Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Shit, I didn't know that only one objection could mean it was blocked wholesale.

 

Seriously, there's a time and a place for scrutiny but a bill sorting this out is a frigging no-brainer.

Posted
52 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

An attempt to make upskirting a specific criminal offence in England and Wales has been blocked by one Conservative MP.

The government had given its support to introducing the new law earlier.

But Sir Christopher Chope shouted "object" to the bill, leading to cries of "shame" from other MPs.

 

Wonder whose twat he looks at on his government computer. :rolleyes:

1

:whistle:

Posted
6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Did you just call the Prime minister “this wench”?

Well, we all know that Strokes is a left wing balm pot, Poor little chap is a big red bad of wind, but he can't help it. lol

Posted
11 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

Well, we all know that Strokes is a left wing balm pot, Poor little chap is a big red bad of wind, but he can't help it. lol

I wonder, do you pay attention to anything whilst your good lady is fantasising about corpses?

  • Haha 3
Guest Kopfkino
Posted
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Shit, I didn't know that only one objection could mean it was blocked wholesale.

 

Seriously, there's a time and a place for scrutiny but a bill sorting this out is a frigging no-brainer.

 

It's if there's no time to debate a PMB then it only passes if nobody objects. It delays it until another time and basically wastes everybody's time but if he can well do the same next time around. Given the terrible PR it might well end up going through a different channel now. Seems like he has form for these objections. 

Posted
Just now, Kopfkino said:

 

It's if there's no time to debate a PMB then it only passes if nobody objects. It delays it until another time and basically wastes everybody's time but if he can well do the same next time around. Given the terrible PR it might well end up going through a different channel now. Seems like he has form for these objections. 

I hear that.

 

However, you'd have thought he's learned to pick his battles a little better - he's going to be associated with this for a long time going forward, I think.

Guest Kopfkino
Posted
Just now, leicsmac said:

I hear that.

 

However, you'd have thought he's learned to pick his battles a little better - he's going to be associated with this for a long time going forward, I think.

 

He's an ignorant, out of date, old man who should have collected his pension ages ago and was one of the worst for expenses. He doesn't give a damn. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

He's an ignorant, out of date, old man who should have collected his pension ages ago and was one of the worst for expenses. He doesn't give a damn. 

You're right, he probably doesn't.

 

He can look forward to a good kicking on social media though and that might bleed over into his own life for this one, though. I wonder if he's ready for that flak - I doubt he's been in the public eye this much before.

Guest MattP
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Voll Blau said:

Him and that other filibustering twat Philip Davies are about the most odious blokes in Parliament aren't they?

Tom Watson by a country mile. 

 

This is a man who used his parliamentary privelege (so he can't be sued or brought to account) to call someone the epitome of evil and effectively a paedophile - we were later told police wouldn't have even investigated this as evidence was so flimsy and his wife died before he was cleared and his innocence wasnt confirmed.

 

That's evil.

Edited by MattP
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, toddybad said:

To be less (bit not entirely) party political, this situation is an absolute ****ing disgrace

 

Epileptic boy 'in life-threatening state' after cannabis oil seized

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/15/mothers-plea-for-uk-to-legalise-cannabis-oil-charlotte-caldwell-billy?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

I agree but I’m surprised you aren’t going Party political when it would be a totally legitimate time too. It’s disgusting and I can’t understand the reasons behind it. If the PM has moral objections she should watch what her husbands up to.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-blasted-links-medical-cannabis-12701871

Edited by Strokes
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, toddybad said:

To be less (bit not entirely) party political, this situation is an absolute ****ing disgrace

 

Epileptic boy 'in life-threatening state' after cannabis oil seized

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/15/mothers-plea-for-uk-to-legalise-cannabis-oil-charlotte-caldwell-billy?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

 

No, this is party political.

 

The Tories are prevented from being progressive in any way because their voter base is stuck in the early 20th century.

Edited by Buce
Posted
18 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I agree but I’m surprised you aren’t going Party political when it would be a totally legitimate time too. It’s disgusting and I can’t understand the reasons behind it. If the PM has moral objections she should watch what her husbands up too.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-blasted-links-medical-cannabis-12701871

Because we should all agree this is disgusting. If I go party political I'll have to read webbo and Matty explaining why the poor lad's life should be ****ed up.

Posted
21 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Statism costs lives. Simple fact of life.

Don't be a cvnt. It's nothing to do with statism.

Posted
2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Don't be a cvnt. It's nothing to do with statism.

Tell me toddy, did labour legalise this stuff and the tories repeal it?

Guest Kopfkino
Posted
2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Don't be a cvnt. It's nothing to do with statism.

 

**** off. It has everything to do with statism. The state is denying him the treatment that has shown to work for him, nobody else. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

No, this is party political.

 

The Tories are prevented from being progressive in any way because their voter base is stuck in the early 20th century.

 

I don't care the reason. A poor customs official was forced to remove the oil in tears and a government minister refused to give it back. They should have got parliament to vote on an immediate change to the law but haven't. 

 

As much as I rail against the big things something's it's the little stories of one person that really speak truths about those in power. I.honestly couldn't be more angry that this wasnt just allowed to happen bit it's still happening with no sign of life from the government. Where's the immediate action to change what is an obvious flaw in the law?

 

So embarrassed and angry with my shit, crap government.

Posted
1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Tell me toddy, did labour legalise this stuff and the tories repeal it?

That's right. Here we go. I haven't blamed the government before you posted that but here you go with the defence of the Royal blues. You sad little man. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

**** off. It has everything to do with statism. The state is denying him the treatment that has shown to work for him, nobody else. 

The law isn't the same as statism. 

Posted
1 minute ago, toddybad said:

That's right. Here we go. I haven't blamed the government before you posted that but here you go with the defence of the Royal blues. You sad little man. 

You've certainly implied it. Calling someone a cvnt for blaming statism but doing the same yourself.

Posted
Just now, Webbo said:

You've certainly implied it. Calling someone a cvnt for blaming statism but doing the same yourself.

Why not be a decent human for a change and just comment on the situation.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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