Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DeeJayOne

Anger as Pokemon Go uses SWFC Hillsborough memorial as 'Pokestop'

Recommended Posts

So many people in this thread declaring they know for an absolute fact what caused the disaster yet unwilling to listen to or watch any other side of the discussion.

So sad to see.

Humans should be open to hearing both sides of a debate instead of just closing off saying 'blah blah blah' whilst putting their fingers in their ears.

Leads to a very ignorance society

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, the ignorance and utter bloodymindedness of some people never ceases to amaze me.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DeeJayOne said:

Wow, the ignorance and utter bloodymindedness of some people never ceases to amaze me.

 

 

The meek acceptance that 'officialdom' always come up with the correct answer never ceases to amaze me.

 

So we are told that this 'enquiry' is absolute gospel and beyond reproach and yet the original one is now not worth the paper its written on. 

 

At first you have a Pop at people for not having watched it and then have a pop because people who have watched it but STILL don't agree with your verdict are either ignorant or bloody minded.

 

I would have thought asking the question in relation to the whole day and not just the events immediately outside Leppings Lane was a reasonable point to make and would have led to the enquiry coming up with a much more balanced verdict, but by covering the whole day, other parties would have been dragged into the blame game and clearly this would not have been acceptable to said certain parties would it?  

 

Relating the question purely to the events outside the Leppings Lane clearly indicates SYPs shortcomings and only theirs. Which in my humble opinion is where they wanted the blame to lie.

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

So many people in this thread declaring they know for an absolute fact what caused the disaster yet unwilling to listen to or watch any other side of the discussion.

So sad to see.

Humans should be open to hearing both sides of a debate saying 'blah blah blah' whilst putting their fingers in their ears.

Leads to a very ignorance society

Is this deliberate, albeit subtle irony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

The meek acceptance that 'officialdom' always come up with the correct answer never ceases to amaze me.

 

So we are told that this 'enquiry' is absolute gospel and beyond reproach and yet the original one is now not worth the paper its written on. 

 

At first you have a Pop at people for not having watched it and then have a pop because people who have watched it but STILL don't agree with your verdict are either ignorant or bloody minded.

 

I would have thought asking the question in relation to the whole day and not just the events immediately outside Leppings Lane was a reasonable point to make and would have led to the enquiry coming up with a much more balanced verdict, but by covering the whole day, other parties would have been dragged into the blame game and clearly this would not have been acceptable to said certain parties would it?  

 

Relating the question purely to the events outside the Leppings Lane clearly indicates SYPs shortcomings and only theirs. Which in my humble opinion is where they wanted the blame to lie.

 

 

 

 

 

I have also seen a significant amount of the evidence that was provided to the inquest, attended a part of it and have read the report, but hey... You keep assuming too, eh?

 

 

EDIT: Oh, yeah - and obviously spoken to many first-hand witnesses myself, including family who were outside Leppings Lane at the time.

 

Edited by DeeJayOne
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

The meek acceptance that 'officialdom' always come up with the correct answer never ceases to amaze me.

 

So we are told that this 'enquiry' is absolute gospel and beyond reproach and yet the original one is now not worth the paper its written on. 

 

At first you have a Pop at people for not having watched it and then have a pop because people who have watched it but STILL don't agree with your verdict are either ignorant or bloody minded.

 

I would have thought asking the question in relation to the whole day and not just the events immediately outside Leppings Lane was a reasonable point to make and would have led to the enquiry coming up with a much more balanced verdict, but by covering the whole day, other parties would have been dragged into the blame game and clearly this would not have been acceptable to said certain parties would it?  

 

Relating the question purely to the events outside the Leppings Lane clearly indicates SYPs shortcomings and only theirs. Which in my humble opinion is where they wanted the blame to lie.

 

 

 

 

Hear, hear. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


It's one of those arguments this that will NEVER end


There are those who are willing to hear both sides

And then there are the Sun readers 

 

lol

  • Agree 3
  • Disagree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DeeJayOne said:

 

I have also seen a significant amount of the evidence that was provided to the inquest, attended a part of it and have read the report, but hey... You keep assuming too, eh?

 

 

"Assuming" what?

 

I referred to your quote about the enquiry's verdict only relating to events outside Leppings Lane rather than the entire events of the day.

 

I don't give a monkey's if you were camped out for the entire proceedings and have read the whole shooting match from start to finish.

 

That does not alter the fact that as you rightly say, the enquiry only refers to events outside Leppings Lane which inevitably results in certain findings.

 

Not sure why you would need to pore over bazillions of pounds worth of findings to understand, if you ask a specific question about specific events that form part of a much bigger picture, you will get the answer relating to the individual specific incident and not the answer that relates to the bigger picture. 

 

If you can't or more likely don't want to grasp this, then Hey... carry on preaching the gospel, eh?

Edited by bigthinrob
  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's one of those arguments this that will NEVER end


There are those who are willing to hear both sides

And then there are the Sun readers 

 

lol

And then there are apologist Labour voters who won't admit Scouse fans do actually hold some portion of blame.

 

Easy this generalisation, isn't it.

  • Agree 4
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's one of those arguments this that will NEVER end


There are those who are willing to hear both sides

And then there are the Sun readers 

 

lol

That's just lazy!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


You dumb ass fookwits can't even spot sarcastic comedy when it's in front of you


lol

  • Disagree 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:
4 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 


You dumb ass fookwits can't even spot sarcastic comedy when it's in front of you


lol

 


You dumb ass fookwits can't even spot sarcastic comedy when it's in front of you


lol

you need it to work on the comedy element.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lukestheman82 said:

you need it to work on the comedy element.

 


You're on your own with that opinion

Everyone knows I'm hilarious

 

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 


You dumb ass fookwits can't even spot sarcastic comedy when it's in front of you


lol

No it's clear to us dumb ass fookwits that it was 'sarcastic comedy' because of old Sid on the bottom.

 

 But Nah, still just lazy!!

 

Ps is sarcastic comedy something like a form of irony or am i thinking of satire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Christ...

This thread is painful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jambler said:

 

I could introduce you to around 50, probably double that people that can back up what other things happened that day, including what has already been mentioned. Including my family members. 

 

Can't be arsed to get into it though. 

 

 

But the initial tragedy was caused by impotent policing. Anything outside of that doesn't really matter.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...