Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
The answers to her final questions.
Yes, and yes.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The potentially career-ending video of Keir Starmer drinking a beer in Durham was filmed by Ivo Delingpole, the student son of the Breitbart writer James Delingpole.Stevo_666 said:
Until they received significant new evidence, hence the investigation.Pross said:
The police have already said they were happy he hadn't broken the law once.Stevo_666 said:
So youve decided that he's innocent before the police have finished their investigation? How very Cake Stop.Pross said:
Not according to the police. Some of Johnson's (many) reported infractions occured during a full lockdown imposed by his own Government whereas Starmer's was, from the reports I read, during less stringent restrictions and were allowed within the rules set down by Johnson's government.Stevo_666 said:
No. Starmer looks like he broke the very rules he insisted Boris resign over, that is the point.rick_chasey said:
You seem to think it was a bad idea that Starmer held BoJo accountable to the rules BoJo set himself - else how else is it "self righteous leftiebollocks"Stevo_666 said:
You appear to be replying to a different post to mine. I'm making a different point. Very odd.rick_chasey said:
I don’t understand this argument.Stevo_666 said:Thered be a lot of noise if Boris Johnson breathes.
Anyhow, Starmer really has boxed himself into a corner with this one. Good example of self righteous leftiebollox backfiring.
Why is it acceptable for the PM to not abide by the laws of the land?
So, by logic, you seem to think Johnson should not have been held accountable for breaking the rules he set himself, right?
So if you don't think that, then, by logic, you don't think it's necessary the PM abide by the laws of the land, surely?
So it's self righteous leftiebollox. Simple really.
Delingpole, who graduated from the University of Durham last year, was at his student house in the city, close to a venue where the Labour leader held a political campaign event on 30 April 2021.
According to individuals with knowledge of the video’s creation, it was Delingpole who spotted the Labour leader through the window of Durham Miners Hall. Starmer was drinking with a team of campaigners eating a takeaway curry at a time when the country was still under partial lockdown and large indoor social gatherings were banned.
The short video was subsequently passed to the anti-lockdown activist Laurence Fox, who tweeted it out to his followers.
Mainstream media outlets largely ignored the footage for nine months, but as public fury over parties in Downing Street escalated over the winter, the Daily Mail put the Starmer video on its front page in January and accused the Labour leader of hypocrisy.
The newspaper, along with the Sun and the Telegraph, has since led a concerted campaign to investigate the circumstances surrounding the video, resulting in an announcement from Durham police that the force would launch an investigation into whether Starmer and his fellow campaigners broke lockdown rules.
Ivo Delingpole could not be reached for comment, but his father confirmed that he was the individual who filmed the footage. Ivo has insisted in anonymous interviews with the student newspaper Palatinate that he did not want the footage to be used to excuse Boris Johnson’s rule-breaking and that his decision to film had not been politically motivated.
James Delingpole was an Oxford University contemporary of Johnson’s in the 1980s. He has written for the rightwing Breitbart and other outlets such as the Spectator and the Telegraph. He hosted a live edition of his podcast last month featuring a number of anti-lockdown activists, including Fox.
When the video of Starmer first circulated last April, he tweeted about it without mentioning that his son had filmed it. “Literally no one would care whether or not Keir Starmer broke mask/social distancing regulations if it weren’t for the fact that he has pushed for them even more assiduously than the government. It’s about grotesque double standards. How is this point not obvious?” he wrote.
https://news.yahoo.com/revealed-student-shot-beergate-video-162213445.html
TBH I don't care if Starmer goes so long as it gets rid of Johnson.0 -
You are loving in a fantasy world if you think Boris's fine or any future fines being him down. You are even more mental if you think Starmer falling on his sword would make any difference either.HilaryAmin said:
The potentially career-ending video of Keir Starmer drinking a beer in Durham was filmed by Ivo Delingpole, the student son of the Breitbart writer James Delingpole.Stevo_666 said:
Until they received significant new evidence, hence the investigation.Pross said:
The police have already said they were happy he hadn't broken the law once.Stevo_666 said:
So youve decided that he's innocent before the police have finished their investigation? How very Cake Stop.Pross said:
Not according to the police. Some of Johnson's (many) reported infractions occured during a full lockdown imposed by his own Government whereas Starmer's was, from the reports I read, during less stringent restrictions and were allowed within the rules set down by Johnson's government.Stevo_666 said:
No. Starmer looks like he broke the very rules he insisted Boris resign over, that is the point.rick_chasey said:
You seem to think it was a bad idea that Starmer held BoJo accountable to the rules BoJo set himself - else how else is it "self righteous leftiebollocks"Stevo_666 said:
You appear to be replying to a different post to mine. I'm making a different point. Very odd.rick_chasey said:
I don’t understand this argument.Stevo_666 said:Thered be a lot of noise if Boris Johnson breathes.
Anyhow, Starmer really has boxed himself into a corner with this one. Good example of self righteous leftiebollox backfiring.
Why is it acceptable for the PM to not abide by the laws of the land?
So, by logic, you seem to think Johnson should not have been held accountable for breaking the rules he set himself, right?
So if you don't think that, then, by logic, you don't think it's necessary the PM abide by the laws of the land, surely?
So it's self righteous leftiebollox. Simple really.
Delingpole, who graduated from the University of Durham last year, was at his student house in the city, close to a venue where the Labour leader held a political campaign event on 30 April 2021.
According to individuals with knowledge of the video’s creation, it was Delingpole who spotted the Labour leader through the window of Durham Miners Hall. Starmer was drinking with a team of campaigners eating a takeaway curry at a time when the country was still under partial lockdown and large indoor social gatherings were banned.
The short video was subsequently passed to the anti-lockdown activist Laurence Fox, who tweeted it out to his followers.
Mainstream media outlets largely ignored the footage for nine months, but as public fury over parties in Downing Street escalated over the winter, the Daily Mail put the Starmer video on its front page in January and accused the Labour leader of hypocrisy.
The newspaper, along with the Sun and the Telegraph, has since led a concerted campaign to investigate the circumstances surrounding the video, resulting in an announcement from Durham police that the force would launch an investigation into whether Starmer and his fellow campaigners broke lockdown rules.
Ivo Delingpole could not be reached for comment, but his father confirmed that he was the individual who filmed the footage. Ivo has insisted in anonymous interviews with the student newspaper Palatinate that he did not want the footage to be used to excuse Boris Johnson’s rule-breaking and that his decision to film had not been politically motivated.
James Delingpole was an Oxford University contemporary of Johnson’s in the 1980s. He has written for the rightwing Breitbart and other outlets such as the Spectator and the Telegraph. He hosted a live edition of his podcast last month featuring a number of anti-lockdown activists, including Fox.
When the video of Starmer first circulated last April, he tweeted about it without mentioning that his son had filmed it. “Literally no one would care whether or not Keir Starmer broke mask/social distancing regulations if it weren’t for the fact that he has pushed for them even more assiduously than the government. It’s about grotesque double standards. How is this point not obvious?” he wrote.
https://news.yahoo.com/revealed-student-shot-beergate-video-162213445.html
TBH I don't care if Starmer goes so long as it gets rid of Johnson.0 -
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzseanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
-
You have a talent for dragging things off on a tangent and claiming that the article agrees with you without offering offering a reason why.kingstongraham said:
I have read it. I think it might be another one you've posted that doesn't disagree with me.Stevo_666 said:
Maybe you need to read the article. Beats denial of reality.kingstongraham said:No, no. If
Not true. They insisted he resign when he was put under police investigation, not solely because of it. You know all this, everyone does.Stevo_666 said:
Nope. Starmer and Rayner both insisted Boris should resign just for being under police investigation.tailwindhome said:
It would/will only be hypocrisy if he was fined and didn't resignStevo_666 said:
Nope, wrong again. It's about leftie hypocrisy, for the umpteenth time.rick_chasey said:
The crime here is calling out the actual crime, rather than the crime itself.kingstongraham said:
If you are only offended by hypocrisy by those outside the Tory party, is that hypocritical?Stevo_666 said:
My point is about leftie hypocrisy. Any thoughts on that?
Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.
https://telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/05/06/sir-keir-starmer-accused-hypocrisy-urging-boris-johnson-quit/
Starmer is now under police investigation.
So leftie hypocrisy it is.
By the way, did you ever work out why the other graph didn't say what you thought?
It was very clear from the statements in the linked article that Starmer and Rayner were demanding that Johnson resigned simply because he was under police investigation.
One Quote from Rayner:
"Boris Johnson's Downing Street is under police investigation. How on earth can he think he can stay on as Prime Minister?"
And one from Starmer (there are several more in the article.):
"Honesty and decency matter. After months of denials the Prime Minister is now under criminal investigations for breaking his own lockdown laws. He needs to do the decent thing and resign.”
Clearly leftie hypocrisy. Go on, convince me otherwise..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
That is an impossible task.Stevo_666 said:
Clearly leftie hypocrisy. Go on, convince me otherwise...
I'll refer you to the post I made a page or so back explaining why there's an obvious difference, but you will pretend not to understand.0 -
Not pretending pretending not to understand, I just don't agree because the evidence isn't there.kingstongraham said:
That is an impossible task.Stevo_666 said:
Clearly leftie hypocrisy. Go on, convince me otherwise...
I'll refer you to the post I made a page or so back explaining why there's an obvious difference, but you will pretend not to understand.
You can give up now if you want."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You and The Telegraph are both making false equivalences, and I assume you both know it. If you don't, The Telegraph certainly does.Stevo_666 said:
Not pretending pretending not to understand, I just don't agree because the evidence isn't there.kingstongraham said:
That is an impossible task.Stevo_666 said:
Clearly leftie hypocrisy. Go on, convince me otherwise...
I'll refer you to the post I made a page or so back explaining why there's an obvious difference, but you will pretend not to understand.
You can give up now if you want.0 -
Blair talking some sense to the labour party.
Alas, the same people Blair wants to win votes from are the people rank & file labour despise.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/tony-blair-tells-keir-starmer-to-drop-woke-politics-and-focus-on-economy-labour1 -
He's absolutely spot on.rick_chasey said:Blair talking some sense to the labour party.
Alas, the same people Blair wants to win votes from are the people rank & file labour despise.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/tony-blair-tells-keir-starmer-to-drop-woke-politics-and-focus-on-economy-labour0 -
The linked article seems strangely relevant to this thread:
https://telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/05/17/margaret-thatcher-still-lives-rent-free-enemies-heads/
Quote:
"Mere hours after its unveiling in her hometown of Grantham, a bronze statue of Margaret Thatcher was pelted with eggs by a Left-wing protester. Admirers of the Iron Lady, however, should not feel aggrieved. On the contrary, they should be delighted – for two simple reasons.
First, the egging of the statue is, if anything, a greater tribute to Lady Thatcher’s legacy than the statue itself. During her premiership she repeatedly reduced the hard Left to paroxysms of futile rage. Today, more than 30 years after she left office – and almost 10 years after she died – she’s still managing it. This is a rare feat. Most politicians are swiftly forgotten. Yet Lady Thatcher, it seems, maddens her political foes just as much now as she did back then. Even in death, she lives rent-free in their heads.
She herself would probably be quite content for other Left-wingers to follow this first assailant’s lead. Egging her statue, after all, won’t reverse anything she did in office. The eggs will simply hit the statue with a quiet splat, and then, shortly afterwards, be wiped off by a weary council employee. So, just as the statue represents Lady Thatcher, any attack on it represents the hard Left: angry, juvenile, and entirely impotent.
This is the second reason her admirers should be happy. Ordinary, non-political members of the public will read of the egging, shake their heads, and think how weird the hard Left are. So aggressive, so bitter, so rabidly tribal – and, above all, so pathetic. A grown adult, furiously flinging eggs at a statue of a long-dead woman? What sort of man behaves like that?
In short, they will find it unpleasant and off-putting. Which will mean that, after all these years, Lady Thatcher is still making the Left look bad – and helping to keep them out of office."
Give the woman a posthumous medal
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.0 -
Is there anyway we could switch to chaos with this guy?
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver1 -
Makes you realise how shallow the talent pool of current politicians on all sides are when Milliband looks heavyweight.ddraver said:Is there anyway we could switch to chaos with this guy?
0 -
Windfall tax is a stupid idea.
Oh you’re all worried about the shortage of oil - let’s go tax them. That’ll help.0 -
Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of the article a “serious” newspaper should not be using tired lines like “living rent free...”Stevo_666 said:The linked article seems strangely relevant to this thread:
https://telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/05/17/margaret-thatcher-still-lives-rent-free-enemies-heads/
Quote:
"Mere hours after its unveiling in her hometown of Grantham, a bronze statue of Margaret Thatcher was pelted with eggs by a Left-wing protester. Admirers of the Iron Lady, however, should not feel aggrieved. On the contrary, they should be delighted – for two simple reasons.
First, the egging of the statue is, if anything, a greater tribute to Lady Thatcher’s legacy than the statue itself. During her premiership she repeatedly reduced the hard Left to paroxysms of futile rage. Today, more than 30 years after she left office – and almost 10 years after she died – she’s still managing it. This is a rare feat. Most politicians are swiftly forgotten. Yet Lady Thatcher, it seems, maddens her political foes just as much now as she did back then. Even in death, she lives rent-free in their heads.
She herself would probably be quite content for other Left-wingers to follow this first assailant’s lead. Egging her statue, after all, won’t reverse anything she did in office. The eggs will simply hit the statue with a quiet splat, and then, shortly afterwards, be wiped off by a weary council employee. So, just as the statue represents Lady Thatcher, any attack on it represents the hard Left: angry, juvenile, and entirely impotent.
This is the second reason her admirers should be happy. Ordinary, non-political members of the public will read of the egging, shake their heads, and think how weird the hard Left are. So aggressive, so bitter, so rabidly tribal – and, above all, so pathetic. A grown adult, furiously flinging eggs at a statue of a long-dead woman? What sort of man behaves like that?
In short, they will find it unpleasant and off-putting. Which will mean that, after all these years, Lady Thatcher is still making the Left look bad – and helping to keep them out of office."
Give the woman a posthumous medal0 -
The lady wasn’t for turning, but she is now if she could see the shower we’ve got now.
Brought an alternative meaning to conviction politics 😆
Sorry this should be on the Tory bashing thread.0 -
skyblueamateur said:
Makes you realise how shallow the talent pool of current politicians on all sides are when Milliband looks heavyweight.ddraver said:Is there anyway we could switch to chaos with this guy?
I still don't rate him highly - he's not a natural orator (needs to read his script), and his delivery feels stilted/practised.0 -
Windfall tax relates to the profits being higher than expected due to the increase in oil price though doesn't it? No-one is talking about taxing their normal profit more just taking a chunk of extra money they aren't doing anything to earn.rick_chasey said:Windfall tax is a stupid idea.
Oh you’re all worried about the shortage of oil - let’s go tax them. That’ll help.0 -
Pross said:
Windfall tax relates to the profits being higher than expected due to the increase in oil price though doesn't it? No-one is talking about taxing their normal profit more just taking a chunk of extra money they aren't doing anything to earn.rick_chasey said:Windfall tax is a stupid idea.
Oh you’re all worried about the shortage of oil - let’s go tax them. That’ll help.
Ah, but they'll say they need to invest it...
...and then give it to shareholders.
Seems a bit of a risky investment strategy for long-term improvements to wait for a war in Ukraine.0 -
i
Eh?Pross said:
Windfall tax relates to the profits being higher than expected due to the increase in oil price though doesn't it? No-one is talking about taxing their normal profit more just taking a chunk of extra money they aren't doing anything to earn.rick_chasey said:Windfall tax is a stupid idea.
Oh you’re all worried about the shortage of oil - let’s go tax them. That’ll help.
They dig it out of the ground and sell it at market rate.
That’s how it works. They don’t set the price. It’s a competitive market. If there’s evidence of collusion then let’s see it and punish them accordingly.
Higher prices incentives more exploration which leads to more supply, etc etc.
We don’t give them tax breaks when the price is way lower than break even for them, so why should we do it the other way?
It’s frankly outrageous. Where do you draw the line in a free market?
How do we then decide a company is making “too much money”?
Are they gonna come after me because I have a fat margin? Ridiculous.
Anyway, the solution is to wean the economy off fossil fuels which has the added impact of slowing our path down climate Armageddon.0 -
Probably because there is more behaviour of this type from the lefties to comment on.kingstongraham said:I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.
Do you think what he did was useful or sensible?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Probably because there is more behaviour of this type from the lefties to comment on.kingstongraham said:I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.
Do you think what he did was useful or sensible?
You're right. Posh boys just do it without any political reason.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4066329.stm0 -
Good whataboutery Brian.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Probably because there is more behaviour of this type from the lefties to comment on.kingstongraham said:I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.
Do you think what he did was useful or sensible?
You're right. Posh boys just do it without any political reason.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4066329.stm"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Good whataboutery Brian.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Probably because there is more behaviour of this type from the lefties to comment on.kingstongraham said:I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.
Do you think what he did was useful or sensible?
You're right. Posh boys just do it without any political reason.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4066329.stm
You said that it's lefties that do it, so I'm just giving a bit of counter evidence to your assertion. That's not whataboutery.
You might have noticed that I've been making positive comments about aspects of Thatcher, and I do think that the enduring hatred of her weird, especially from a generation that didn't experience the 70s.0 -
I don't have an opinion on it.Stevo_666 said:
Probably because there is more behaviour of this type from the lefties to comment on.kingstongraham said:I think it is a useful article, because it shares a very prevalent attitude among the right wing press of attributing the action of one person as "the actions of the left".
Doesn't happen the other way so much.
Do you think what he did was useful or sensible?
He's not living in my head at all.0
