talk to our friends openly in public as we may be reported by others “on their behalf” that we are being racist, sexist etc towards those friends
    We can be fired from our job for any of the above.
    We are not allowed to “debate” certain subjects because even to mention them makes you a bad person. For example debating limiting immigration due to the high population (or because many asylum seekers are bogus) implies you are racist towards the UK ethnic community. Debating the mere possibilty that any extreme BLM factions may also have done wrong makes you a Klansman. Querying the risk of gay parenting to our future population levels labels me a homophobe
    We no longer live in a democracy. Free speech exists in theory not in fact for the great majority, because we, the media and politicians can no longer debate important subjects due to the reputational risks we run by doing so. There are no longer any balances or checks because only a vocal minority have a voice.
    I class myself as liberal. I hate the far right for example. But not allowing us to even talk at the changes we are going through is going to be hugely damaging long term to the movements that are emerging.
    Or maybe I’m just getting crotchety!
    Let’s see if any responses prove my point!

    1. depends what you mean mate
      hard without pacific examples which I understand why it might not br worthwhile sayinng lol

    2. GUY Your wise post perfectly sums up the widespread misunderstanding – esp among the younger folk- of what true Liberalism ACTUALLY IS.
      As you say, it is not denying free speech and ideas that to some seem wrong. It is not no platforming, well known or unknown at all people, who wish to address an audience. Intolerance of other ideas, without discussion, reasoning and having given no chance chance to debate, is the very OPPOSITE of liberalism.

      I vividly remember the chilling effect of Enoch Powells “rivers of blood” speech in 1968, when I was an impressionable teenager. That speech, though dark and evil, changed my life, as after hearing it, my life was changed for the better and I became an activist, campaigning in many ways actively to fight racism ,bigotry and prejudice.

      But had that speech been banned, I might never have learned at such an early age the evil of racism. Now – albeit ONLY on a personal level – I am pleased that speech happened, as it kick started myself and very many others too, to fight racism and bigotry for our lives to come.

      Powell was of course sacked from the Tory Cabinet and became a notorious pariah, adored by some but ridiculed and ostracised by millions more. IT WAS A MORTAL BLOW AGAINST RACISM and actually worked against Powells disgusting life philosophy.
      My life philosophy born from my long years of experiences both at street and Parliament level is that by far the vast majority of folk, worldwide are good, kind, decent, compassionate and want peace and harmony for all. I have learned to trust the common goodness in people, so when I see well meaning but ill thought out banning of free speech by so called liberals (but who are NOT!! ), I despair for TRUE liberalism, which HAS done so much to progress our world.
      BTW, I voted to leave the EU ,M a ai see centralised and remote government of peo;l,e as one of the most illiberla idead out there. People shoukl always be as far as possible in a civilised law abiding society, as free as possible to live their lives free from interference by government , by rules regulations and tyrany both from the far right, including sinister corporations like FB AND from the far left, who seek to overthrow the capitalist system that had freed countless billions from poverty, disease and hunger. Whoever or whatever challenges all our freedoms to be who we are HAS to be fought and challenged. OR we become cowards!
      That explains why I fought Ozils laziness and sheer greed so unrelentingly.

      1. Further to my above post I was never an MP, but I spent countless hours in PARLIAMENTS lobby and listening to debates. I worked actively with MPs in a campaigning capacity, both for law changes, political issues such as keeping open Accident and Emergency Depts, hospitals and for election or re-election of certain MPs.

      2. Yes Jon and your relentless hounding of Mesut Ozil, was absolute abuse, disguised as free speech.
        To refer to someone that you have never met as “filth” is the perfect example of using free speech in an abusive way.
        Perhaps you don’t see it as abuse, but when preaching to others, one needs to be very careful regarding one’s own actions.
        The fact that you, personally, saw him as lazy and greedy is no excuse for such inflammatory language… abuse is abuse no matter who uses it.

        1. ken I utterly reject your snowflake comments done to try deny free speech! At your age you should know the key difference between non abusive but plain speech which contain facts- as he IS a leech, a fraud and non tryer and needed calling out for his shocking long lasting fraud on our club by his pathetic laziness That is not abuse. Those are facts.
          His own stinking attitude towards doing his duty under his contract was the ACTUAL abuse. By HIM against the club. Silly man KEN!

          1. Jon, I actually do know the difference and calling someone FILTH is abuse as it could be.
            I don’t really care about your personal attack, it’s water off a ducks back.
            A snowflake is someone who thinks they can do and say whatever they want, disguising it as “free speech” but react like a spoiled little boy when called out.
            It doesn’t matter WHO you called filth, the point is you feel you have the right to do that, while hiding under the umbrella of free speech.
            I’m afraid it’s YOU who looks like the snowflake and age has nothing to do with it.
            Your righteous stand against racial abuse, should be mirrored in the way you treat others, because abuse is abuse is abuse.. So grow up and admit you have the most ridiculous double standards when it comes to yourself.

          2. Ken There is no point us further discussing Arsenal matters as we have so little meeting of minds. I am dismayed at what I see as your paternal attitude and how little you actually understand of what IS free speech. Freedom to offend is not the same as freedom to abuse.

            You should know that difference but you dont. I will not, at least for a while, reply to any more to any of your posts, as I see no point. Perhaps, in time, we shall see but I am not holding my breath, as I really do think you a very silly man at times. I will not be denied free speech, whatever lies you say about it!

          3. Thanks Jon, I will do the same.
            Dictionary definition :
            ABUSE = insulting or coarse speech.
            OFFEND = to hurt or insult one’s feelings.

            To me, calling someone FILTH is coarse, insulting and used to definitely insult another person.

  10. TMJW, yep I laughed so hard when I heard BLM were nominated for the Nobel prize!! Over 1 billion in damage caused this year and multiple people killed, utterly disgraceful.

  11. well there is your misconception no kids can get this surgery at least not in my country i dont know in which country you live but in my country there are many many procedures which have to be upheld at drugs are there that they dont develop into something they dont want and as its fully reversible its giving them time to make an educated decision and the operation is done after they are old enough to decide such a lifechanging matter but i am pretty sure you know much too less to talk about such topics and are basing you opinions just on your view of life without facts and understanding of the harsh reality of GID so refrain from generalizing psychiatrics dilemmas

  12. lol you are really a ridiculous one of course you will say that Defend the Media is spot on as he has the same wrong opinion as you 😂 dont talk bullshit and go study about GID

    1. Umm… no…. what I said is not “opinion” its factual, yielded through statistical analysis of multiple studies. Just because you dont like hearing it doesnt make it an opinion. I think you need to check out some new universities as yours is clearly not up to scratch.

    2. “Rig an election”? In 2020 Joe Biden was elected President by a margin of 7 million votes and 306 electoral college votes to 225. This has been confirmed in 21 court cases and by Trump’s own Attorney General Bill Barr. When forced to present evidence and risk perjury they were unable to present any.
      Talk about living in “cloud cookoo land”.

  13. @Defund The Media and @TMJW
    I could explain more on these topic to both of you as you surely have got your facts absolutely wrong and just claim that you uneducated opinions as facts.. but i will just write the most important things but wont answer to your responds as its too much of a hassle:
    1. just let me say that pumping drugs into kids is just a lie, thats not true in most of the countries today which adhere to WHO..
    2. a talking therapy and session is always the first line treatment and its just talking whats the problem of the youngsters its not making them change their gender
    3. after long therapies if the teenager is adamant and a GID is diagnoses drug are issued so that they get time to make an educated decision
    4. as an able and judicious person they can as the last step make operations but thats purely if they can decide such things NO child can do it, and no adult can do it on a whim
    5. dont talk about serious diseases or rather problems which people get stigmated for in such horrible way (directed at TMJW) YOU are not helping them, a psychiatrist DOES help them to make their decision AFTER they are capable to do it not before

    1. Cant speak for TMJW but I’m certainly not talking about your country as I have no clue where your from, I’m talking about america where before 18 you can absolutely have puberty blockers and cross sex hormones before you are 18 (quite easily might I add), all you need is parental consent, and as soon as your 18 ( and still an adolescent) you can have full on surgery, and as you should know the brain doesn’t stop developing until 25, so they are still not able to fully comprehend the magnitude of the situation and how it will affect you in later life.

  14. ThirdManJW, give up the “conspiracy theories” ; the Republican Party in the USA have won the popular vote in a Presidential election once in the last 32 years. But don’t worry the GOP are working hard in every State, City and County jurisdiction they control to disenfranchise any demographic likely not to vote for them.

    1. The US Republicans are not one to ever moan about corruption. In 2000, while living in Japan my Japanese student returned from a sixth month homestay in Florida. This was a then 16 year old girl who was as naiveand disinterested about politics. Anyway, in our first lesson after her return she asked me innocently, why it was OK in the USA for people in the USA to vote three times. Apparently her Florida homestay “father” had boasted on election Day that this is what he had done in aide of George W Bush. Considering that Bush won Florida by 600 votes and this decided the election,well there are a lot of implications. Make of that what you will.

    2. TMJW, the reason Biden got the most votes was because the Democratic Party got their voters to vote by mail during a pandemic and got their voters to register in numbers, because removing Donald Trump from office was a great motivator. The demographics of many electorates is changing in the South and South West due to increasing numbers of African Americans and Latino able to register to vote. Donald Trump himself has stated that if elections are free and fair the Republican Party cannot win a majority. If the GOP goes away from its historical tenets and sees Trump’s core supporters as the electorate they want to appease they will drive sensible conservatives away. If they see Marjorie Taylor-Green as the future of the GOP and espouses QAnon conspiracy theories then the Republican Party should be unelectable. If this is not the case the USA is in big trouble and tragicly, if the USA sneezes the world catches pneumonia.

  15. Come on Gentlemen, play nicely. I’m sure you have a (perhaps grudging) respect for each other.

    Let’s stick to the “literal” use of the English language;


    “A small piece of snow that falls from the sky. Snowflakes are sometimes represented as six-sided crystals on Christmas cards, decorations, etc.

    I look forward to either Jon, Ken (or both) adorning the front of the nations Christmas cards next year !

    1. AJ ADMIRATION FOR YOUR KIND POST. But Ken and myself have a totally different way of looking at profound principles, which we both hold dear.

      HENCE OUR IMPASSE. Neither of us is ever going to change our views, so I see no way round that continuing impasse sadly.

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors
JustArsenal Top Ten UK Blogs