LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
I guess that's me fücked then.briantrumpet said:This starts to feel ever so slightly fascish... Dangerous Dogs act imprecision, but with rather more severe consequences for society if interpreted broadly.
The election better come soon!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 -
There’s also all those asylum seekers who risk drowning in the Channel as a lifestyle choice (they could be the same one’s choosing to come from abroad to live in tents in our town centres though I suppose)Jezyboy said:
If they do as good a job with the people who are homeless as a "lifestyle choice" as they have done with the people who are jobless as a "lifestyle choice"...briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
Then I guess we won't be seeing any difference.0 -
I disagree. This is classic Tory. Normally it's the disabled who are hamming it up.briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
All this tells me is she's been to San Fran on holiday.1 -
Don't worry about it Pross, Labour will be in soon and everything will be fantastic.Pross said:
There’s also all those asylum seekers who risk drowning in the Channel as a lifestyle choice (they could be the same one’s choosing to come from abroad to live in tents in our town centres though I suppose)Jezyboy said:
If they do as good a job with the people who are homeless as a "lifestyle choice" as they have done with the people who are jobless as a "lifestyle choice"...briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
Then I guess we won't be seeing any difference.
Personally I think Governments are just a face to chaos the core issues will always be pretty much the same.
We would have still had the financial crisis, austerity (Clegg), Brexit vote (pushed by Farage), COVID, Putin, inflation and consequently massive debt.1 -
Disagree. Cameron thought he'd win that one and his only concern was splitting the vote at the election. If Labour had been in charge there would have been no vote.focuszing723 said:
Don't worry about it Pross, Labour will be in soon and everything will be fantastic.Pross said:
There’s also all those asylum seekers who risk drowning in the Channel as a lifestyle choice (they could be the same one’s choosing to come from abroad to live in tents in our town centres though I suppose)Jezyboy said:
If they do as good a job with the people who are homeless as a "lifestyle choice" as they have done with the people who are jobless as a "lifestyle choice"...briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
Then I guess we won't be seeing any difference.
Personally I think Governments are just a face to chaos the core issues will always be pretty much the same.
We would have still had the financial crisis, austerity (Clegg), Brexit vote (pushed by Farage), COVID, Putin, inflation and consequently massive debt.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 UK will follow the likes of San Francisco and Los Angeles in the US, where "weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking, and squalor", if action is not taken, she added.focuszing723 said:
Don't worry about it Pross, Labour will be in soon and everything will be fantastic.Pross said:
There’s also all those asylum seekers who risk drowning in the Channel as a lifestyle choice (they could be the same one’s choosing to come from abroad to live in tents in our town centres though I suppose)Jezyboy said:
If they do as good a job with the people who are homeless as a "lifestyle choice" as they have done with the people who are jobless as a "lifestyle choice"...briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
Then I guess we won't be seeing any difference.
Personally I think Governments are just a face to chaos the core issues will always be pretty much the same.
We would have still had the financial crisis, austerity (Clegg), Brexit vote (pushed by Farage), COVID, Putin, inflation and consequently massive debt.
I mean, yet again we have a senior Minister talking as though someone else has been governing for the last 13 years. It’s quite something to admit the issue has been created by your weak policies.0 -
Also we (again) have a UK politician importing talking points from the USA.Pross said:
The UK will follow the likes of San Francisco and Los Angeles in the US, where "weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking, and squalor", if action is not taken, she added.focuszing723 said:
Don't worry about it Pross, Labour will be in soon and everything will be fantastic.Pross said:
There’s also all those asylum seekers who risk drowning in the Channel as a lifestyle choice (they could be the same one’s choosing to come from abroad to live in tents in our town centres though I suppose)Jezyboy said:
If they do as good a job with the people who are homeless as a "lifestyle choice" as they have done with the people who are jobless as a "lifestyle choice"...briantrumpet said:It's par for the course for the current lot of Tories: make a problem much worse, then take it out on those who are the symptom of the policy.
Then I guess we won't be seeing any difference.
Personally I think Governments are just a face to chaos the core issues will always be pretty much the same.
We would have still had the financial crisis, austerity (Clegg), Brexit vote (pushed by Farage), COVID, Putin, inflation and consequently massive debt.
I mean, yet again we have a senior Minister talking as though someone else has been governing for the last 13 years. It’s quite something to admit the issue has been created by your weak policies.
I suspect the homeless issues in the USA are reasonably different. We don't have the same level of opiate crisis. The crisis does make for good shock p0rn on internet videos though.0 -
It’s just despicable nonsense.0
-
skyblueamateur said:
It’s just despicable nonsense.
That's the point... she is aiming to be the most outrageous. It still feels like Bannon or similar is either directly involved or is the inspiration.
Still like this one though...
0 -
I mean it's ill-informed bollox, but I guess it still counts as context. Just trying to keep her face on the front page after that bizarre 'interview' by Sunak.focuszing723 said:"Nobody in Britain should be living in a tent on our streets. There are options for people who don't want to be sleeping rough, and the government is working with local authorities to strengthen wraparound support including treatment for those with drug and alcohol addiction.https://news.sky.com/story/suella-braverman-wants-to-restrict-use-of-tents-by-homeless-people-according-to-report-12999971
"What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering, and blighting our communities."
Context.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Disgusting though her comments are, I can't get too worked up about them. I view her comments on homelessness and multiculturalism as purely positioning for a run at leader post the election. Even though she's in a position of power she doesn't have enough time or has shown any inclination to create any policies around either so it's just posturing.rjsterry said:
I mean it's ill-informed bollox, but I guess it still counts as context. Just trying to keep her face on the front page after that bizarre 'interview' by Sunak.focuszing723 said:"Nobody in Britain should be living in a tent on our streets. There are options for people who don't want to be sleeping rough, and the government is working with local authorities to strengthen wraparound support including treatment for those with drug and alcohol addiction.https://news.sky.com/story/suella-braverman-wants-to-restrict-use-of-tents-by-homeless-people-according-to-report-12999971
"What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering, and blighting our communities."
Context.
Call me a cynic but I think she is 'saying the unsayable' because she wants to appeal to a membership that are not going to be predisposed to a non-white female, as if to say 'I can say this because of who I am'. Everything is designed to create a 'woke backlash' to proven she can 'stick one to the liberals'.
I suspect if she did become leader she'd knock all of this on the head pronto and say whatever she felt was needed to appeal to the general public over the membership.
0 -
Call me a cynic but I think the people she is trying to appeal to don't want her.super_davo said:
...
Call me a cynic but I think she is 'saying the unsayable' because she wants to appeal to a membership that are not going to be predisposed to a non-white female...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 -
I made this argument a while ago. Forum didn’t buy itsuper_davo said:
Disgusting though her comments are, I can't get too worked up about them. I view her comments on homelessness and multiculturalism as purely positioning for a run at leader post the election. Even though she's in a position of power she doesn't have enough time or has shown any inclination to create any policies around either so it's just posturing.rjsterry said:
I mean it's ill-informed bollox, but I guess it still counts as context. Just trying to keep her face on the front page after that bizarre 'interview' by Sunak.focuszing723 said:"Nobody in Britain should be living in a tent on our streets. There are options for people who don't want to be sleeping rough, and the government is working with local authorities to strengthen wraparound support including treatment for those with drug and alcohol addiction.https://news.sky.com/story/suella-braverman-wants-to-restrict-use-of-tents-by-homeless-people-according-to-report-12999971
"What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering, and blighting our communities."
Context.
Call me a cynic but I think she is 'saying the unsayable' because she wants to appeal to a membership that are not going to be predisposed to a non-white female, as if to say 'I can say this because of who I am'. Everything is designed to create a 'woke backlash' to proven she can 'stick one to the liberals'.
I suspect if she did become leader she'd knock all of this on the head pronto and say whatever she felt was needed to appeal to the general public over the membership.0 -
It's possible that it's her tactic, but I think the problem with tactics like this is that the Internet is less forgetful than print media.rick_chasey said:
I made this argument a while ago. Forum didn’t buy itsuper_davo said:
Disgusting though her comments are, I can't get too worked up about them. I view her comments on homelessness and multiculturalism as purely positioning for a run at leader post the election. Even though she's in a position of power she doesn't have enough time or has shown any inclination to create any policies around either so it's just posturing.rjsterry said:
I mean it's ill-informed bollox, but I guess it still counts as context. Just trying to keep her face on the front page after that bizarre 'interview' by Sunak.focuszing723 said:"Nobody in Britain should be living in a tent on our streets. There are options for people who don't want to be sleeping rough, and the government is working with local authorities to strengthen wraparound support including treatment for those with drug and alcohol addiction.https://news.sky.com/story/suella-braverman-wants-to-restrict-use-of-tents-by-homeless-people-according-to-report-12999971
"What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering, and blighting our communities."
Context.
Call me a cynic but I think she is 'saying the unsayable' because she wants to appeal to a membership that are not going to be predisposed to a non-white female, as if to say 'I can say this because of who I am'. Everything is designed to create a 'woke backlash' to proven she can 'stick one to the liberals'.
I suspect if she did become leader she'd knock all of this on the head pronto and say whatever she felt was needed to appeal to the general public over the membership.
Maybe she'd tone things down slightly.
Either way, if she doesn't agree with what she's saying, she's still saying despicable things.1 -
0
-
-
Part of the remedy is for Lee Anderson to donate to the strike fund. Couldn't be better.briantrumpet said:"Misleading" = a complete lie.
0 -
Hideous character, but actually fair play.0
-
For posting something written for him in order to avoid being sued?secretsqirrel said:Hideous character, but actually fair play.
0 -
Has he had his arm twisted into apologising for the original tweet?
Seems a bit out of character for him.0 -
Ah don’t know the back story. Just taking it at face value. Silly mekingstongraham said:
For posting something written for him in order to avoid being sued?secretsqirrel said:Hideous character, but actually fair play.
0 -
Did he make the claim or just link to a Mail article (which is what the above seems to say)? If the latter then I don't see how he could be sued unless he added further comment (which he doesn't seem to have included in his apology!).kingstongraham said:
For posting something written for him in order to avoid being sued?secretsqirrel said:Hideous character, but actually fair play.
0 -
Pross said:
Did he make the claim or just link to a Mail article (which is what the above seems to say)? If the latter then I don't see how he could be sued unless he added further comment (which he doesn't seem to have included in his apology!).kingstongraham said:
For posting something written for him in order to avoid being sued?secretsqirrel said:Hideous character, but actually fair play.
I can't find an image of the original Tweet (which obviously he will have taken down), but I suspect he added his own ha'porth, hence the carefully written apology and payment, to avoid court action.0 -
Bl00dy woke #toryscum, whaddabout freeze peach?briantrumpet said:Pross said:
Did he make the claim or just link to a Mail article (which is what the above seems to say)? If the latter then I don't see how he could be sued unless he added further comment (which he doesn't seem to have included in his apology!).kingstongraham said:
For posting something written for him in order to avoid being sued?secretsqirrel said:Hideous character, but actually fair play.
I can't find an image of the original Tweet (which obviously he will have taken down), but I suspect he added his own ha'porth, hence the carefully written apology and payment, to avoid court action.0 -
Sayeeda Warsi not beating about the bush...History will judge us harshly for allowing this circus to continue.
When those entrusted to protect us trample over national security & national interest to pursue personal political ambitions we need to speak out. Our country is being set alight - arsonists masquerading as patriots
0 -
Baroness Warsi was certainly laying into Cruella on Sky's The Politics Hub this evening. No holds barred.0
-
It's a shame Warsi is in the Lords as she could do far more in the Commons. She might show up the halfwits who have replaced her, though.Dorset_Boy said:Baroness Warsi was certainly laying into Cruella on Sky's The Politics Hub this evening. No holds barred.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
It's a shame Warsi is in the Lords as she could do far more in the Commons. She might show up the halfwits who have replaced her, though.Dorset_Boy said:Baroness Warsi was certainly laying into Cruella on Sky's The Politics Hub this evening. No holds barred.
She's probably glad she left the sinking shïts. And what isn't sinking are secondary floaters. Time for every one of them to be gone, unless they find the courage to speak out about how their party has gone round the u-bend.0 -
it seems that the summary of Johnson as a lying, lazy, incompetent PM with no principles didn't go far enough.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/08/former-civil-service-head-mark-sedwill-apologises-for-chicken-pox-party-covid-remarksThe hearing was shown extracts of messages between Sedwill and his eventual successor as permanent secretary, Simon Case, in which Case, at the time the head civil servant at No 10, wrote: “It is like taming wild animals. Nothing in my past experience has prepared me for this madness. The PM and the people he chooses to surround himself with are basically feral.”
Sedwill said in reply: “I have the bite marks.”0 -
