There's a Lot Wrong with Britain

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
741

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

How do you get to train with these guys?
Who AREyou?

You are not one of them I have flirted with on Hyde Park, are you?

: D

When I am in London I train BJJ with Roger Gracie, there are a few close protection guys and a lot of police guys that train there.

By the way, a little point of order from an earlier post. The BBC is not owned by the government. It is funded by the license fee and authorized by Royal Charter however it is deliberately set up to be totally independent from government and autonomous. There have been occasions where claims have been made of bias (sometimes rightly so in my opinion,) however these have typically been for attacks on the government not defence of it.[/quote]

The BBC charter is the standard cop out given by Brits who don’t want to face up to the fact that the BBC is very biased. That charter isn’t worth the paper it is written on because the people running the BBC are highly biased and allow their biases to influence their decision making for the organisation.

742

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

Cock you are so full of shit. That level of protection is not standard for anyone other than a handful of elites. There are a lot of people in Britain who are targets who are not allowed any protection. They do not get armed police guards or unarmed police guards. More importantly they are not allowed to have their own weaponry so they can fend for themselves without having to depend upon the unreliable police and criminal justice system.

What is wrong with Britain is honest decent people are stripped of the ability to defend themselves while criminals are allowed to run amock.

[/quote]

Utter rubbish, the British people have not been stripped of anything. The majority of the British population is not in favour of people having guns in their houses or having the right to carry guns in public therefore those rights are not currently available in Britain.

Were there real public support for the arming of the populace in the UK, one of the parties would jump on this and use it to ensure that they got elected.

Just face facts Sifu, regardless of what your Granny told you the majority of people in the UK do not want guns. Numerous British people have jumped on posts here on this forum stating exactly that and you are the only one who seems to think differently based on the fact that your Granny lives in the UK and you read the Daily Mail.

743

[quote]Sifu wrote:
A burqa is a lot more than just another piece of clothing. There is a whole lot of cultural baggage that goes along with it. Islam has an extensive history of treating women and girls as chattel. Using the burqa to strip women of any sense of identity and to prevent others from seeing them as individuals is the ultimate objectification of women.

What those women in Hyde park wearing burqas represent is a culture of seperation and rejection of other cultures. If the muslim population is not kept in check but allowed to grow unhindered that will be the future for all British women. [/quote]

No, a Burqua is just another piece of clothing. If you choose to attach all that power to it then that is down to you but it really is just a piece of cloth.

Forcing someone to wear one is wrong but if someone chooses to wear one because they feel that it gives them freedom to walk about in public without judgement on the way that they look then who am I to tell them not to.

744

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

How do you get to train with these guys?
Who AREyou?

You are not one of them I have flirted with on Hyde Park, are you?

: D

When I am in London I train BJJ with Roger Gracie, there are a few close protection guys and a lot of police guys that train there.

By the way, a little point of order from an earlier post. The BBC is not owned by the government. It is funded by the license fee and authorized by Royal Charter however it is deliberately set up to be totally independent from government and autonomous. There have been occasions where claims have been made of bias (sometimes rightly so in my opinion,) however these have typically been for attacks on the government not defence of it.

The BBC charter is the standard cop out given by Brits who don’t want to face up to the fact that the BBC is very biased. That charter isn’t worth the paper it is written on because the people running the BBC are highly biased and allow their biases to influence their decision making for the organisation. [/quote]

As I have mentioned, the BBC has rightly (in my opinion) been accused of bias on numerous occasions however on several of those occasions, the bias was actually directed against the Labour party.

745

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Live Feed from London Central

That is a bit disingenuous. Firstly Tony Blair is by no stretch upper class. His adoptive grandfather was a Glasgow shipyard worker. [/quote]

You are the one being disingenuous. Blair is ruling class. What his background was doesn’t matter now. He is an elite.

[quote]
Secondly, class doesn’t dictate the fact that Blair has armed guards. The fact that he is a legitimate target dictates this. [/quote]

There are lots of people who are targets. Blair is not unique.

[quote]
Where I in the UK to receive legitimate death threats from known armed groups, the police would station officers outside my property armed with Glock 17s and 9mm Heckler and Koch MP5s. This is the same equipment as the SO16 officers outside Blairs house have.[/quote]

Cock you are so full of shit. Just a few pages back I posted an article about a young woman who recieved threats form a violent boyfriend who she ad put in jail. She went to the police and they did nothing about it except release him from jail early so he could go shove a knife in her chest so now she’s dead.

Besides there are a lot of people who do not have a demonstable threat that they can go to the police with in order to get this nonexistant protection that you claim exists. For a lot of people the first sign they have of any threat is when it is upon them. When that happens they have a moment to do something or die.

746

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:

Ah so you have noticed something. They are quite dilligent and extremely effective at enforcing traffic laws because they can generate revenues that way. But when it comes to important law and order issues like dealing with burglary, mugging, assault, rape, murder they are nowhere as good at catching those kinds of criminals and when they do the punishments they receive are a joke or some aspect of the human rights act helps the criminal.

Two completely different methods of law enforcement between civil and criminal law, but they have the same effect on people. They make them feel like the country has gone to the dogs and they want to get out.

Or could it possibly be that catching someone who has parked illegally or run a red light is a teensy bit easier than catching a rapist given that the evidence is right there and the perpertrator is linked to the vehicle?[/quote]

It’s a soft target, they like to go after soft targets. There is a pattern of that. The thing is going after the soft targets isn’t improving the quality of life, it is degrading it. When people engage in a damaging pattern of behaviour long enough you eventually have to ask why?

It is a well known fact that people are fleeing Britain in record numbers. If you read peoples comments in the newspapers things like crime and government abuse of power are often mentioned.

747

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

Cock you are so full of shit. That level of protection is not standard for anyone other than a handful of elites. There are a lot of people in Britain who are targets who are not allowed any protection. They do not get armed police guards or unarmed police guards. More importantly they are not allowed to have their own weaponry so they can fend for themselves without having to depend upon the unreliable police and criminal justice system.

What is wrong with Britain is honest decent people are stripped of the ability to defend themselves while criminals are allowed to run amock.

Utter rubbish, the British people have not been stripped of anything. The majority of the British population is not in favour of people having guns in their houses or having the right to carry guns in public therefore those rights are not currently available in Britain.

Were there real public support for the arming of the populace in the UK, one of the parties would jump on this and use it to ensure that they got elected.

Just face facts Sifu, regardless of what your Granny told you the majority of people in the UK do not want guns. Numerous British people have jumped on posts here on this forum stating exactly that and you are the only one who seems to think differently based on the fact that your Granny lives in the UK and you read the Daily Mail.[/quote]

Not true. They have been stripped of their right of rebellion. They have also been stripped of the ability to defend themselves against armed criminals. The criminals are having no problems getting guns, knives or a gang of mates.

The fact that there may not yet be widespread support for gun ownership is only because the British are a brainwashed bunch of sheep. Since there is no rational basis for gun control public opinion could be changed. However if the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause.

748

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
A burqa is a lot more than just another piece of clothing. There is a whole lot of cultural baggage that goes along with it. Islam has an extensive history of treating women and girls as chattel. Using the burqa to strip women of any sense of identity and to prevent others from seeing them as individuals is the ultimate objectification of women.

What those women in Hyde park wearing burqas represent is a culture of seperation and rejection of other cultures. If the muslim population is not kept in check but allowed to grow unhindered that will be the future for all British women.

No, a Burqua is just another piece of clothing. If you choose to attach all that power to it then that is down to you but it really is just a piece of cloth. [/quote]

No Cock. A burqa is a portable one person isolation cell. It dehumanizes women by hiding or not allowing them to have an identity.

[quote]
Forcing someone to wear one is wrong but if someone chooses to wear one because they feel that it gives them freedom to walk about in public without judgement on the way that they look then who am I to tell them not to.[/quote]

You really are clueless. A lot of women are forced to wear them and have suffered extreme violence for not wearing them. Why don’t you spend sometime studying up on muslim rape gangs in France and what happens to women there who don’t wear burqas.

749

[quote]Sifu wrote:
No Cock. A burqa is a portable one person isolation cell. It dehumanizes women by hiding or not allowing them to have an identity.
[/quote]

Amen. It has no place in our society. I can accept the hijab head covering. I cannot and will not accept the burqa.

And as I support freedom (including the freedom to wear whatever you please) the solution is to stop immigration from countries where the dominant culture is incompatible with ours.

750

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

Cock you are so full of shit. That level of protection is not standard for anyone other than a handful of elites. There are a lot of people in Britain who are targets who are not allowed any protection. They do not get armed police guards or unarmed police guards. More importantly they are not allowed to have their own weaponry so they can fend for themselves without having to depend upon the unreliable police and criminal justice system.

What is wrong with Britain is honest decent people are stripped of the ability to defend themselves while criminals are allowed to run amock.

Utter rubbish, the British people have not been stripped of anything. The majority of the British population is not in favour of people having guns in their houses or having the right to carry guns in public therefore those rights are not currently available in Britain.

Were there real public support for the arming of the populace in the UK, one of the parties would jump on this and use it to ensure that they got elected.

Just face facts Sifu, regardless of what your Granny told you the majority of people in the UK do not want guns. Numerous British people have jumped on posts here on this forum stating exactly that and you are the only one who seems to think differently based on the fact that your Granny lives in the UK and you read the Daily Mail.

Not true. They have been stripped of their right of rebellion. They have also been stripped of the ability to defend themselves against armed criminals. The criminals are having no problems getting guns, knives or a gang of mates.

The fact that there may not yet be widespread support for gun ownership is only because the British are a brainwashed bunch of sheep. Since there is no rational basis for gun control public opinion could be changed. However if the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause. [/quote]

OK this is another example of your screwed up logical processes. You claim that the British people are a brainwashed bunch of sheep and therefore easily led then you say that they are a lost cause because they can’t be swayed. So which is it? Are they easily swayed or are they impossible to sway? It can’t be both.

751

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
A burqa is a lot more than just another piece of clothing. There is a whole lot of cultural baggage that goes along with it. Islam has an extensive history of treating women and girls as chattel. Using the burqa to strip women of any sense of identity and to prevent others from seeing them as individuals is the ultimate objectification of women.

What those women in Hyde park wearing burqas represent is a culture of seperation and rejection of other cultures. If the muslim population is not kept in check but allowed to grow unhindered that will be the future for all British women.

No, a Burqua is just another piece of clothing. If you choose to attach all that power to it then that is down to you but it really is just a piece of cloth.

No Cock. A burqa is a portable one person isolation cell. It dehumanizes women by hiding or not allowing them to have an identity.

Forcing someone to wear one is wrong but if someone chooses to wear one because they feel that it gives them freedom to walk about in public without judgement on the way that they look then who am I to tell them not to.

You really are clueless. A lot of women are forced to wear them and have suffered extreme violence for not wearing them. Why don’t you spend sometime studying up on muslim rape gangs in France and what happens to women there who don’t wear burqas. [/quote]

You are the clueless one, you want to enforce your views on others and you see this as liberty. I clearly stated that forcing someone to wear a Burqa is wrong however if someone chooses to wear one that is their own business and I have no right to tell them not to.

From that, you do your normal trick of leaping up in outrage screaming that I support gang rape.

752

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

Cock you are so full of shit. That level of protection is not standard for anyone other than a handful of elites. There are a lot of people in Britain who are targets who are not allowed any protection. They do not get armed police guards or unarmed police guards. More importantly they are not allowed to have their own weaponry so they can fend for themselves without having to depend upon the unreliable police and criminal justice system.

What is wrong with Britain is honest decent people are stripped of the ability to defend themselves while criminals are allowed to run amock.

Utter rubbish, the British people have not been stripped of anything. The majority of the British population is not in favour of people having guns in their houses or having the right to carry guns in public therefore those rights are not currently available in Britain.

Were there real public support for the arming of the populace in the UK, one of the parties would jump on this and use it to ensure that they got elected.

Just face facts Sifu, regardless of what your Granny told you the majority of people in the UK do not want guns. Numerous British people have jumped on posts here on this forum stating exactly that and you are the only one who seems to think differently based on the fact that your Granny lives in the UK and you read the Daily Mail.

Not true. They have been stripped of their right of rebellion. They have also been stripped of the ability to defend themselves against armed criminals. The criminals are having no problems getting guns, knives or a gang of mates.

The fact that there may not yet be widespread support for gun ownership is only because the British are a brainwashed bunch of sheep. Since there is no rational basis for gun control public opinion could be changed. However if the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause.

OK this is another example of your screwed up logical processes. You claim that the British people are a brainwashed bunch of sheep and therefore easily led then you say that they are a lost cause because they can’t be swayed. So which is it? Are they easily swayed or are they impossible to sway? It can’t be both.[/quote]

Your reading comprehension is very poor. I wrote: IF the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause.

I did not write “because”. That is your rewrite.

What I wrote is true . If the British cannot or will not admit when they have made a mistake and then rectify that mistake they really are finished as a people.

753

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
A burqa is a lot more than just another piece of clothing. There is a whole lot of cultural baggage that goes along with it. Islam has an extensive history of treating women and girls as chattel. Using the burqa to strip women of any sense of identity and to prevent others from seeing them as individuals is the ultimate objectification of women.

What those women in Hyde park wearing burqas represent is a culture of seperation and rejection of other cultures. If the muslim population is not kept in check but allowed to grow unhindered that will be the future for all British women.

No, a Burqua is just another piece of clothing. If you choose to attach all that power to it then that is down to you but it really is just a piece of cloth.

No Cock. A burqa is a portable one person isolation cell. It dehumanizes women by hiding or not allowing them to have an identity.

Forcing someone to wear one is wrong but if someone chooses to wear one because they feel that it gives them freedom to walk about in public without judgement on the way that they look then who am I to tell them not to.

You really are clueless. A lot of women are forced to wear them and have suffered extreme violence for not wearing them. Why don’t you spend sometime studying up on muslim rape gangs in France and what happens to women there who don’t wear burqas.

You are the clueless one, you want to enforce your views on others and you see this as liberty. I clearly stated that forcing someone to wear a Burqa is wrong however if someone chooses to wear one that is their own business and I have no right to tell them not to. [/quote]

You obviously have no idea of what life is like for women in muslim countries. Nor do you have any idea of the history islam and how muslims have forced their religion on others. My wanting to see the plot of land that my ancestors have been on for a thousand years remain free from subjugation by that religion is not forcing my ideas on others it is preventing others from forcing their ideas on me or my family. If you had half a brain you would understand the difference.

[quote]
From that, you do your normal trick of leaping up in outrage screaming that I support gang rape. [/quote]

Again you are making things up. I wrote nothing of the sort. What is the matter with you tonight? You need to lay off the tequila worms and the Mexican dirt weed. I wrote that you should learn about the muslim rape gangs in France because you obviously don’t any idea how violent muslim men are towards women who don’t wear burqas.

The idea that women willingly choose such a torture without being threatened is ridiculous.

754

HELLOOOOOO A scout knife is a tool, not a weapon. If you get lost in the woods what the hell do you do without a knife? Also, having a knife is the coolest thing about scouts. Fuck those liberal bastards and their retarded logic. We have gun crime huh? Take away all guns!! We got knife crime now? Take away all knives!!! We got people getting beat to death with cricket bats?? Ban them too!!!

755

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
OK this is another example of your screwed up logical processes. You claim that the British people are a brainwashed bunch of sheep and therefore easily led then you say that they are a lost cause because they can’t be swayed. So which is it? Are they easily swayed or are they impossible to sway? It can’t be both.[/quote]

I don’t think that is what he meant.

Regardless that can make sense and is not an example of a screwed up logical process.

For instance let us suppose I am easily convinced. If 95% of the people I come into contact with say guns are bad then I will believe that guns are bad. It doesn’t matter how well reasoned the other 5% are because I don’t need a strong argument to be convinced. As such I would take on the opinion of those I spent the most time with.

When you throw the media into the mix it becomes even more futile trying to change the minds of people who are easily led.

756

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So as I suggested, the security is the standard provided by the police to both British and Foreign figures that are considered to be targets and Tony Blair actually has no choice in it whatsoever. Incidentally I know this anyway because when I am in London I train with some of these guys.

Cock you are so full of shit. That level of protection is not standard for anyone other than a handful of elites. There are a lot of people in Britain who are targets who are not allowed any protection. They do not get armed police guards or unarmed police guards. More importantly they are not allowed to have their own weaponry so they can fend for themselves without having to depend upon the unreliable police and criminal justice system.

What is wrong with Britain is honest decent people are stripped of the ability to defend themselves while criminals are allowed to run amock.

Utter rubbish, the British people have not been stripped of anything. The majority of the British population is not in favour of people having guns in their houses or having the right to carry guns in public therefore those rights are not currently available in Britain.

Were there real public support for the arming of the populace in the UK, one of the parties would jump on this and use it to ensure that they got elected.

Just face facts Sifu, regardless of what your Granny told you the majority of people in the UK do not want guns. Numerous British people have jumped on posts here on this forum stating exactly that and you are the only one who seems to think differently based on the fact that your Granny lives in the UK and you read the Daily Mail.

Not true. They have been stripped of their right of rebellion. They have also been stripped of the ability to defend themselves against armed criminals. The criminals are having no problems getting guns, knives or a gang of mates.

The fact that there may not yet be widespread support for gun ownership is only because the British are a brainwashed bunch of sheep. Since there is no rational basis for gun control public opinion could be changed. However if the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause.

OK this is another example of your screwed up logical processes. You claim that the British people are a brainwashed bunch of sheep and therefore easily led then you say that they are a lost cause because they can’t be swayed. So which is it? Are they easily swayed or are they impossible to sway? It can’t be both.

Your reading comprehension is very poor. I wrote: IF the British really can’t be swayed by reason to change their mind on gun control or any other issue for that matter then they truly are a lost cause.

I did not write “because”. That is your rewrite.

What I wrote is true . If the British cannot or will not admit when they have made a mistake and then rectify that mistake they really are finished as a people. [/quote]

You use and IF THEN statement and then claim there is no BECAUSE. IF THEN clearly implies a causation. Because is a conjunction used to show causation.

So again, are the British People Sheep or are they impossible to sway? One or the other.

757

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
A burqa is a lot more than just another piece of clothing. There is a whole lot of cultural baggage that goes along with it. Islam has an extensive history of treating women and girls as chattel. Using the burqa to strip women of any sense of identity and to prevent others from seeing them as individuals is the ultimate objectification of women.

What those women in Hyde park wearing burqas represent is a culture of seperation and rejection of other cultures. If the muslim population is not kept in check but allowed to grow unhindered that will be the future for all British women.

No, a Burqua is just another piece of clothing. If you choose to attach all that power to it then that is down to you but it really is just a piece of cloth.

No Cock. A burqa is a portable one person isolation cell. It dehumanizes women by hiding or not allowing them to have an identity.

Forcing someone to wear one is wrong but if someone chooses to wear one because they feel that it gives them freedom to walk about in public without judgement on the way that they look then who am I to tell them not to.

You really are clueless. A lot of women are forced to wear them and have suffered extreme violence for not wearing them. Why don’t you spend sometime studying up on muslim rape gangs in France and what happens to women there who don’t wear burqas.

You are the clueless one, you want to enforce your views on others and you see this as liberty. I clearly stated that forcing someone to wear a Burqa is wrong however if someone chooses to wear one that is their own business and I have no right to tell them not to.

You obviously have no idea of what life is like for women in muslim countries. Nor do you have any idea of the history islam and how muslims have forced their religion on others. My wanting to see the plot of land that my ancestors have been on for a thousand years remain free from subjugation by that religion is not forcing my ideas on others it is preventing others from forcing their ideas on me or my family. If you had half a brain you would understand the difference.

From that, you do your normal trick of leaping up in outrage screaming that I support gang rape.

Again you are making things up. I wrote nothing of the sort. What is the matter with you tonight? You need to lay off the tequila worms and the Mexican dirt weed. I wrote that you should learn about the muslim rape gangs in France because you obviously don’t any idea how violent muslim men are towards women who don’t wear burqas.

The idea that women willingly choose such a torture without being threatened is ridiculous. [/quote]

You quite clearly implied that as I didn’t support a ban on Burqas that I was complicit in some way with gang rape otherwise what was the point that you were making?

I am fully aware of tournantes, it is an example of what happens when religion joins up with crazy. It is not about the burqa it is about male sexual aggression and supression. Banning anyone from wearing Burqas would not suddenly make Tournantes and so called Honour Killings stop.

758

[quote]elano wrote:
HELLOOOOOO A scout knife is a tool, not a weapon. If you get lost in the woods what the hell do you do without a knife? Also, having a knife is the coolest thing about scouts. Fuck those liberal bastards and their retarded logic. We have gun crime huh? Take away all guns!! We got knife crime now? Take away all knives!!! We got people getting beat to death with cricket bats?? Ban them too!!![/quote]

Read the link in the 3rd post. They are not taking away scout’s knives. This was a misrepresentation by the newspaper.

759

[quote]phaethon wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
OK this is another example of your screwed up logical processes. You claim that the British people are a brainwashed bunch of sheep and therefore easily led then you say that they are a lost cause because they can’t be swayed. So which is it? Are they easily swayed or are they impossible to sway? It can’t be both.

I don’t think that is what he meant.

Regardless that can make sense and is not an example of a screwed up logical process.

For instance let us suppose I am easily convinced. If 95% of the people I come into contact with say guns are bad then I will believe that guns are bad. It doesn’t matter how well reasoned the other 5% are because I don’t need a strong argument to be convinced. As such I would take on the opinion of those I spent the most time with.

When you throw the media into the mix it becomes even more futile trying to change the minds of people who are easily led.[/quote]

No it doesn’t it makes it very easy. You hire a publicist and ensure that your message is in the media.

760

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

So again, are the British People Sheep or are they impossible to sway? One or the other.[/quote]

Cockney,

Think about religious cults, for instance. They are sheep and they are almost impossible to be swayed/persuaded from their blind course.

I think this is what Sifu was trying to convey and it has been my experience with the British.
They are very bound to tradition, conserving the status quo and more importantly very proud, and God forbid, of not becoming like those Americans.

America is “Them” and this is “Us” and we don’t embrace gun ownership policies - that is for vile American gangster society.

I have heard British people saying countless times with resentment how we are “constantly following America’s footsteps, always a step behind” “becoming like America” and “that is why we now have a knife/gang problem, because we are catching up with America.”
Whether that is true or not, there is a lot of passing the buck and stubbornness.
The obstinacy Sifu is talking about may have something to do with a lot of hurt pride.

That is just how I see it from my window.