Jump to content
IGNORED

10 German bombers


Robin-hugh-blind

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Robin-hugh-blind said:

Such a nice guy. Sorry if my post offended you enough to call me an idiot. 

Smart jibe man, wish I was as cleaver as you !

Cry harder for me. I need more lube to **** with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Country just seems to have gotten worse over the last 20 odd years. Probably the same amount of dick heads, limp lefty’s, right wing idiots, so on so on, but the main difference is the press and media stirring up trouble at every opportunity. Scandal and outrage sell papers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

Silliness aside, I don’t get this thread at all. I don’t imagine the Danes are going to be singing songs about the Vikings and the Celts later. I’ve never heard France sing about arrows in people’s eyes during an England - France game so why would we sing about World War II.

What is notable to me is I’ve never heard someone who actually fought in World War II sing it and the point was made earlier that many who did fight in the war understood the gravity of was not to be trivialised.

It seems to be exclusively sung by those too young to have fought in the war who want to claim credit for a victory they did nothing to bring about. It‘s not necessarily offensive but it is certainly embarrassing and disrespectful to those who made sacrifices and suffered losses in World War II.

The song was actually written during World War 2. Schoolchildren used to sing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few guardian readers on here me thinks. Rich to knock The Sun/Daily Mail (best selling paper in England) when the orrible left-leaning rag with 1.5% population readership (and declinging fast) still tries to hate football fans, statues to our history and anything royalist or centre of politics.

Sing what you like if it doesnt offend the people around you; people who go to games dont have to please people in their armchairs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BoneyardTIM said:

This Country just seems to have gotten worse over the last 20 odd years. Probably the same amount of dick heads, limp lefty’s, right wing idiots, so on so on, but the main difference is the press and media stirring up trouble at every opportunity. Scandal and outrage sell papers.

People saying ‘gotten’ doesn’t help…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hampshire Red said:

A few guardian readers on here me thinks. Rich to knock The Sun/Daily Mail (best selling paper in England) when the orrible left-leaning rag with 1.5% population readership (and declinging fast) still tries to hate football fans, statues to our history and anything royalist or centre of politics.

Sing what you like if it doesnt offend the people around you; people who go to games dont have to please people in their armchairs

If you are seriously suggesting that the death of the Guardian at the expense of the Sun/Daily Mail would be to the benefit of the improvement of this country, then I sincerely hope you enjoy the world you end up living in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

A few guardian readers on here me thinks. Rich to knock The Sun/Daily Mail (best selling paper in England) when the orrible left-leaning rag with 1.5% population readership (and declinging fast) still tries to hate football fans, statues to our history and anything royalist or centre of politics.

Sing what you like if it doesnt offend the people around you; people who go to games dont have to please people in their armchairs

This post is so full of shit I don’t know where to even start. Keep on keeping on though ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

A few guardian readers on here me thinks. Rich to knock The Sun/Daily Mail (best selling paper in England) when the orrible left-leaning rag with 1.5% population readership (and declinging fast) 

Don’t know where you got that wrong but it’s patently rubbish. I know it was a popular narrative among right wing keyboard warriors a few years back.

The paper is mainly funded by online contributions these days - over 800,000 regular contributors at the last count.

You can no longer judge a papers readership by the amount of sales of the print run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Hampshire Red said:

A few guardian readers on here me thinks. Rich to knock The Sun/Daily Mail (best selling paper in England) when the orrible left-leaning rag with 1.5% population readership (and declinging fast) still tries to hate football fans, statues to our history and anything royalist or centre of politics.

Sing what you like if it doesnt offend the people around you; people who go to games dont have to please people in their armchairs

See you instantly touched a few nerves ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Cowshed said:

And these songs are just noise. There is no malice or spite behind them. Its not the singing of the Sash from real nutters who support real nutters in Ulster. You and I would have heard that decades ago. That has gone. This noise is football panto, virtually nobody takes this seriously, sticking your arms out imitating a bomber really does not mean individuals want to bomb Dresden again. Anybody that really thinks there is anything sinister behind silly sings, and they are silly need to give their heads a wobble.  

What is behind this is snobbery. We don't like you and your noisy bawdy class. Sit down, shut up and please  join in the Mexican waves and the FA authorised display sponsored by McDonalds instead of booing. That is the politically correct safe space authority wants with complaint robots (customers) as fans.  

Enjoy Tuesday fella.

Pretty much spot on.

I wouldn't join in with the chant myself, as it's not for me, but i'm not going to look down upon and ban those who would choose to chant it.

There have been worse chants at City. Leeds and Jimmy Savile come to mind. 

The 'progressive' culture has a sneering hatred towards the English culturally working class. 

Hopefully in the future things change for the good and not to please an offended minority

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Slacker said:

 

 

13 hours ago, Son of Fred said:

WW2 was a tragedy.....

But a war we HAD to fight and to prevail...

The die was cast &  the cost was always set to be heartbreaking.

Germany 'moving on' in many ways better than ourselves is another story...

To the victor not always the spoils.

Sadly it did have to be fought but like pretty much all wars since Napoleon all wars have been financed by banksters. Invariably both sides. The Rothschild's Clan financed IG Farben who made the gas. Bizarre when you consider they too are a jewish family. IBM supplied the counting machines for the concentration camps also financed by the banksters. The Bank of England, prior to WWII beginning agreed, albeit reluctantly to 'lend' 10 million to Hitler to rearm supposedly before they realised he was not such a good bloke. This was a democratic majority decision of the board of the Bank of International Settlements of which the BofE sits. There are a number of Central Banks who sit on the board but while they all purport to be owners you will never see that official information outside their own web site. Being registered in Switzerland they do not have to declare who the owners are. Many believe it again follows a trail back to the Rothschild's who also sit on the board, the only private bank to do so. Odd that. In All docs released following the time limitation of the Official Secrets Act. In short, if banks stepped away wars would not last long but they profit immensely by charging the governments immense amount of interest. Obviously far too tempting as we see in modern times.

I don't believe it serves anybody's interest to chant inflammatory words anywhere. However, if there is a known comical too and fro between Germany and England does it cause harm? Yes, if it causes offence to one side.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lenred said:

Think the majority of people living in Berlin may have a problem with that statement.  It’s been more confined to Dresden and Chemnitz and even then there is a lot of activism to try and counter it.  

As I said, 'largely confined to what used to be East Germany and is generally despised by the majority of Germans'.  

So, not exclusively, but largely in what used to be East Germany, including of course, Dresden and Chemnitz, the latter town, perhaps surprisingly, being listed as the European Capital of Culture in a few years time.

As a useful guide, check where the AfD are popular, e.g. Dresden, and you will find strong neo-nazi sympathies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignoring the left / right wing squabble for a moment.

 

It wasn't the RAF of England.

A substantial % were of Polish, Dutch and Czech birth, many of whom fought their way across occupied Europe to join the RAF.  There were also Canadian, French and American Pilots. Indeed on 'Battle Of Britain' day - 25% OF RAF pilots were Polish or Czech.

 

Lastly - could people please stop calling all German Troops "Nazi's"

Outside the SS, the vast majority were ordinary Axis citizens, obeying orders during the war. They were sickened by the atrocities.

I used know a couple of WW2 vets who were German - both sickened by what happened, and that everyone tars them with the same brush as the Schutzstaffel

The SS reached a max of 800,000 by 1943 - and 40% of those were not German at all - including 40,000 Arab Muslim troops, 50,000 Dutch and 130,000 Hungarian / Romanian.

It is offensive to the vast majority of Germans to label them ALL - 'Nazis'

2p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

Outside the SS, the vast majority were ordinary Axis citizens, obeying orders during the war. They were sickened by the atrocities.

I used know a couple of WW2 vets who were German - both sickened by what happened, and that everyone tars them with the same brush as the Schutzstaffel

A good read:

Soldat - Reflections of a German Soldier. 1936-1949.

Siegfried Knappe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

Ignoring the left / right wing squabble for a moment.

 

It wasn't the RAF of England.

A substantial % were of Polish, Dutch and Czech birth, many of whom fought their way across occupied Europe to join the RAF.  There were also Canadian, French and American Pilots. Indeed on 'Battle Of Britain' day - 25% OF RAF pilots were Polish or Czech.

 

Lastly - could people please stop calling all German Troops "Nazi's"

Outside the SS, the vast majority were ordinary Axis citizens, obeying orders during the war. They were sickened by the atrocities.

I used know a couple of WW2 vets who were German - both sickened by what happened, and that everyone tars them with the same brush as the Schutzstaffel

The SS reached a max of 800,000 by 1943 - and 40% of those were not German at all - including 40,000 Arab Muslim troops, 50,000 Dutch and 130,000 Hungarian / Romanian.

It is offensive to the vast majority of Germans to label them ALL - 'Nazis'

2p

Some interesting facts great post mate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

As I said, 'largely confined to what used to be East Germany and is generally despised by the majority of Germans'.  

So, not exclusively, but largely in what used to be East Germany, including of course, Dresden and Chemnitz, the latter town, perhaps surprisingly, being listed as the European Capital of Culture in a few years time.

As a useful guide, check where the AfD are popular, e.g. Dresden, and you will find strong neo-nazi sympathies. 

I’m sure many people will think of Berlin when people talk about the former East Germany and maybe some wouldn’t even know where Dresden / Chemnitz is. You didn’t mention that far right activism is not wide spread in Berlin so thought it best to point that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, havanatopia said:

 

Sadly it did have to be fought but like pretty much all wars since Napoleon all wars have been financed by banksters. Invariably both sides. The Rothschild's Clan financed IG Farben who made the gas. Bizarre when you consider they too are a jewish family. IBM supplied the counting machines for the concentration camps also financed by the banksters. The Bank of England, prior to WWII beginning agreed, albeit reluctantly to 'lend' 10 million to Hitler to rearm supposedly before they realised he was not such a good bloke. This was a democratic majority decision of the board of the Bank of International Settlements of which the BofE sits. There are a number of Central Banks who sit on the board but while they all purport to be owners you will never see that official information outside their own web site. Being registered in Switzerland they do not have to declare who the owners are. Many believe it again follows a trail back to the Rothschild's who also sit on the board, the only private bank to do so. Odd that. In All docs released following the time limitation of the Official Secrets Act. In short, if banks stepped away wars would not last long but they profit immensely by charging the governments immense amount of interest. Obviously far too tempting as we see in modern times.

I don't believe it serves anybody's interest to chant inflammatory words anywhere. However, if there is a known comical too and fro between Germany and England does it cause harm? Yes, if it causes offence to one side.

 

The Swedish economy flourished because of the 2nd world war. Sweden supplied the Germans with a lot of the raw materials they needed to build their army. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, lenred said:

I’m sure many people will think of Berlin when people talk about the former East Germany and maybe some wouldn’t even know where Dresden / Chemnitz is. You didn’t mention that far right activism is not wide spread in Berlin so thought it best to point that out.

I don’t know whether you have ever been to Berlin, but it is one of the most laidback, bohemian European towns I can think of - it’s almost as if the word originated there.
Far right and neo-naziism are not terms I would associate with Berlin.

Having said that, you may be surprised that the lovely town of Dresden is also pretty laid back - despite its unfortunate political leanings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 2015 said:

Pretty much spot on.

I wouldn't join in with the chant myself, as it's not for me, but i'm not going to look down upon and ban those who would choose to chant it.

There have been worse chants at City. Leeds and Jimmy Savile come to mind. 

The 'progressive' culture has a sneering hatred towards the English culturally working class. 

Hopefully in the future things change for the good and not to please an offended minority

It's not for you, why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, havanatopia said:

 

Sadly it did have to be fought but like pretty much all wars since Napoleon all wars have been financed by banksters. Invariably both sides. The Rothschild's Clan financed IG Farben who made the gas. Bizarre when you consider they too are a jewish family. IBM supplied the counting machines for the concentration camps also financed by the banksters. The Bank of England, prior to WWII beginning agreed, albeit reluctantly to 'lend' 10 million to Hitler to rearm supposedly before they realised he was not such a good bloke. This was a democratic majority decision of the board of the Bank of International Settlements of which the BofE sits. There are a number of Central Banks who sit on the board but while they all purport to be owners you will never see that official information outside their own web site. Being registered in Switzerland they do not have to declare who the owners are. Many believe it again follows a trail back to the Rothschild's who also sit on the board, the only private bank to do so. Odd that. In All docs released following the time limitation of the Official Secrets Act. In short, if banks stepped away wars would not last long but they profit immensely by charging the governments immense amount of interest. Obviously far too tempting as we see in modern times.

I don't believe it serves anybody's interest to chant inflammatory words anywhere. However, if there is a known comical too and fro between Germany and England does it cause harm? Yes, if it causes offence to one side.

 

Just for clarity,I like to sing at matches but wouldn't join in with this particular song.I am not against songs directed at our Welsh friends,I personally think they are harmless fun,and I find the songs aimed at Brighton fans were funny a few years ago,but a bit old hat now.I think referees are fair game for a bit of stick,as well as opposition players up to a point.And of course,it was always nice to welcome Micky Naynard back to his sons birthplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...