Absolute *** of our time Pt.MXXVI

[StanSP]

Imagine thinking Ed Miliband is up there with Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Dahmer, Rolf Harris, Harvey Weinstein, Epstein, Maxwell etc

[ajthefox]

You can dislike Ed Miliband. You can raise concerns about how we transition to net zero and how we fund it. Fine.

 

But fvck me what is that Garbage excuse for some sort of political position. 

[HighPeakFox]

5 hours ago, splinterdream said:

Labour have made empty promises on defense spending, but we all know welfare budget needs cuts to fund it. Lord Robertson (a labour peer and ex nato chief who is thought to be in the pay of a lobby group) criticism (corrosive complaceny) of the govt, Starmer doesn't accept

 

5 hours ago, splinterdream said:

I'm no economist, and no political history expert.

 

It's good at least that you found something to say that we can all agree on. You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, however, your sources and influences are very obvious.

[HighPeakFox]

6 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

@Samilktray @Thefox81 @FoxesDeb @Zear0 @HighPeakFox @worthosoriginals

Be honest - how far into this post did you click the laugh emoji?

Unfortunately, being familar with the author in question, it didn't take very long. Sadly, many walk amongst us.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Imagine thinking Ed Miliband is up there with Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Dahmer, Rolf Harris, Harvey Weinstein, Epstein, Maxwell etc

It's bizarre that people think fairly moderate politicians with differing opinions are what this thread is about.

 

Guess some people are just intolerant and fueled by hate.

[splinterdream]

2 hours ago, StanSP said:

Imagine thinking Ed Miliband is up there with Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Dahmer, Rolf Harris, Harvey Weinstein, Epstein, Maxwell etc

In this thread, there has been Robert Jenrick, Kemi badenoch, Joey Barton, Donald Trump, Mel Stride. imagine thinking they're up there with the names mentioned above

[splinterdream]

1 hour ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

It's bizarre that people think fairly moderate politicians with differing opinions are what this thread is about.

 

Guess some people are just intolerant and fueled by hate.

I see plenty of hate in this thread

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, splinterdream said:

In this thread, there has been Robert Jenrick, Kemi badenoch, Joey Barton, Donald Trump, Mel Stride. imagine thinking they're up there with the names mentioned above

Miliband not even close, still. 

 

The fact you've included Barton and Trump as an argument to suit your side is bemusing.

[splinterdream]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

 

 

It's good at least that you found something to say that we can all agree on. You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, however, your sources and influences are very obvious.

I'd say it's fairly normal to be concerned about a nations defences and protections, irrelevent whether those issuing the warnings are being linked with lobbying on behalf of defense manufacturers, I'd be complaining about the actions of any government if they were running the Country the way the Labour Party are

[splinterdream]

4 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Miliband not even close, still. 

 

The fact you've included Barton and Trump as an argument to suit your side is bemusing.

I don't share the same hate for these people than you may do, I thnk that like milliband, they're just idiots 

[HighPeakFox]

26 minutes ago, splinterdream said:

I'd say it's fairly normal to be concerned about a nations defences and protections, irrelevent whether those issuing the warnings are being linked with lobbying on behalf of defense manufacturers, I'd be complaining about the actions of any government if they were running the Country the way the Labour Party are

You can deflect as much as you like to avoid the point being made.

 

Given your final sentence, were you as vocal about the 14 years of dismantlement under the Tories? Thought not.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, splinterdream said:

In this thread, there has been Robert Jenrick, Kemi badenoch, Joey Barton, Donald Trump, Mel Stride. imagine thinking they're up there with the names mentioned above

Pretty sure I’ve posted most of those so I’ll give you my reasonings:

 

Robert Jenrick, Mel Stride and Kemi Badenoch

All three are directly and personally culpable in the 14 years of Tory misrule that have lead this country to be in such a vulnerable position. That’s bad enough, but in opposition that have spent their time whingeing about the result of their own policies while taking absolutely zero responsibility for it.
 

Jenrick proudly proclaimed that he was procuring more and more migrant hotels but is now blaming Labour for their handling of the Farage Small Boats Crisis. When in fact they have reduced immigration backlog to ‘normal’ levels after the Brexitwave, reduced the asylum backlog by 48%, and are closing more and more ‘asylum hotels’ - its own from 400 to 183. He is also a massive racist.

 

Kemi Badenoch doesn’t really do gaffes but she is demonstrably a deeply unpleasant, deeply unpatriotic, deeply unprofessional and deeply arrogant bully who would have taken us into this war on a whim, yet takes no responsibility for the consequences while blaming Starmer for not joining the war. She has proven beyond any doubt that she is unfit for the position she holds. A damning indictment on the talent in the Conservative Party after 14 years of unrelenting disgrace. 

All three have displayed extreme callousness to the most vulnerable people in the country which is bad enough while out of office, but in power, with millions of vulnerable people in their care, they have behaved with utter contempt. 

 

Joey Barton

I posted this on the day he got arrested for assault at a golf club and was forced to pay Eni Aluko compensation for libel. 
 

He is a violent racist and misogynist. An absolute stain on our society. 

 

Donald Trump

Is bombing a girls primary school enough to consider him a cvnt or should I go further?

[Jon the Hat]

17 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

Labour are hugely increasing defence spending. Tory cuts to defence spending meant that £75bn was cut from the department over their time in office. Over the first 7 years of Tory rule, real terms spending dropped by 22%, only riding back up to 2010 levels. 

Labour have already implemented spending increases equivalent to 3.8% a year to 2028/29 and gave committed to a much higher top end % of GDP spent on the military. So the facts do not support the nonsense you've written. 

Not a single extra pound has been given to the Military yet.  Its all empty promises.  3.8% a year doesn't maintain what we currently have.  It's not all their fault, the Tories are guilty of letting things slide to a pathetic level, but to not react properly to the change in world security in the past year or so is criminal.  See the recent commentary by the former Labour Defence minister.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

Donald Trump

Is bombing a girls primary school enough to consider him a cvnt or should I go further?

He is most certainly a ****, but your example is a bit ridiculous.  Sadly tragedies happen in any war, and the US are better than most at avoiding them.

[leicsmac]

Regarding poliicians - as opposed to the convicted dregs of society - on this thread is always going to be a matter of debate, but what is not a matter of debate is some of those politicians (including some mentioned above) are actively pursuing policy platforms that will, in all likelihood and in the not too distant future, result in a toll of death and suffering that will make all previous wars look positively homely.

 

Ignoring increasing global temperatures and the decline of vital resources as a result of it will make that happen.

 

Whether that makes such politicians worthy of inclusion in this thread is clearly up to the beholder.

 

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He is most certainly a ****, but your example is a bit ridiculous.  Sadly tragedies happen in any war, and the US are better than most at avoiding them.

What was it that Coriolanus Snow said? "Mistakes happen in war?" How very true.

 

I wonder how that's best explained to the families of those little girls.

 

But anyway, if other examples are required the man is a rapist and likely worse who has managed to use his power and influence to avoid justice truly finding him - so far.

[StanSP]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He is most certainly a ****, but your example is a bit ridiculous.  Sadly tragedies happen in any war, and the US are better than most at avoiding them.

Avoiding?

 

Hasn't Trump started this war just to pretty much claim he can end them and 'win' them? 

[Torquay Gunner]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He is most certainly a ****, but your example is a bit ridiculous.  Sadly tragedies happen in any war, and the US are better than most at avoiding them.

I am sure that there are many people in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone Iran who would disagree with you.

[leicsmac]

Just now, Torquay Gunner said:

I am sure that there are many people in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone Iran who would disagree with you.

And most of central and Latin America.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Regarding poliicians - as opposed to the convicted dregs of society - on this thread is always going to be a matter of debate, but what is not a matter of debate is some of those politicians (including some mentioned above) are actively pursuing policy platforms that will, in all likelihood and in the not too distant future, result in a toll of death and suffering that will make all previous wars look positively homely.

 

Ignoring increasing global temperatures and the decline of vital resources as a result of it will make that happen.

 

Whether that makes such politicians worthy of inclusion in this thread is clearly up to the beholder.

 

What was it that Coriolanus Snow said? "Mistakes happen in war?" How very true.

 

I wonder how that's best explained to the families of those little girls.

 

But anyway, if other examples are required the man is a rapist and likely worse who has managed to use his power and influence to avoid justice truly finding him - so far.

Indeed, the war itself you could argue makes him a ****, though I am no fan of the Iranian regime, and nor it seems are most of those living under it.  Individual tragedies in that war are his responsibility as CIC, but not his fault exactly.

 

I just thought it was a strange example to use when there are many clearer ones.

Edited 16 April by Jon the Hat

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Avoiding?

 

Hasn't Trump started this war just to pretty much claim he can end them and 'win' them? 

I have literally no idea why Trump started this war to be honest.  He seems to be completely mental now.  Weird messages all night, making little sense, contradicting himself in even shorter periods than before.  If you Dad was doing this you would be taking him to the doctors.

 

Someone obviously convinced him this was necessary, for what reason who knows.  Lets however not confuse Trump with the USA.  We have our own differences with the USA as well of course, but Trump is a different level.

[Free Falling Foxes]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I have literally no idea why Trump started this war to be honest.  He seems to be completely mental now.  Weird messages all night, making little sense, contradicting himself in even shorter periods than before.  If you Dad was doing this you would be taking him to the doctors.

 

Someone obviously convinced him this was necessary, for what reason who knows.  Lets however not confuse Trump with the USA.  We have our own differences with the USA as well of course, but Trump is a different level.

The American public have voted for him twice now. Many, many still support him and there seems to be little if any chance of any impeachment.

[bovril]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I have literally no idea why Trump started this war to be honest.  He seems to be completely mental now.  Weird messages all night, making little sense, contradicting himself in even shorter periods than before.  If you Dad was doing this you would be taking him to the doctors.

 

Someone obviously convinced him this was necessary, for what reason who knows.  Lets however not confuse Trump with the USA.  We have our own differences with the USA as well of course, but Trump is a different level.

If only the Americans had taken a similar view over the last few decades, a lot of civilian deaths would have been avoided. 

[bovril]

I wonder if people at the height of the British Empire were like "let's remember our problem is with the British PM, not with the empire itself and its system of ruthless wealth extraction and subjugation of native peoples". 

[leicsmac]

53 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

The American public have voted for him twice now. Many, many still support him and there seems to be little if any chance of any impeachment.

There might be a possibility after the midterms later this year if the current trend continues, but yes, his cult of personality and the damage it has caused makes for a (darkly) fascinating case study in terms of difficult to flush it has been and is. 

[urban.spaceman]

10 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He is most certainly a ****, but your example is a bit ridiculous.  Sadly tragedies happen in any war, and the US are better than most at avoiding them.

OK fair enough. How about:

Starting a war without any planning or consultation of your allies, whom you have spent the last year lying about, which is going to cause serious and long term economic problems in this country, and in which he used AI to select targets to bomb, one of which was a girls primary school with 150 children and their teachers?

 

If murdering children at school isn't enough to make him an evil cvnt then perhaps the wider context of what led him to doing that does?