Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Guest Foxin_mad]

19 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Just a thought but in terms of events likely to incite a class war, a pop-star criticising the prime minister is perhaps slightly less powerful than the burning to death of numerous poor families and subsequent inability of the establishment to demonstrate they give even the slightest ****.

What examples are there of the establishment 'failing to give a shit?' . A very unfortunate incident happened, now I do not believe for one moment that anyone involved in events would want innocent individuals to burn to death. Mistakes may have been made by a number of bodies which need to be investigated and laws changed to ensure this doesn't happen again. I have seen examples of incompetence but no deliberate actions of failing to give a shit. Yet again we are a country with some of the best fire regulations in the World but sometimes terrible things happen we can only learn from that.

 

A cock like Stormzy amongst the young is quite powerful in the world of Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat etc etc. Its a poor precedent to set insinuating burning Prime Ministers. Funds have been allocated, people have been rehoused, an inquiry will be held, some people MAY be held to account. What else does the class war warrior want?

 

Again perhaps him and his rich mates, instead of attending an elitist event full of disgusting and unnecessary excess and back patting for talentless individuals; could club together some money and pay for the best possible recovery efforts for their comrades. Of course they wont because they DONT actually care, they just want popularist sound bites to make them look good.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

What examples are there of the establishment 'failing to give a shit?' . A very unfortunate incident happened, now I do not believe for one moment that anyone involved in events would want innocent individuals to burn to death. Mistakes may have been made by a number of bodies which need to be investigated and laws changed to ensure this doesn't happen again. I have seen examples of incompetence but no deliberate actions of failing to give a shit. Yet again we are a country with some of the best fire regulations in the World but sometimes terrible things happen we can only learn from that.

 

A cock like Stormzy amongst the young is quite powerful in the world of Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat etc etc. Its a poor precedent to set insinuating burning Prime Ministers. Funds have been allocated, people have been rehoused, an inquiry will be held, some people MAY be held to account. What else does the class war warrior want?

 

Again perhaps him and his rich mates, instead of attending an elitist event full of disgusting and unnecessary excess and back patting for talentless individuals; could club together some money and pay for the best possible recovery efforts for their comrades. Of course they wont because they DONT actually care, they just want popularist sound bites to make them look good.

7

 

You are doing it again - there was no such insinuation.

[Rogstanley]

25 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

What examples are there of the establishment 'failing to give a shit?' . A very unfortunate incident happened, now I do not believe for one moment that anyone involved in events would want innocent individuals to burn to death. Mistakes may have been made by a number of bodies which need to be investigated and laws changed to ensure this doesn't happen again. I have seen examples of incompetence but no deliberate actions of failing to give a shit. Yet again we are a country with some of the best fire regulations in the World but sometimes terrible things happen we can only learn from that.

 

A cock like Stormzy amongst the young is quite powerful in the world of Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat etc etc. Its a poor precedent to set insinuating burning Prime Ministers. Funds have been allocated, people have been rehoused, an inquiry will be held, some people MAY be held to account. What else does the class war warrior want?

 

Again perhaps him and his rich mates, instead of attending an elitist event full of disgusting and unnecessary excess and back patting for talentless individuals; could club together some money and pay for the best possible recovery efforts for their comrades. Of course they wont because they DONT actually care, they just want popularist sound bites to make them look good.

The insultion to burn prime ministers is entirely a figment of your imagination, whereas the fact that the prime minister his behind a security detail like she was visiting dangerous wild animals on her brief visit to Grenfell actually happened.

[Fox Ulike]

13 hours ago, Donut said:

Weve worked out by now that you love your fish despite knowing the square root of nothing about EU law, so lets examine a few quotes from Buce's article:

 

"The quota each member state receives is based largely on how much they fished in those areas in the 1970s, before the Common Fisheries Policy came into effect".....a good old nod to the 1970s that you felt had been ignored, which hasnt been.

 

"The UK’s share of the overall EU fishing catch grew between 2004 and 2014. In 2004 the UK had the fourth largest catch of any EU country at 652,000 tonnes, by 2014 this had grown to 752,000 tonnes and the second largest catch of any country in the EU...This would suggest that within the EU the UK is improving its position.

 

"..... so the UK were actually catching more fish despite being within the horrid threat to your freedom that was the EU

 

"On the subject of the objective of the policy, which is to enhance sustainable supplies of fish for everyone: There are doubts within the industry as to whether or not the EU’s fishing policy has actually achieved this. But, some species, such as North Sea cod, seem to be recovering and an assessment is underway to determine whether or not it is now sustainable".....So there was evidence the policy was working and a report had been comissioned to confirm this.

 

"If we left the EU it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the situation would improve. The House of Commons Library has said that “many of the underlying issues that affect fisheries management would remain unchanged.”..... Issues not solved by your taking back of control it would seem.

 

"The UK is signed up to the UN Law of the Sea Convention which allows countries to establish an Exclusive Economic Zone of up to 200 nautical miles from their coast. If the UK were to leave the EU we could have control of all fish which were within this zone. But, the same laws also require countries to ensure that fish stocks are conserved and that the allowable catch is specified and where necessary shared with other countries.

Countries such as Norway have this 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone in place, they also have agreements with a number of countries, and with the EU to allow fishing in those waters"....... Damn.....the UK has excerised its sovereignty to sign up to a sea convention programme where it has deemed it would be happy to share stocks of fish with other countries anyway like we did in the EU, and commit to a conservation programme just like the EU had.

 

 

So there you go. Youve taken back control in a desire to end a policy that was working that you thought was a threat and that you didnt like, despite the evidence that you werent aware of or didnt care about, you just went with your EU law is bad boooooooo theory, and it must pain you to death we have a convention with the UN too that we are part of. Maybe we should scrap this too?

 

 

The coup de grace was the "you lost" quote though. Genius. Straight off the playground.

 

 

 

But do you know the TACs (Total Allowable Catches) for each EU nation?

 

I was under the impression that Britain had been given a bad deal on this. That is, we had the same right to catch fish as other EU nations. So Luxembourg and Czech Republic, for example, have the right to fish as much as we can. I admit though I might have been a victim of Brexit propaganda on this issue though.

 

If this is just about fishing quotas then it’s a non-argument as quotas are put in place only to allow fish to grow back to sustainable numbers – rather than to become exist. Surely no-one can argue that we should be allowed to fish without limits??

 

If however, Britain has been badly treated in regard to our Total Allowable Catch, then that’s another story.

 

Which is it?

Edited 26 February 2018 by Fox Ulike

[Buce]

Osborne says Corbyn has made Labour 'more pro-business, more pro-free trade' than Tories

George Osborne’s Evening Standard has welcomed Jeremy Corbyn’s intervention. In its leader, which Osborne, the former chancellor, has promoted on Twitter, it says Corbyn has now made Labour more pro-business than the Tories.

The Labour leader has, with the smallest of nudges, manoeuvred himself into a more pro-business, pro-free trade European policy than the Tory Government.

He has also opened up the looming prospect of the Prime Minister suffering a huge defeat in the Commons, as the number of Tory MPs who agree with remaining in a customs union grows each week.

The Evening Standard has warned consistently that this would happen since the moment the last election result became clear.

So did the Chancellor of the Exchequer, many sensible Cabinet members, business groups, Tory peers and backbench MPs.

But the warnings were ignored and the Conservative leadership instead chose to appease the hardcore Brexiteers, obsessed with the ideological purity of their experiment and — in some cases — openly willing to lose an election, if that’s the price of pursuing it.

[Buce]

Business will welcome Corbyn's announcement, says IoD

The Institute of Directors has given a qualified welcome to Jeremy Corbyn’s announcement, partially vindicating George Osborne’s claim about the speech making Labour more pro-business than the Tories. (See 11.55am.) But the IoD says it thinks its plan for a hubrid customs union is better. Stephen Martin, the IoD director general, said:

Labour has widened the debate today on the UK’s relationship with the EU post-Brexit, and many businesses, particularly manufacturers, will be pleased to hear the opposition’s proposal to keep a customs union on the table. It was important to see Jeremy Corbyn putting emphasis on the complexity of cross-border ‘just-in-time’ supply chains that could face significant new costs and barriers without one. As with everything about the Brexit process, however, extracting detailed and specific answers on the future trade arrangements from our political leaders has been a slow and laborious process.

There are no easy solutions here. A full customs union would make life simpler for goods exporters, but it is not clear whether Jeremy Corbyn is proposing that Brussels negotiate trade deals for the UK even after Brexit. It is hard to see how the EU could simply extend its trade agreements to a sizeable non-member state without a fundamental revision of its Treaties.

We advocate instead a partial customs union covering all industrial goods, in conjunction with a broader FTA [free trade agreement] for the many other areas that would be needed to ensure frictionless trade with the EU. This would minimise disruption to the UK’s manufacturing industries, but also allow the UK to set its own tariffs and negotiate them down on products ranging from cheese and chocolate to sugar and oranges. It would also give the UK control over much of its own anti-dumping regime.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 hours ago, Buce said:

 

You are doing it again - there was no such insinuation.

I believe there is, its your prerogative to disagree and 'give me dogs abuse' if you like. Stormzy is a cvnt. He is saying that for one reason only and that is to incite hatred and tension amongst communities because its the kind of thing idiots like him thrive on. People actually think pillocks like him are decent normal chaps shows the problem this country has!

3 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

The insultion to burn prime ministers is entirely a figment of your imagination, whereas the fact that the prime minister his behind a security detail like she was visiting dangerous wild animals on her brief visit to Grenfell actually happened.

Its not at all. Given the incitement from various people towards the EVIL MURDEING Tory scum shits  etc etc, and high tensions it was probably extremely wise for May to remain away from the public at that particular time.

 

Again the outrage over this incident and political point scoring is horrendous, no one wanted people to die. If you believe this you are obviously planting your head firmly in the sand.

 

There are many factors involved in this terrible situation. To blame 'Tory SCUM cuts' is yet more utter bullshit pedalled by certain factors to score cheap points. The facts are a fridge set on fire, it unfortunately spread, materials were used that may not have been appropriate for that kind of building, and investigation will be carried out on all of this. Perhaps mistakes have been made but we will learn from them as we do with all tragedies and make regulations better. If people have made decisions that have led to deaths it is likely they will be held to account.

 

There are issues about whether this kind of building is safe full stop but that is a bigger issue. Both Labour and Conservatives consider this kind of housing fundamentally safe. I disagree.

[SMX11]

45 minutes ago, Buce said:

Osborne says Corbyn has made Labour 'more pro-business, more pro-free trade' than Tories

George Osborne’s Evening Standard has welcomed Jeremy Corbyn’s intervention. In its leader, which Osborne, the former chancellor, has promoted on Twitter, it says Corbyn has now made Labour more pro-business than the Tories.

The Labour leader has, with the smallest of nudges, manoeuvred himself into a more pro-business, pro-free trade European policy than the Tory Government.

He has also opened up the looming prospect of the Prime Minister suffering a huge defeat in the Commons, as the number of Tory MPs who agree with remaining in a customs union grows each week.

The Evening Standard has warned consistently that this would happen since the moment the last election result became clear.

So did the Chancellor of the Exchequer, many sensible Cabinet members, business groups, Tory peers and backbench MPs.

But the warnings were ignored and the Conservative leadership instead chose to appease the hardcore Brexiteers, obsessed with the ideological purity of their experiment and — in some cases — openly willing to lose an election, if that’s the price of pursuing it.

Pro big and London centric business. I thought Mr Corbyn was for the 'many'?

 

 

I haven't seen or listened to this 'major' speech but from what I gather off twitter he is only advocating CU membership in transition? Not sure that position is any different to the Tories transition/implementation period.

Edited 26 February 2018 by SMX11

[lifted*fox]

18 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Stormzy is a cvnt. He is saying that for one reason only and that is to incite hatred and tension amongst communities because its the kind of thing idiots like him thrive on. People actually think pillocks like him are decent normal chaps shows the problem this country has! Its not at all. Given the incitement from various people towards the EVIL MURDEING Tory scum shits  etc etc, and high tensions it was probably extremely wise for May to remain away from the public at that particular time.

 

 at how much you seemingly hate Stormzy for calling out the crooks that run this country. 

 

musicians have been a voice for political change for years - he ain't the first and won't be the last.

 

looking at his upbringing, school grades and what he's gone on to achieve I'd say he's actually a pretty intelligent and determined young man.

 

he spends a lot of his time working with young people - getting them into music and bettering their future prospects.

 

he made a choice to use his time in the limelight to voice what a large proportion of this country is thinking right now - it might not be what you're thinking but plenty are.

 

so you can call him a cvnt and a **** and an idiot all you like but until you get yourself into a position where people want to listen to you (which I doubt you will) then Stormzy wins the day.

 

I really don't understand what people like you stand to gain for arguing for and protecting the state when it comes to injustices like Grenfell. there is clearly foul play at hand and no matter how hard you push it people will 'not be held to account'. it will be forgotten unless people like Stormzy choose to keep it in play. 

 

Also - stop misquoting him - at no point did he suggest burning anyone's house down ffs. 

[Buce]

14 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I believe there is, its your prerogative to disagree and 'give me dogs abuse' if you like. Stormzy is a cvnt. He is saying that for one reason only and that is to incite hatred and tension amongst communities because its the kind of thing idiots like him thrive on. People actually think pillocks like him are decent normal chaps shows the problem this country has!

Its not at all. Given the incitement from various people towards the EVIL MURDEING Tory scum shits  etc etc, and high tensions it was probably extremely wise for May to remain away from the public at that particular time.

 

Again the outrage over this incident and political point scoring is horrendous, no one wanted people to die. If you believe this you are obviously planting your head firmly in the sand.

 

There are many factors involved in this terrible situation. To blame 'Tory SCUM cuts' is yet more utter bullshit pedalled by certain factors to score cheap points. The facts are a fridge set on fire, it unfortunately spread, materials were used that may not have been appropriate for that kind of building, and investigation will be carried out on all of this. Perhaps mistakes have been made but we will learn from them as we do with all tragedies and make regulations better. If people have made decisions that have led to deaths it is likely they will be held to account.

 

There are issues about whether this kind of building is safe full stop but that is a bigger issue. Both Labour and Conservatives consider this kind of housing fundamentally safe. I disagree.

6

 

It's not something that boils down to a matter of opinion - it's a demonstrable fact.

 

I have no opinion on whether the bloke is a cvnt or not - I was blissfully unaware of his existence up until a couple of days ago - but what he said is a matter of public record, and he did not say what you are claiming.

[ealingfox]

In every post since he moaned about people being abusive and misrepresenting the views and comments of other, he's been abusive and misrepresented the views and comments of others. Beggars belief it really does.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

 

56 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

 at how much you seemingly hate Stormzy for calling out the crooks that run this country. 

 

musicians have been a voice for political change for years - he ain't the first and won't be the last.

 

looking at his upbringing, school grades and what he's gone on to achieve I'd say he's actually a pretty intelligent and determined young man.

 

he spends a lot of his time working with young people - getting them into music and bettering their future prospects.

 

he made a choice to use his time in the limelight to voice what a large proportion of this country is thinking right now - it might not be what you're thinking but plenty are.

 

so you can call him a cvnt and a **** and an idiot all you like but until you get yourself into a position where people want to listen to you (which I doubt you will) then Stormzy wins the day.

 

I really don't understand what people like you stand to gain for arguing for and protecting the state when it comes to injustices like Grenfell. there is clearly foul play at hand and no matter how hard you push it people will 'not be held to account'. it will be forgotten unless people like Stormzy choose to keep it in play. 

 

Also - stop misquoting him - at no point did he suggest burning anyone's house down ffs. 

at you for thinking that crooks are running the country and supporting a potential Labour government that praises the regime in Venezuela and refuses to condemn its corruption and murder.

 

Musicians should stick to music.

 

Again why doesn't he donate more of his personal fortune to the causes he claims to 'support'?

 

Is a large percentage of the country thinking this right now or just the left? Who because I am not seeing too many people thinking that.

 

I don't understand what people like you have to gain who are arguing for people like Stormzy, he is a rich young man who enjoys a privileged lifestyle from having something that is questionable as to whether it is an actual 'talent'. He could get out there and make a real difference instead of attending events of excess and privilege like the Brit Awards. Again of course that does create the same sound bites attention seekers like him strive for. I also do not understand why so many people fall for Comrade Corbyn either.

 

You have a go at me then you are caught misrepresenting the facts, there is not clearly 'foul play' at hand, that is YOUR opinion and this is the kind of dangerous ground we can get in making accusations like this. If you are saying there is foul play then prove it. Otherwise I doubt you are in a position when you can be taken seriously either. We are country with a fair legal system, I believe the enquiry will uncover what it needs to.

 

He insinuated that in my interpretation of what he said. He could have made his point much more eloquently without mentioning the prime ministers house burning, its unnecessary. He said it for a reason but you go on thinking he is a nice normal young man if you wish your perogative.

 

53 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

It's not something that boils down to a matter of opinion - it's a demonstrable fact.

 

I have no opinion on whether the bloke is a cvnt or not - I was blissfully unaware of his existence up until a couple of days ago - but what he said is a matter of public record, and he did not say what you are claiming.

To which I have already said. I do not debate the actual wording of what he has said. In my opinion what he said could be heard by some as encouragement to attack the so called elite establishment. That is my personal opinion on what he said, in my eyes it is inciting unnecessary division. .

 

45 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

In every post since he moaned about people being abusive and misrepresenting the views and comments of other, he's been abusive and misrepresented the views and comments of others. Beggars belief it really does.

When did I moan about people being abusive and misrepresenting views? I have always said people are entitled to their views whatever they are, I may disagree but they can have them freely and interpret things how they like.

 

I have not been personally abusive to people on here, I have called out a repulsive pop star who has jumped on to the Corbyn Bandwagon.

 

Obviously there is lots of interpretation and potential misrepresentation on here. Its an Internet forum not an echo chamber.

-People think we can spend money we don't have on things and that will stimulate growth and we can then maybe pay it back

-Others think we shouldn't spend money we don't have

-People think we can raise tax for business and individuals and they will all just pay it

-Others think this may cause jobs to be lost

-Some think Labours economic policy will save the public sector, create jobs and a boom and make everyone richer

-Others think it will lead to everyone being poorer.

 

Goodness me the lefties are like crazy hyenas eating the Tory Scum Shitbag willy puller. Kinder gentle politics - Momentum styleeeLove it!

Edited 26 February 2018 by Foxin_mad

[lifted*fox]

Just now, Foxin_mad said:

at you for thinking that crooks are running the country and supporting a potential Labour government that praises the regime in Venezuela and refuses to condemn its corruption and murder.

 

annnnnnd at this point I stopped reading. 

 

sensationalist rubbish - on par with Stormzy's assessment of Grenfell if your view on it is to be believed. 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Just now, lifted*fox said:

 

annnnnnd at this point I stopped reading. 

 

sensationalist rubbish - on par with Stormzy's assessment of Grenfell if your view on it is to be believed. 

Have they or have they not previously praised the regime in Venezuela?

 

 

Do they or do they not refuse to condemn it?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/jeremy-corbyn-refuses-condemn-venezuelan-presidentnicolas-maduro/

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-venezuela-must-condemn-richard-burgon-us-ken-livingstone-a7875451.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-condemns-violence-venezuela-10946020

 

If it is so sensationalist rubbish prove it. Instead of going off on a lefty one as usual.

 

So you don't think that saying that there is 'foul play' at hand over Grenfell is sensationalist rubbish? Pot Kettle Black and all that!

[Guest MattP]

30 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Have they or have they not previously praised the regime in Venezuela?

 

 

Do they or do they not refuse to condemn it?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/jeremy-corbyn-refuses-condemn-venezuelan-presidentnicolas-maduro/

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-venezuela-must-condemn-richard-burgon-us-ken-livingstone-a7875451.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-condemns-violence-venezuela-10946020

 

If it is so sensationalist rubbish prove it. Instead of going off on a lefty.

That's not Jeremy Corbyn, it's a lookalike and the voice over has been dubbed onto it, it's another smear from the right-wing media.

 

What a speech this morning, another chance - they now want to stay in "a" customs union (at least for a while) - whatever that is going to be.

 

Can't find a clip yet but this actually happened  

 

I get the feeling the dear leader is going to be very hard to ask a question to over the next few weeks.

[Guest MattP]

As for Stormzy  (whoever he is) - we should engage him. His rant was basically Theresa, where's the money for Grenfell?

 

Let's get him on the Daily Politics or something similar and ask him why he thinks the financial support so far (relocation and 20k cash) isn't sufficient, how much he thinks the Government should provide and were that money should be diverted from, I have no problem with "celebrities" making political statements providing they are prepared to back them up with logic, thought and fact.

 

Soon as you ask these things you rarely hear from them again, look how quickly Russell Brand vanished after being shown up in front of a big audience. 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

21 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

What a speech this morning, another chance - they now want to stay in "a" customs union (at least for a while) - whatever that is going to be.

 

 

'A' customs union but not 'The' customs union. Will EU even allow that? Quite honestly what is the point? does he really think we are all that thick?

 

So basically Labour want to negotiate a customs union similar to the customs union but not the customs union, they also do not want to restrict freedom of movement? Why not just stay in the customs union? or single market or just the EU?

 

Corbyn says he respects the referendum result. I hope the North of England remembers his respect for their wishes. The only reason he wants out of the EU is His renationalisation plans would fall foul to EU state aid laws. Deary me! Talk about not acting in the interests of the country!

 

I think after Mays speech later in the week we should hold an election in June. Labour floppy brexit, Tories proper brexit. Let the people put this to bed.

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

'A' customs union but not 'The' customs union. Will EU even allow that? Quite honestly what is the point? does he really think we are all that thick?

 

So basically Labour want to negotiate a customs union similar to the customs union but not the customs union, they also do not want to restrict freedom of movement? Why not just stay in the customs union? or single market or just the EU?

 

Corbyn says he respects the referendum result. I hope the North of England remembers his respect for their wishes. The only reason he wants out of the EU is His renationalisation plans would fall foul to EU state aid laws. Deary me! Talk about not acting in the interests of the country!

 

I think after Mays speech later in the week we should hold an election in June. Labour floppy brexit, Tories proper brexit. Let the people put this to bed.

 

Isnt it lovely how simple everything is now?

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

'A' customs union but not 'The' customs union. Will EU even allow that? Quite honestly what is the point? does he really think we are all that thick?

 

So basically Labour want to negotiate a customs union similar to the customs union but not the customs union, they also do not want to restrict freedom of movement? Why not just stay in the customs union? or single market or just the EU?

 

Corbyn says he respects the referendum result. I hope the North of England remembers his respect for their wishes. The only reason he wants out of the EU is His renationalisation plans would fall foul to EU state aid laws. Deary me! Talk about not acting in the interests of the country!

 

I think after Mays speech later in the week we should hold an election in June. Labour floppy brexit, Tories proper brexit. Let the people put this to bed.

I think the journalists wanted to ask that, but instead we got activists asking questions like "please by our Prime Minister".

 

They will clearly need to give us a bit more depth on this, Barry Gardiner is already digging a hole trying to get himself out of his comments, we need to get it from Keir Starmer, he's supposed to be the brains behind this.

 

Feel for whoever they shove on to be humiliated by Andrew Neil on Wednesday when he goes at them.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

5 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Isnt it lovely how simple everything is now?

It will hopefully paint a clearer line.

 

I think whoever does whatever they do they need a clear mandate for it and just get on with it whatever it is. All this pissing around is stupid.

 

Im sick of hearing it. Just get on with either being in or being out. I am quite sure whichever way it goes they world wont end. Yet!

Edited 26 February 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

I think the journalists wanted to ask that, but instead we got activists asking questions like "please by our Prime Minister".

 

They will clearly need to give us a bit more depth on this, Barry Gardiner is already digging a hole trying to get himself out of his comments, we need to get it from Keir Starmer, he's supposed to be the brains behind this.

 

Feel for whoever they shove on to be humiliated by Andrew Neil on Wednesday when he goes at them.

The kind of strange media regulation, manipulation and propaganda that you get in repressive socialist states. You only get told what good things have happened and what they want you to hear. Everything else is brushed off.

 

Kind of like what happens in North Korea. And people keep pretending that this is not strange!

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

The kind of strange media regulation, manipulation and propaganda that you get in repressive socialist states. You only get told what good things have happened and what they want you to hear. Everything else is brushed off.

 

Kind of like what happens in North Korea. And people keep pretending that this is not strange!

It's only going to get weirder as well. Just in the last few months we've had threats to the media, proposal of government controlled nationalisation price, ideas of confiscating private property etc - yet some still try and claim this is some sort of proposal for a Scandinavian style social democracy, it's bizarre.

 

There are some that hate the right-wing press so much I think they'll stand by and watch all press freedoms erode if it means limitations on them, hope I'm wrong though on that.

 

I just hope the Tories can get their act together as the idea of those sorts being in charge of a first World country like ours is mad. 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

12 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

It will hopefully paint a clearer line.

 

I think whoever does whatever they do they need a clear mandate for it and just get on with it whatever it is. All this pissing around is stupid.

 

Im sick of hearing it. Just get on with either being in or being out. I am quite sure whichever way it goes they world wont end. Yet!

I suppose its possible a clearer line can be painted.

 

But then there is the issue of we cant be too apparent in our intentions as we are negotiating with the EU and are scared of undermining our position, apparently...

 

Also, May already tried to get a mandate with her snap election and that didnt work.

 

Now that we're in it I suppose its possible to have the two main parties agree on a position and have the public vote for it.

But then we really are reducing our democratic discussion to a two party state and i'm not sure thats desirable, although i suppose we are effectively there anyway

 

Cant quite see that working out and if we voted on it and it was split down the middle again it wouldnt make the whole thing any less contentious

 

 

[Rogstanley]

12 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

The kind of strange media regulation, manipulation and propaganda that you get in repressive socialist states. You only get told what good things have happened and what they want you to hear. Everything else is brushed off.

 

Kind of like what happens in North Korea. And people keep pretending that this is not strange!

I can’t believe you’re complaining about manipulation when you’ve spent the last day ranting about something stormzy didn’t actually say or imply in any way.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

16 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

I can’t believe you’re complaining about manipulation when you’ve spent the last day ranting about something stormzy didn’t actually say or imply in any way.

Goodness me changing the subject are we?

 

Been over this one. I have interpreted it in a certain way that is my prerogative. If feel that others may be driven to act by its divisive tone, that's my opinion I accept you and others see that as wrong but don't really care.  Please go back and read previous posts. Going to make any worthwhile contribution to the current matters in hand?

 

That is my view only. I am not a newspaper, a media outlet or a minister or member of the press team for our esteemed opposition. I think me having a view point and you rightfully being able to disagree to it is a little different to a supposed government in waiting diverting away important questions regarding its policies? Yes/No?

Edited 26 February 2018 by Foxin_mad