View Poll Results: SWF Exit Poll

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Conservatives

    21 53.85%
  • Labour

    11 28.21%
  • Liberals

    6 15.38%
  • Brexit

    1 2.56%
  • SNP/Plaid

    0 0%
  • Green

    0 0%
  • Independant

    0 0%
Page 38 of 52 FirstFirst ... 28363738394048 ... LastLast
Results 1,851 to 1,900 of 2582

Thread: General Election 2019 - Post Match Reaction

  1. #1851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Bognor View Post
    I'm still a bit undecided about my vote direction this coming Thursday.

    I've obviously taken into consideration what I consider to be the following swaying points on the two main parties.

    On the one hand the Conservative Boris Johnson is a bit of a rascal with the ladies and can sometimes bend the truth a bit, he’s also a bit posh.

    And on the other hand..

    Labours Jeremy Corbyn…

    • Invited two IRA members to parliament two weeks after the Brighton bombing.
    • Attended Bloody Sunday commemoration with bomber Brendan McKenna.
    • Attended meeting with Provisional IRA member Raymond McCartney.
    • Hosted IRA linked Mitchell McLaughlin in parliament.
    • Spoke alongside IRA terrorist Martina Anderson.
    • Attended Sinn Fein dinner with IRA bomber Gerry Kelly.
    • Chaired Irish republican event with IRA bomber Brendan MacFarlane.
    • Attended Bobby Sands commemoration honouring IRA terrorists.
    • Stood in minute’s silence for IRA gunmen shot dead by the SAS.
    • Refused to condemn the IRA in Sky News interview.
    • Refused to condemn the IRA on Question Time.
    • Refused to condemn IRA violence in BBC radio interview.
    • Signed EDM after IRA Poppy massacre massacre blaming Britain for the deaths.
    • Arrested while protesting in support of Brighton bomber’s co-defendants.
    • Lobbied government to improve visiting conditions for IRA killers.
    • Attended Irish republican event calling for armed conflict against Britain.
    • Hired suspected IRA man Ronan Bennett as a parliamentary assistant.
    • Hired another aide closely linked to several convicted IRA terrorists.
    • Heavily involved with IRA sympathising newspaper London Labour Briefing.
    • Put up £20,000 bail money for IRA terror suspect Roisin McAliskey.
    • Didn’t support IRA ceasefire.
    • Said Hamas and Hezbollah are his “friends“.
    • Called for Hamas to be removed from terror banned list.
    • Called Hamas “serious and hard-working“.
    • Attended wreath-laying at grave of Munich massacre terrorist.
    • Attended conference with Hamas and PFLP.
    • Photographed smiling with Hezbollah flag.
    • Attended rally with Hezbollah and Al-Muhajiroun.
    • Repeatedly shared platforms with PFLP plane hijacker.
    • Hired aide who praised Hamas’ “spirit of resistance“.
    • Accepted £20,000 for state TV channel of terror-sponsoring Iranian regime.
    • Opposed banning Britons from travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS.
    • Defended rights of fighters returning from Syria.
    • Said ISIS supporters should not be prosecuted.
    • Compared fighters returning from Syria to Nelson Mandela.
    • Said the death of Osama Bin Laden was a “tragedy“.
    • Wouldn’t sanction drone strike to kill ISIS leader.
    • Voted to allow ISIS fighters to return from Syria.
    • Opposed shoot to kill.
    • Attended event organised by terrorist sympathising IHRC.
    • Signed letter defending Lockerbie bombing suspects.
    • Wrote letter in support of conman accused of fundraising for ISIS.
    • Spoke of “friendship” with Mo Kozbar, who called for destruction of Israel.
    • Attended event with Abdullah Djaballah, who called for holy war against UK.
    • Called drone strikes against terrorists “obscene”.
    • Boasted about “opposing anti-terror legislation”.
    • Said laws banning jihadis from returning to Britain are “strange”.
    • Accepted £5,000 donation from terror supporter Ted Honderich.
    • Accepted £2,800 trip to Gaza from banned Islamist organisation Interpal.
    • Called Ibrahim Hewitt, extremist and chair of Interpal, a “very good friend”.
    • Accepted two more trips from the pro-Hamas group PRC.
    • Speaker at conference hosted by pro-Hamas group MEMO.
    • Met Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh several times.
    • Hosted meeting with Mousa Abu Maria of banned group Islamic Jihad.
    • Patron of Palestine Solidarity Campaign – marches attended by Hezbollah.
    • Compared Israel to ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.
    • Said we should not make “value judgements” about Britons who fight for ISIS.
    • Received endorsement from Hamas.
    • Attended event with Islamic extremist Suliman Gani.
    • Chaired Stop the War, who praised “internationalism and solidarity” of ISIS.
    • Praised Raed Salah, who was jailed for inciting violence in Israel.
    • Signed letter defending jihadist advocacy group Cage.
    • Met Dyab Jahjah, who praised the killing of British soldiers.
    • Shared platform with representative of extremist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
    • Compared ISIS to US military in interview on Russia Today.
    • Opposed proscription of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
    • Attended conference which called on Iraqis to kill British soldiers.
    • Attended Al-Quds Day demonstration in support of destruction of Israel.
    • Supported Hamas and ISIS-linked Viva Palestina group.
    • Attended protest with Islamic extremist Moazzam Begg.
    • Made the “case for Iran” at event hosted by Khomeinist group.
    • Photographed smiling with Azzam Tamimi, who backed suicide bombings.
    • Photographed with Abdel Atwan, who sympathised with attacks on US troops.
    • Said Hamas should “have tea with the Queen”.
    • Attended ‘Meet the Resistance’ event with Hezbollah MP Hussein El Haj.
    • Attended event with Haifa Zangana, who praised Palestinian “mujahideen”.
    • Defended the infamous anti-Semitic Hamas supporter Stephen Sizer.
    • Attended event with pro-Hamas and Hezbollah group Naturei Karta.
    • Backed Holocaust denying anti-Zionist extremist Paul Eisen.
    • Photographed with Abdul Raoof Al Shayeb, later jailed for terror offences.
    • Mocked “anti-terror hysteria” while opposing powers for security services.
    • Named on speakers list for conference with Hamas sympathiser Ismail Patel.
    • Criticised drone strike that killed Jihadi John.
    • Said the 7/7 bombers had been denied “hope and opportunity”.
    • Said 9/11 was “manipulated” to make it look like bin Laden was responsible.
    • Failed to unequivocally condemn the 9/11 attacks.
    • Called Columbian terror group M-19 “comrades”.
    • Blamed beheading of Alan Henning on Britain.
    • Gave speech in support of Gaddafi regime.
    • Signed EDM spinning for Slobodan Milosevic.
    • Blamed Tunisia terror attack on “austerity”.
    • Voted against banning support for the IRA.
    • Voted against the Prevention of Terrorism Act three times during the Troubles.
    • Voted against emergency counter-terror laws after 9/11.
    • Voted against stricter punishments for being a member of a terror group.
    • Voted against criminalising the encouragement of terrorism.
    • Voted against banning al-Qaeda.
    • Voted against outlawing the glorification of terror.
    • Voted against control orders.
    • Voted against increased funding for the security services to combat terrorism.


    So it’s a tricky one really
    Funny cos I've seen long lists of the anti-racist/anti-terrorist acts that Corbyn has been involved in over the years. I note none of yours have actual sources.
    Last edited by Jonnyboy; 10-12-2019 at 05:10 PM.

  2. #1852

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    12,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadoldgit View Post
    The Coalition for Reform in Political Advertising is saying that 31 campaigns are “indecent, dishonest or untruthful.”
    88% (5952) of Tory ads have breached their code. Only 1 from Labour apparently. People keep kicking off about democracy but what price democracy when a party spouts a stream of bull**** which is swallowed whole by a large % of the electorate and is allowed to get away with it?
    Show me where you found this. I couldn't find it on their site. However, they have listed several cases where they believe that Labour transgressed their guidelines, along with the usual underhand methods employed by the Lib Dumbs. Yes, the Conservatives have also transgressed their guidelines several times, but to infer that the other parties are lily white is naive, but not surprising from you.

  3. #1853

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    After moving around Kent, Surrey and Sussex have now settled on the edge of Romney Marsh
    Posts
    13,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Tender View Post
    Show me where you found this. I couldn't find it on their site. However, they have listed several cases where they believe that Labour transgressed their guidelines, along with the usual underhand methods employed by the Lib Dumbs. Yes, the Conservatives have also transgressed their guidelines several times, but to infer that the other parties are lily white is naive, but not surprising from you.
    It’s a report from the BBC. It actually said it found none by Labour but in the interests of fairness I added a statement when Corbyn got a fact wrong. It also mentioned the LibDems charts.

  4. #1854

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    It's grim oop north
    Posts
    7,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Tender View Post
    Show me where you found this. I couldn't find it on their site. However, they have listed several cases where they believe that Labour transgressed their guidelines, along with the usual underhand methods employed by the Lib Dumbs. Yes, the Conservatives have also transgressed their guidelines several times, but to infer that the other parties are lily white is naive, but not surprising from you.
    Wasn't difficult to find if you read the BBC article fully...

    https://firstdraftnews.org/latest/th...cebook-policy/

    "With 12 days until polling day, the Conservatives massively stepped up its ad campaign on Facebook, running almost 7,000 ads and spending more than £50,000 between November 27 and December 3, according to the latest figures from Facebook’s Ad Library.

    First Draft accessed the Facebook Ad Library API to download all 6,749 ads from the Conservative Party between December 1 and December 4. Some 88% (5,952) of the most widely promoted ads featured claims about the NHS, income tax cuts, and the Labour Party which had already been labelled misleading by Full Fact."
    Last edited by Sheaf Saint; 10-12-2019 at 04:29 PM.

  5. #1855

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    12,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadoldgit View Post
    It’s a report from the BBC. It actually said it found none by Labour but in the interests of fairness I added a statement when Corbyn got a fact wrong. It also mentioned the LibDems charts.
    Ah, so asked to reference the incidents from the organisation that you referenced as overseeing incidents of dubious advertising from the political parties during the election campaign, you are unable to do that, but instead you reference a report from the Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

    So show me the report from the BBC then. Of course, there are several websites dedicated to examining their left bias politically, so I'm afraid that your link to them will probably not be seen to be any more impartial by me than an article from the Guardian, Mirror, the Not Independent or Sky.

  6. #1856

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    It's grim oop north
    Posts
    7,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Tender View Post
    Ah, so asked to reference the incidents from the organisation that you referenced as overseeing incidents of dubious advertising from the political parties during the election campaign, you are unable to do that, but instead you reference a report from the Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

    So show me the report from the BBC then. Of course, there are several websites dedicated to examining their left bias politically, so I'm afraid that your link to them will probably not be seen to be any more impartial by me than an article from the Guardian, Mirror, the Not Independent or Sky.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50726500

    Read it in full and check its sources for yourself, as per my post above.

  7. #1857

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    12,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheaf Saint View Post
    Wasn't difficult to find if you read the BBC article fully...

    https://firstdraftnews.org/latest/th...cebook-policy/

    "With 12 days until polling day, the Conservatives massively stepped up its ad campaign on Facebook, running almost 7,000 ads and spending more than £50,000 between November 27 and December 3, according to the latest figures from Facebook’s Ad Library.

    First Draft accessed the Facebook Ad Library API to download all 6,749 ads from the Conservative Party between December 1 and December 4. Some 88% (5,952) of the most widely promoted ads featured claims about the NHS, income tax cuts, and the Labour Party which had already been labelled misleading by Full Fact."
    So First Draft then.

    First Draft has not been able to find misleading claims in Facebook adverts from the Labour Party, which has promoted far fewer ads than the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats.
    Frankly, this is laughable. Their credibility is zero if they believe this.

  8. #1858

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    After moving around Kent, Surrey and Sussex have now settled on the edge of Romney Marsh
    Posts
    13,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Tender View Post
    Ah, so asked to reference the incidents from the organisation that you referenced as overseeing incidents of dubious advertising from the political parties during the election campaign, you are unable to do that, but instead you reference a report from the Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

    So show me the report from the BBC then. Of course, there are several websites dedicated to examining their left bias politically, so I'm afraid that your link to them will probably not be seen to be any more impartial by me than an article from the Guardian, Mirror, the Not Independent or Sky.
    Can you stop with the childish name calling. I can point you in the direction of plenty of people who think the BBC is biased towards the Tories so there is no point playing that card.

    They have added some info to the report from when I first read it. Re the 31 flagged reports of election ads that were untruthful, 10 were attributed to the Tories, 11 to the LibDems, 6 to Brexit and 4 to Labour.

    The figure of 5952 ads came from paid for ads from the 3 main parties recorded in the first 5 days of December on Facebook. The Tories managed to record a rate of 88% not correct or not entirely correct ads. The Labour Party recorded zero.

  9. #1859

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    It's grim oop north
    Posts
    7,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wes Tender View Post
    So First Draft then.



    Frankly, this is laughable. Their credibility is zero if they believe this.
    If you have done some independent research that contradicts this then please share it with us.

    Otherwise it just looks like you are dismissing it based solely on your own tribal allegiance.

  10. #1860

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Super Weston Mare
    Posts
    11,819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadoldgit View Post
    Can you stop with the childish name calling. I can point you in the direction of plenty of people who think the BBC is biased towards the Tories so there is no point playing that card.

    They have added some info to the report from when I first read it. Re the 31 flagged reports of election ads that were untruthful, 10 were attributed to the Tories, 11 to the LibDems, 6 to Brexit and 4 to Labour.

    The figure of 5952 ads came from paid for ads from the 3 main parties recorded in the first 5 days of December on Facebook. The Tories managed to record a rate of 88% not correct or not entirely correct ads. The Labour Party recorded zero.
    It's a headline figure to be sure and absolutely eyewatering!

    But there is a little more to the article that seems to have been left out :

    Quote Originally Posted by BBC
    One example was that Labour would spend £1.2 trillion at a cost of £2,400 to every household, which was contained within 4,028 ads.
    Would that count as seperate incidents or just the same info being repeated ad-infinitum?

    Still, technically, there is nothing wrong with them publishing the info - nor would it be an issue for any political party as the BBC also states :

    Quote Originally Posted by BBC
    But political advertising is regulated outside of the ASA. And the electoral law that applies "doesn't require claims in political campaigns to be truthful or factually accurate," according to the House of Commons library.
    Looks like Batman is right - they all tell porkies, but then, why not, when they are given carte blanche to do so?

  11. #1861

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rothschild and Soros HQ
    Posts
    19,614
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Remember if its not on far-right websites like politicalite that run stories about muslims gang-raping donkeys, its not credible to our Les.

    What is it about Les and Tuesdays

  12. Default General Election 2019 - Boris Poll Dancing

    Quote Originally Posted by LGTL View Post
    Exactly my position if you substitute Eastleigh for New Forest East. Although any vote other then Tory here is totally pointless.
    There were once plenty of labour seats like this, until they shat on the working man. Scotland first, followed by Wales, The midlands and the north. They’re becoming a metropolitan party for the middle class & muslims

    #draintheswamp


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  13. #1863

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    22 Acacia Avenue
    Posts
    12,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Duckhunter View Post
    There were once plenty of labour seats like this, until they shat on the working man. Scotland first, followed by Wales, The midlands and the north. They’re becoming a metropolitan party for the middle class & muslims
    Does this explain why you don't support them ?

  14. #1864

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badgerx16 View Post
    Does this explain why you don't support them ?
    I think the ill defined definition of Islamaphobia as "an expression of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness" is an incredibly alarming definition that Labour want the country to adopt. Its one of the reasons I don't want them in power.

  15. #1865

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    It's grim oop north
    Posts
    7,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hypochondriac View Post
    I think the ill defined definition of Islamaphobia as "an expression of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness" is an incredibly alarming definition that Labour want the country to adopt. Its one of the reasons I don't want them in power.
    Yet you're happy to give your vote to a party whose leader refuses to apologise for describing Muslim women as looking like letterboxes.

  16. #1866

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheaf Saint View Post
    Yet you're happy to give your vote to a party whose leader refuses to apologise for describing Muslim women as looking like letterboxes.
    An article that correctly identified the garment as ridiculous (and oppressive) yet nevertheless defended the right for people to wear it even though they could be subject to ridicule for doing so. I agree with that 100%. It's actually the polar opposite of what I opposed which was the stifling of religious criticism under the guise of Islamaphobia. A relative of my wife faces pressure to wear the niqab and I think it's abhorrent.
    Last edited by hypochondriac; 10-12-2019 at 07:22 PM.

  17. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheaf Saint View Post
    Yet you're happy to give your vote to a party whose leader refuses to apologise for describing Muslim women as looking like letterboxes.
    They do, why should he apologise? If I went out with a yellow cardboard box on my head, would it be “racist” to tell me I look like Sponge Bob.

    Emily Thornbury said she did want someone wearing a burka looking after her elderly mother, or her 4 year old, said she wouldn’t mind them working “in records” at the hospital, but not in front of the public. Is that more acceptable?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  18. #1868

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    WHAT?! The "land of the free?" Whoever told you that is your enemy!
    Posts
    18,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Duckhunter View Post
    They do, why should he apologise? If I went out with a yellow cardboard box on my head, would it be “racist” to tell me I look like Sponge Bob.

    Emily Thornbury said she did want someone wearing a burka looking after her elderly mother, or her 4 year old, said she wouldn’t mind them working “in records” at the hospital, but not in front of the public. Is that more acceptable?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    What religion do you follow that requires you to wear a yellow cardboard box on your head?

  19. #1869

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doddisalegend View Post
    What religion do you follow that requires you to wear a yellow cardboard box on your head?
    What difference does it make if its a religion? Ignoring the fact that Islam doesn't require you to wear a burqa.

  20. #1870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadoldgit View Post
    Can you stop with the childish name calling. I can point you in the direction of plenty of people who think the BBC is biased towards the Tories so there is no point playing that card.

    They have added some info to the report from when I first read it. Re the 31 flagged reports of election ads that were untruthful, 10 were attributed to the Tories, 11 to the LibDems, 6 to Brexit and 4 to Labour.

    The figure of 5952 ads came from paid for ads from the 3 main parties recorded in the first 5 days of December on Facebook. The Tories managed to record a rate of 88% not correct or not entirely correct ads. The Labour Party recorded zero.
    Childish name calling is an illustration of mental issues. Wes is making himself ill with his rants and his extreme views. Feel sorry for him. I do.

  21. #1871

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Garden of Engerland
    Posts
    4,114

    Default

    The burka is wrong as far as I'm concerned. But he was clearly being demeaning on purpose, a little nod to the right wing. The tories have been doing it for years; their statements used to be riskier, then they'd get called out and apologise. Nowadays they have to be 'intolerant' to this behaviour their statements are now coded signals, just ambiguous enough so the right wing fan boys can argue it's case. As witnessed on here.

  22. #1872

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fan The Flames View Post
    The burka is wrong as far as I'm concerned. But he was clearly being demeaning on purpose, a little nod to the right wing. The tories have been doing it for years; their statements used to be riskier, then they'd get called out and apologise. Nowadays they have to be 'intolerant' to this behaviour their statements are now coded signals, just ambiguous enough so the right wing fan boys can argue it's case. As witnessed on here.
    I don't consider it healthy to hold people responsible when thick people do things in their name unless it's a direct call for violence and even then the ultimate responsibility lies with the people commiting the acts. If some right wingers use a comment about letterboxes to be bigoted towards some Muslims then that responsibility lies entirely with them, I wouldn't want responsibility to be abdicated to others. The point stands- we should absolutely be free to criticise or laugh at Islam and all its supposed trappings in the same way we can do it to Christianity and the aburd things that go with that. Actually there's not much more British than poking fun at a religion and its pomposity.
    Last edited by hypochondriac; 10-12-2019 at 08:20 PM.

  23. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hypochondriac View Post
    I don't consider it healthy to hold people responsible when thick people do things in their name unless it's a direct call for violence and even then the ultimate responsibility lies with the people commiting the acts. If some right wingers use a comment about letterboxes to be bigoted towards some Muslims then that responsibility lies entirely with them, I wouldn't want responsibility to be abdicated to others. The point stands- we should absolutely be free to criticise or laugh at Islam and all its supposed trappings in the same way we can do it to Christianity and the aburd things that go with that. Actually there's not much more British than poking fun at a religion and its pomposity.
    So a Muslim woman in a Burka walks past a building site and gets mocked “hey look lads there’s a letterbox” just a bit of fun and healthy for our society?
    The good old PM has highlighted this fact

  24. #1874

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rothschild and Soros HQ
    Posts
    19,614
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fan The Flames View Post
    The burka is wrong as far as I'm concerned. But he was clearly being demeaning on purpose, a little nod to the right wing. The tories have been doing it for years; their statements used to be riskier, then they'd get called out and apologise. Nowadays they have to be 'intolerant' to this behaviour their statements are now coded signals, just ambiguous enough so the right wing fan boys can argue it's case. As witnessed on here.

    Yep. It was an obvious dog-whistle for the bigots and the base with all the plausible deniability that comes with the best dog whistles. Hence the lily-livered whining about the article’s ‘wider context’.
    Last edited by shurlock; 10-12-2019 at 08:37 PM.

  25. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Duckhunter View Post
    They do, why should he apologise? If I went out with a yellow cardboard box on my head, would it be “racist” to tell me I look like Sponge Bob.

    Emily Thornbury said she did want someone wearing a burka looking after her elderly mother, or her 4 year old, said she wouldn’t mind them working “in records” at the hospital, but not in front of the public. Is that more acceptable?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Getting thicker every day.

  26. #1876

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whelk View Post
    So a Muslim woman in a Burka walks past a building site and gets mocked “hey look lads there’s a letterbox” just a bit of fun and healthy for our society?
    The good old PM has highlighted this fact
    Nope I don't think aggressively confronting a woman like that in that fashion is acceptable. Not in any way the same thing as highlighting how ridiculous they look in an article which had a wider context.

  27. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hypochondriac View Post
    Nope I don't think aggressively confronting a woman like that in that fashion is acceptable. Not in any way the same thing as highlighting how ridiculous they look in an article which had a wider context.
    Guess turbans look ridiculous to us too?

  28. #1878

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whelk View Post
    Guess turbans look ridiculous to us too?
    You could apply the same principle to a sikh turban or a habit yes. All religious garments should be fair game for ridicule though obviously aggressively confronting anyone in the street should never happen. I think many pieces of religious clothing look silly but the burkha in particular looks mad because it covers the entire body and is just impractical as well as oppressive as I already mentioned.
    Last edited by hypochondriac; 10-12-2019 at 08:51 PM.

  29. #1879

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    WHAT?! The "land of the free?" Whoever told you that is your enemy!
    Posts
    18,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hypochondriac View Post
    What difference does it make if its a religion? Ignoring the fact that Islam doesn't require you to wear a burqa.
    Which version of Islam? Just like Christianity there are different versions of Islam. Many Salafi do require the Burqa to be a requirement in the presence of non related men and there about 80 million Salafi Sunnis across the world. And of course it makes a difference if its a religious choice people should be allowed to follow religious tenants without their own government taking the **** out of them on the other hand if lord D where as a yellow box on his head its for no reason other to make a pretty facile point. We all know you, Lord D and the gang would be ****ing yourselves stupid if Corbyn made a comment about the Kippah.

  30. #1880

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    30,486
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doddisalegend View Post
    Which version of Islam? Just like Christianity there are different versions of Islam. Many Salafi do require the Burqa to be a requirement in the presence of non related men and there about 80 million Salafi Sunnis across the world. And of course it makes a difference if its a religious choice people should be allowed to follow religious tenants without their own government taking the **** out of them on the other hand if lord D where as a yellow box on his head its for no reason other to make a pretty facile point. We all know you, Lord D and the gang would be ****ing yourselves stupid if Corbyn made a comment about the Kippah.
    Couldn't disagree more. People are completely free to believe whatever made up nonsense they like and indeed wear whatever they like within reason but you have no more legitimacy or freedom from ridicule if you claim to follow a religion than you do if you don't and are just wearing something that makes you look ridiculous for the sake of it. That's what freedom is.

  31. Default

    Boris takes the Mick out of Muslim chicks, but in the same article defends their right to wear it. Lady Nugee wants them hidden away from the public, only working “in records” in “our” NHS and certainly not with 4 year olds. Yet Boris is the dog whistling racist...




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  32. #1882

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    West of Fareham
    Posts
    13,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Duckhunter View Post
    They do, why should he apologise? If I went out with a yellow cardboard box on my head, would it be “racist” to tell me I look like Sponge Bob.

    Emily Thornbury said she did want someone wearing a burka looking after her elderly mother, or her 4 year old, said she wouldn’t mind them working “in records” at the hospital, but not in front of the public. Is that more acceptable?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    I doubt you would say that if your old dragon was one of the “letterboxes” on the receiving of hate crime as a direct result of what he said.

  33. #1883

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    After moving around Kent, Surrey and Sussex have now settled on the edge of Romney Marsh
    Posts
    13,676

    Default

    Just read an interesting FB post about Hancock and the hospital story. If true he used someone else’s account to post a false rebuttal of the story.

  34. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aintforever View Post
    I doubt you would say that if your old dragon was one of the “letterboxes” on the receiving of hate crime as a direct result of what he said.
    The snap dragon can wear what the **** she likes. If she dresses like an idiot, she deserves any clog she gets. Nothing to do with me.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  35. #1885

  36. #1886

    Default

    More importantly, a good summary being shared now:

    Strap yourselves in folks, one of the political stories of the century is brewing...

    1. A concerned mother shares a photo of her 4-year-old boy who was forced to wait hours on a hospital floor with suspected pneumonia.

    2. The photo circulates online so a journalist challenges Boris Johnson about it during an interview by showing him the picture of the boy on his phone.

    3. Johnson repeatedly refuses to even look at the boy, let alone acknowledge responsibility for the situation, and eventually steals the journalists phone and puts it in his pocket.

    4. There is uproar about Johnson's lack of compassion so Health Minister, Matt Hancock, is dispatched to the hospital to deal with the situation.

    5. Matt Hancock briefs journalists that, while at the hospital, one of his advisors was "punched" by a Labour activist.

    6. Much of the media unquestioningly report the "punch" by the "Labour activist" as fact without checking the validity of the allegation. Widespread rage about "violent Labour activists" spreads like wildfire online.

    7. Video footage then emerges online showing that the story had been entirely fabricated and was 100% false.

    8. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    9. A Facebook post then appears claiming to be from a "good friend" of a nurse working in Leeds hospital. The post says that the photograph of the 4-year-old was faked by a "Labour activist". The post is shared more than 30,000 times.

    10. The claim is unquestioning reported as fact by much of the media without checking its validity.

    11. Suspicions of the validity of the claim are then raised as it is discovered there are literally thousands and thousands of Facebook and Twitter accounts posting exactly the same claim, word for word.

    12. It becomes clear that bots are being used to spread disinformation. The hospital also confirms the accuracy of the photo and that it had already apologised to the mother.

    13. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    14. The account where the post originated then comes into question. It belongs to a (real) woman named Sheree Jenner-Hepburn who claims her account has "hacked".

    15. Further investigation shows that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn was not the innocent victim of a hack, but that the post was made from her account intentionally, as she responded to her friend's comments on the post.

    16. It's then discovered that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn's son has a Facebook friend with a very prominent role within this story which may cast light on the motives behind the fake post.

    17. It's… Matt Hancock's account!!!

    In summary: it appears that the actual Health Minister of the British Government has not only fabricated a "punch" to deflect the heat from his boss, but, after being found out the first time, he *may* have used his friend's Facebook account to circulate another entirely fabricated story to try and smear his political opponents.

    Even the writers of The Thick Of It would find this story too incredible to script!

    [Pictures in the comments to show the proof of various parts of the story for those who have dismissed me as a "mad conspiracy theorist". The "conspiracies" are real. All you have to do is open your eyes.]

    Credit Jon Maiden for the excellent text

  37. #1887

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    22 Acacia Avenue
    Posts
    12,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    More importantly, a good summary being shared now:

    Strap yourselves in folks, one of the political stories of the century is brewing...

    1. A concerned mother shares a photo of her 4-year-old boy who was forced to wait hours on a hospital floor with suspected pneumonia.

    2. The photo circulates online so a journalist challenges Boris Johnson about it during an interview by showing him the picture of the boy on his phone.

    3. Johnson repeatedly refuses to even look at the boy, let alone acknowledge responsibility for the situation, and eventually steals the journalists phone and puts it in his pocket.

    4. There is uproar about Johnson's lack of compassion so Health Minister, Matt Hancock, is dispatched to the hospital to deal with the situation.

    5. Matt Hancock briefs journalists that, while at the hospital, one of his advisors was "punched" by a Labour activist.

    6. Much of the media unquestioningly report the "punch" by the "Labour activist" as fact without checking the validity of the allegation. Widespread rage about "violent Labour activists" spreads like wildfire online.

    7. Video footage then emerges online showing that the story had been entirely fabricated and was 100% false.

    8. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    9. A Facebook post then appears claiming to be from a "good friend" of a nurse working in Leeds hospital. The post says that the photograph of the 4-year-old was faked by a "Labour activist". The post is shared more than 30,000 times.

    10. The claim is unquestioning reported as fact by much of the media without checking its validity.

    11. Suspicions of the validity of the claim are then raised as it is discovered there are literally thousands and thousands of Facebook and Twitter accounts posting exactly the same claim, word for word.

    12. It becomes clear that bots are being used to spread disinformation. The hospital also confirms the accuracy of the photo and that it had already apologised to the mother.

    13. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    14. The account where the post originated then comes into question. It belongs to a (real) woman named Sheree Jenner-Hepburn who claims her account has "hacked".

    15. Further investigation shows that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn was not the innocent victim of a hack, but that the post was made from her account intentionally, as she responded to her friend's comments on the post.

    16. It's then discovered that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn's son has a Facebook friend with a very prominent role within this story which may cast light on the motives behind the fake post.

    17. It's… Matt Hancock's account!!!

    In summary: it appears that the actual Health Minister of the British Government has not only fabricated a "punch" to deflect the heat from his boss, but, after being found out the first time, he *may* have used his friend's Facebook account to circulate another entirely fabricated story to try and smear his political opponents.

    Even the writers of The Thick Of It would find this story too incredible to script!

    [Pictures in the comments to show the proof of various parts of the story for those who have dismissed me as a "mad conspiracy theorist". The "conspiracies" are real. All you have to do is open your eyes.]

    Credit Jon Maiden for the excellent text
    And you expect.......?

  38. #1888

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rothschild and Soros HQ
    Posts
    19,614
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    More importantly, a good summary being shared now:

    Strap yourselves in folks, one of the political stories of the century is brewing...

    1. A concerned mother shares a photo of her 4-year-old boy who was forced to wait hours on a hospital floor with suspected pneumonia.

    2. The photo circulates online so a journalist challenges Boris Johnson about it during an interview by showing him the picture of the boy on his phone.

    3. Johnson repeatedly refuses to even look at the boy, let alone acknowledge responsibility for the situation, and eventually steals the journalists phone and puts it in his pocket.

    4. There is uproar about Johnson's lack of compassion so Health Minister, Matt Hancock, is dispatched to the hospital to deal with the situation.

    5. Matt Hancock briefs journalists that, while at the hospital, one of his advisors was "punched" by a Labour activist.

    6. Much of the media unquestioningly report the "punch" by the "Labour activist" as fact without checking the validity of the allegation. Widespread rage about "violent Labour activists" spreads like wildfire online.

    7. Video footage then emerges online showing that the story had been entirely fabricated and was 100% false.

    8. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    9. A Facebook post then appears claiming to be from a "good friend" of a nurse working in Leeds hospital. The post says that the photograph of the 4-year-old was faked by a "Labour activist". The post is shared more than 30,000 times.

    10. The claim is unquestioning reported as fact by much of the media without checking its validity.

    11. Suspicions of the validity of the claim are then raised as it is discovered there are literally thousands and thousands of Facebook and Twitter accounts posting exactly the same claim, word for word.

    12. It becomes clear that bots are being used to spread disinformation. The hospital also confirms the accuracy of the photo and that it had already apologised to the mother.

    13. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    14. The account where the post originated then comes into question. It belongs to a (real) woman named Sheree Jenner-Hepburn who claims her account has "hacked".

    15. Further investigation shows that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn was not the innocent victim of a hack, but that the post was made from her account intentionally, as she responded to her friend's comments on the post.

    16. It's then discovered that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn's son has a Facebook friend with a very prominent role within this story which may cast light on the motives behind the fake post.

    17. It's… Matt Hancock's account!!!

    In summary: it appears that the actual Health Minister of the British Government has not only fabricated a "punch" to deflect the heat from his boss, but, after being found out the first time, he *may* have used his friend's Facebook account to circulate another entirely fabricated story to try and smear his political opponents.

    Even the writers of The Thick Of It would find this story too incredible to script!

    [Pictures in the comments to show the proof of various parts of the story for those who have dismissed me as a "mad conspiracy theorist". The "conspiracies" are real. All you have to do is open your eyes.]

    Credit Jon Maiden for the excellent text
    Sounds very far-fetched. Remember we’re talking about Matt Hancock here.

    https://m.facebook.com/www.JOE.co.uk...7918810458434/

  39. #1889

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Gotham City
    Posts
    29,240

    Default

    Gavyn

    You never did give us all your predictions for this election.... care to share?


  40. #1891

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Gotham City
    Posts
    29,240

    Default

    Was Ashworth just having some ‘Bantz’ about jezza. Or is he telling more lies suggesting that?

  41. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    More importantly, a good summary being shared now:

    Strap yourselves in folks, one of the political stories of the century is brewing...

    1. A concerned mother shares a photo of her 4-year-old boy who was forced to wait hours on a hospital floor with suspected pneumonia.

    2. The photo circulates online so a journalist challenges Boris Johnson about it during an interview by showing him the picture of the boy on his phone.

    3. Johnson repeatedly refuses to even look at the boy, let alone acknowledge responsibility for the situation, and eventually steals the journalists phone and puts it in his pocket.

    4. There is uproar about Johnson's lack of compassion so Health Minister, Matt Hancock, is dispatched to the hospital to deal with the situation.

    5. Matt Hancock briefs journalists that, while at the hospital, one of his advisors was "punched" by a Labour activist.

    6. Much of the media unquestioningly report the "punch" by the "Labour activist" as fact without checking the validity of the allegation. Widespread rage about "violent Labour activists" spreads like wildfire online.

    7. Video footage then emerges online showing that the story had been entirely fabricated and was 100% false.

    8. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    9. A Facebook post then appears claiming to be from a "good friend" of a nurse working in Leeds hospital. The post says that the photograph of the 4-year-old was faked by a "Labour activist". The post is shared more than 30,000 times.

    10. The claim is unquestioning reported as fact by much of the media without checking its validity.

    11. Suspicions of the validity of the claim are then raised as it is discovered there are literally thousands and thousands of Facebook and Twitter accounts posting exactly the same claim, word for word.

    12. It becomes clear that bots are being used to spread disinformation. The hospital also confirms the accuracy of the photo and that it had already apologised to the mother.

    13. The media sheepishly backtrack on what they have posted out to the world.

    14. The account where the post originated then comes into question. It belongs to a (real) woman named Sheree Jenner-Hepburn who claims her account has "hacked".

    15. Further investigation shows that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn was not the innocent victim of a hack, but that the post was made from her account intentionally, as she responded to her friend's comments on the post.

    16. It's then discovered that Sheree Jenner-Hepburn's son has a Facebook friend with a very prominent role within this story which may cast light on the motives behind the fake post.

    17. It's… Matt Hancock's account!!!

    In summary: it appears that the actual Health Minister of the British Government has not only fabricated a "punch" to deflect the heat from his boss, but, after being found out the first time, he *may* have used his friend's Facebook account to circulate another entirely fabricated story to try and smear his political opponents.

    Even the writers of The Thick Of It would find this story too incredible to script!

    [Pictures in the comments to show the proof of various parts of the story for those who have dismissed me as a "mad conspiracy theorist". The "conspiracies" are real. All you have to do is open your eyes.]

    Credit Jon Maiden for the excellent text
    This exciting new information pretty much guarantees a 150 seat working majority for Corbyn and comrades. Congratulations Jeremy and everyone at Sqwarkbox.

  42. #1893

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    22 Acacia Avenue
    Posts
    12,194

    Default

    Adam Price, leader of Plaid Cymru, wants to make lying by politicians a criminal offence. Good luck getting that onto the Statute book.

  43. #1894

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    22 Acacia Avenue
    Posts
    12,194

    Default

    There is a 'Reality Check' article on the BBC website titled "The misinformation war over the boy in the hospital". Not a single mention of Laura Kuensberg's twitter account.

  44. #1895

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Cusp of a wave
    Posts
    18,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badgerx16 View Post
    Adam Price, leader of Plaid Cymru, wants to make lying by politicians a criminal offence. Good luck getting that onto the Statute book.
    If he got it done in Wales and SNP got it done in Scotland then the pressure on Westminster would be huge.

  45. #1896

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    After moving around Kent, Surrey and Sussex have now settled on the edge of Romney Marsh
    Posts
    13,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batman View Post
    Was Ashworth just having some ‘Bantz’ about jezza. Or is he telling more lies suggesting that?
    I’ll see your Ashworth and raise you a Major, a Heseltine and a Clark.

  46. #1897

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    22 Acacia Avenue
    Posts
    12,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buctootim View Post
    If he got it done in Wales and SNP got it done in Scotland then the pressure on Westminster would be huge.
    True, but politics would be an extremely quiet world if they weren't able to distort the truth.

  47. #1898

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    5 metres outside the detailed bit on Google Earth
    Posts
    3,819

    Default

    This election campaign has made it pretty clear that much of Labour's core support no longer feel that Labour represent them properly.

    So what's the future of Labour/opposition then? Most people would probably agree that their is a need for some kind of socialism in the UK, whether that's in the form of healthcare paid for by the taxpayer, affordable housing, basic rights for workers, decent schools and other services funded by taxation etc.

    Those things will be catered for to an extent by the Conservatives, but they aren't really in line with Conservative ideals, as they are a part of socialism. Given enough power over enough time they will be heavily affected/eroded. Not that Conservative ideals are wrong, many of them are very important to me, but a world with no socialism would be pretty bleak.



    Just wondering, with this election looking a clear Tory win, what future, credible opposition will be? Will there be a genuine overhaul, or just a reshuffling? Is "not Corbyn" really enough? Interested in perspectives from both sides.

  48. #1899

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    It's grim oop north
    Posts
    7,989

    Default

    Another brilliant day for Johnson so far.

    When asked to do a live interview on GMB, one of his aides tells the reporter to f*ck off, and Johnson hides in a fridge to escape the camera crew.

    Such a noble, statesmanlike character isn't he.

  49. #1900

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    12,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadoldgit View Post
    I’ll see your Ashworth and raise you a Major, a Heseltine and a Clark.
    Soggy fails to realise the difference between a current shadow minister slagging off his leader and three Tory dinosaurs, two of whom have been retired for some time and the third who should have retired some time ago. All three of them historically happy with EU vassal state membership of the EU. Ashworth on the other hand, says that Labour's muddled position on the EU has caused the party to lose support.

    You haven't thought this through very well, Soggy.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •