Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on April 06, 2023, 10:27:46 pm
-
Whoever has authorised this on behalf of the Labour party wants shooting.
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1643973886311297028?s=20
Absolutely disgusting, gutter politics.
-
Wouldn’t the leader authorise that?
At the very worst he should order it to be removed.
-
Surely it lays squarely at Starmer’s door?
-
This is the new, honest Britain guys!
We're gonna have to learn to live with it.
-
Anyone want to back up their brain fart with ₤100 to charity?
-
What do you mean, Sydney?
-
What do you mean, Sydney?
If you think starmer condoned it back yourself in
-
Come on belton I'll give you an hour to make up your mind
-
I’ll be asleep in an hour.
I never stated that Starmer condoned it.
However, as Leader of the Labour Party, and probably the next PM, shouldn’t he be responsible for what his party puts out there?
We’ll see by his reaction, I guess.
-
It is from the Labour Party official twitter, so it is authorised from the top.
Look at the re-tweets:
https://twitter.com/StevenGWalker74/status/1644063790323908608/photo/1
Labour whips included.
This is a disciplinary matter for Labour.
-
I’ll be asleep in an hour.
I never stated that Starmer condoned it.
However, as Leader of the Labour Party, and probably the next PM, shouldn’t he be responsible for what his party puts out there?
We’ll see by his reaction, I guess.
I accept your climb down
-
For those who don't know, Deb Mattinson is Labour Head of Strategy under Keith.
I should have explained that in the post above.
-
I’ll be asleep in an hour.
I never stated that Starmer condoned it.
However, as Leader of the Labour Party, and probably the next PM, shouldn’t he be responsible for what his party puts out there?
We’ll see by his reaction, I guess.
I accept your climb down
Is your passive aggression something you picked up in Australia, or did you take it with you?
My original quote, quite clearly, that as leader, Starmer has to take responsibility for such tweets.
And I think he will, though I don’t agree that he should be shot.
-
Ah the personal touch, that's the belton I know
-
Very Boris-esque from the Red Tories.
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
A much more pleasant response. Keep it up.
-
Christ. Looks like a UKIP poster.
-
“We need to win back those working class red wall seats we lost”
“Yes how can we positively market our policies to specifically target these voters?”
“Hmm that sounds like a lot of effort. Can’t we just continue with our Tories = bad rhetoric?”
“Ok fine, what do working class folk hate?”
“Nonces.”
“Say no more. I’ve got a great idea.”
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
Well that’s ok then.
Take it down (having allowed it to be posted) then all is ok.
If that had been in reverse, by the Torys against Starmer, there would be over 100 posts on the thread by now.
Well done bst by the way for calling it out.
-
Yes I'm really disappointed that they're playing this game.
Whoever sanctioned this wants a bollocking
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
Well that’s ok then.
Take it down (having allowed it to be posted) then all is ok.
If that had been in reverse, by the Torys against Starmer, there would be over 100 posts on the thread by now.
Well done bst by the way for calling it out.
Johnson blaming Starmer for Savile not the same kind of thing?
The Labour Party needs to show they're better than the Tories, not just the same but with a different coloured rosette.
-
I wonder if any of the above posters blamed Starmer with the savile smear?
-
Attacking the opposition cheaply and crudely is the norm, I’m afraid. Another example of all parties losing their sense of morality for a cheap ‘win’. The tories have been the leaders in this for a long time, probably just because they’ve had a louder voice. I think, as the election grows ever nearer, we’ll see more of this from both parties.
British politics is becoming more and more of a game. Social media is partly to blame - it is just too easy to put whatever you want out there for all to see. Yes, Starmer will probably condemn and have this tweet removed with some sort of mock horror, but it can’t be unseen or unregistered. He will be happy that the seed has been sewn that Sunak might not deal with abusers appropriately, regardless of how it came about.
We have seen more, much more, of this from the tories. But I think Labour are just late to the party. As the election looms ever nearer, gutter politics will increase all round.
Gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
-
I wonder if any of the above posters blamed Starmer with the savile smear?
I definitely didn’t.
-
Attacking the opposition cheaply and crudely is the norm, I’m afraid. Another example of all parties losing their sense of morality for a cheap ‘win’. The tories have been the leaders in this for a long time, probably just because they’ve had a louder voice. I think, as the election grows ever nearer, we’ll see more of this from both parties.
British politics is becoming more and more of a game. Social media is partly to blame - it is just too easy to put whatever you want out there for all to see. Yes, Starmer will probably condemn and have this tweet removed with some sort of mock horror, but it can’t be unseen or unregistered. He will be happy that the seed has been sewn that Sunak might not deal with abusers appropriately, regardless of how it came about.
We have seen more, much more, of this from the tories. But I think Labour are just late to the party. As the election looms ever nearer, gutter politics will increase all round.
Gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
It's not what I want to see, a war over law and order, I'd rather see more effort directed at racial harmony, more social mobility which it what has been lacking for 13+ years a better police force, but it's not gutter politics it's actually true.
-
What’s true? The original Tweet?
-
I'm glad you asked, yes, if you take hounds view of thing, the leader is responsible, no?
-
My apologies. I didn’t realise it was a dig at Hound.
-
Attacking the opposition cheaply and crudely is the norm, I’m afraid. Another example of all parties losing their sense of morality for a cheap ‘win’. The tories have been the leaders in this for a long time, probably just because they’ve had a louder voice. I think, as the election grows ever nearer, we’ll see more of this from both parties.
British politics is becoming more and more of a game. Social media is partly to blame - it is just too easy to put whatever you want out there for all to see. Yes, Starmer will probably condemn and have this tweet removed with some sort of mock horror, but it can’t be unseen or unregistered. He will be happy that the seed has been sewn that Sunak might not deal with abusers appropriately, regardless of how it came about.
We have seen more, much more, of this from the tories. But I think Labour are just late to the party. As the election looms ever nearer, gutter politics will increase all round.
Gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
It goes deeper than that Belton in my opinion .
The cheap shot politics is a consequence of neither party having any ideas or vision to take this country forward .
Unless the political system that we've lived under since 1979 changes to work in the interests of everybody and not the 1% and accepted and adopted by the centre of the Labour Party then gutter politics is the only show in town .
Gutter politics is the tactic that keeps the country divided whilst the interests of the 1% are protected .
Only a left wing government will deliver the change this country desperately needs , only the left have the ideas and political will to change this country for the better .
There is nothing to celebrate or be even remotely enthusiastic about an incoming Labour government , nothing what so ever .
The current Labour Party contains as many dubious characters as any Johnson administration , chancers , liars and self interested .
The status quo will remain because the alternative is the status quo under the present guise that calls itself The Labour Party .
-
Tyke, I completely agree.
I don’t have your, or Billy’s, or many other poster’s expertise on politics, or the passion for a particular party that many do, but I do know how I feel about it.
-
Attacking the opposition cheaply and crudely is the norm, I’m afraid. Another example of all parties losing their sense of morality for a cheap ‘win’. The tories have been the leaders in this for a long time, probably just because they’ve had a louder voice. I think, as the election grows ever nearer, we’ll see more of this from both parties.
British politics is becoming more and more of a game. Social media is partly to blame - it is just too easy to put whatever you want out there for all to see. Yes, Starmer will probably condemn and have this tweet removed with some sort of mock horror, but it can’t be unseen or unregistered. He will be happy that the seed has been sewn that Sunak might not deal with abusers appropriately, regardless of how it came about.
We have seen more, much more, of this from the tories. But I think Labour are just late to the party. As the election looms ever nearer, gutter politics will increase all round.
Gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
It goes deeper than that Belton in my opinion .
The cheap shot politics is a consequence of neither party having any ideas or vision to take this country forward .
Unless the political system that we've lived under since 1979 changes to work in the interests of everybody and not the 1% and accepted and adopted by the centre of the Labour Party then gutter politics is the only show in town .
Gutter politics is the tactic that keeps the country divided whilst the interests of the 1% are protected .
Only a left wing government will deliver the change this country desperately needs , only the left have the ideas and political will to change this country for the better .
There is nothing to celebrate or be even remotely enthusiastic about an incoming Labour government , nothing what so ever .
The current Labour Party contains as many dubious characters as any Johnson administration , chancers , liars and self interested .
The status quo will remain because the alternative is the status quo under the present guise that calls itself The Labour Party .
Do you actually vote at every election tyke?
-
Dog whistle politics from the Farage playbook.
What makes it even worse is that it seems Keith was involved in drawing up the guidelines Labour is now aiming at;
https://twitter.com/breadandposes/status/1644129302215024640
As head of the CPS, the DPP is responsible for all decisions signed off under his watch.
That is how the system works.....whether you or I agree with those decisions or not.
-
I remember you blaming Starmer for not prosecuting savile Albie, you got that wrong are you sure about your facts this time? give us the full print out with all the details of what you are and the tweet suggests.
-
I wonder if any of the above posters blamed Starmer with the savile smear?
I didn't.
-
I'm glad you asked, yes, if you take hounds view of thing, the leader is responsible, no?
The leader oversees what goes on.
I don't know whether KS has condemned the tweet yet but if he hasnt, he should have done by now.
-
No Syd,
I pointed out that Starmer was not the case officer, but was head of the CPS at the time.
It is always the responsibility of the head of service to sign off on work from the unit under his control.
Not sure what you mean about a "print out".
The minutes are set out in the tweet I posted, have you read them?
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
Well that’s ok then.
Take it down (having allowed it to be posted) then all is ok.
If that had been in reverse, by the Torys against Starmer, there would be over 100 posts on the thread by now.
Well done bst by the way for calling it out.
Johnson blaming Starmer for Savile not the same kind of thing? **
The Labour Party needs to show they're better than the Tories, not just the same but with a different coloured rosette.
** all the same?
-
Have YOU read them Albie.
Because this looks like yet another case where you instinctively post something because someone reckons it is evidence against Starmer, when examination of the evidence suggests it's nothing of the sort.
As for you bringing up the Savile case again, like I said: gutter politics.
-
It wasn't albie who first mentioned Saville on this thread.
-
Billy,
The issue is who has control over the sentencing policy.
The Labour tweet suggests it is a political decision, when in truth it is subject to guidelines set out in the tweet I posted.
Whether or not you agree with the guidelines, there they are.
Surely it is then up to the justice system, having considered the evidence, to make the appropriate sentencing decision.
Grandstanding by politicians is nothing to the point.
As to the Saville issue, other posters raised it, not me.....for clarification, I simply corrected Syd's error about what I said.
Gutter politics is about blaming people for things they had no hand in creating.
If you think that this is "gutter politics", no-one can really help you!
-
Attacking the opposition cheaply and crudely is the norm, I’m afraid. Another example of all parties losing their sense of morality for a cheap ‘win’. The tories have been the leaders in this for a long time, probably just because they’ve had a louder voice. I think, as the election grows ever nearer, we’ll see more of this from both parties.
British politics is becoming more and more of a game. Social media is partly to blame - it is just too easy to put whatever you want out there for all to see. Yes, Starmer will probably condemn and have this tweet removed with some sort of mock horror, but it can’t be unseen or unregistered. He will be happy that the seed has been sewn that Sunak might not deal with abusers appropriately, regardless of how it came about.
We have seen more, much more, of this from the tories. But I think Labour are just late to the party. As the election looms ever nearer, gutter politics will increase all round.
Gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
It goes deeper than that Belton in my opinion .
The cheap shot politics is a consequence of neither party having any ideas or vision to take this country forward .
Unless the political system that we've lived under since 1979 changes to work in the interests of everybody and not the 1% and accepted and adopted by the centre of the Labour Party then gutter politics is the only show in town .
Gutter politics is the tactic that keeps the country divided whilst the interests of the 1% are protected .
Only a left wing government will deliver the change this country desperately needs , only the left have the ideas and political will to change this country for the better .
There is nothing to celebrate or be even remotely enthusiastic about an incoming Labour government , nothing what so ever .
The current Labour Party contains as many dubious characters as any Johnson administration , chancers , liars and self interested .
The status quo will remain because the alternative is the status quo under the present guise that calls itself The Labour Party .
Do you actually vote at every election tyke?
Why do you ask ?
-
Tyke, I completely agree.
I don’t have your, or Billy’s, or many other poster’s expertise on politics, or the passion for a particular party that many do, but I do know how I feel about it.
I don't actually have any expertise Belton , I left school the year before Thatcher came to power and so I've had a good look throughout my life as to where we've ended up today as a consequence .
The incoming 1997 Labour government could have done anything they wanted with regard to changing this country , whilst I acknowledge they did some good things they didn't cut the neoliberal umbilical chord either and believed in the free market , an abundance of cheap eastern European Labour and the city of London .
The working class were told by Mandelson that they had no where else to go , what he meant was fuq you but vote for us when we need you to .
From 1997 onwards the Labour vote fell off a cliff and by 2010 they'd sunk to 29% of the vote , only slightly better than Michael Foot in 1983 .
The FPTP system we have in this country never tells the true story , Corbyn's disastrous 2019 defeat attracted 2 million more votes than Brown in 2010 who narrowly lost .
Starmer won't get anywhere near the Corbyn vote either even though he'll likely win .
That's how fecked up this system is and it's deliberately set up this way so as to keep the status quo and the likelihood of significant change a pipe dream .
We've now reached the stage in this country where neither of the two party's are going to be actually considered credible if you look at the actual votes they are likely to attract at the next GE .
This is in essence a race to the bottom .
Even driving change from within the Labour is now off limits given any left wing affiliations will see you thrown out of the party or you won't get selected to stand as an MP as a Labour candidate .
Left wing is so utterly deplorable it attracts more votes than the centre ground .
Work that one out Belton ?
-
Billy,
The issue is who has control over the sentencing policy.
The Labour tweet suggests it is a political decision, when in truth it is subject to guidelines set out in the tweet I posted.
Whether or not you agree with the guidelines, there they are.
Surely it is then up to the justice system, having considered the evidence, to make the appropriate sentencing decision.
Grandstanding by politicians is nothing to the point.
As to the Saville issue, other posters raised it, not me.....for clarification, I simply corrected Syd's error about what I said.
Gutter politics is about blaming people for things they had no hand in creating.
If you think that this is "gutter politics", no-one can really help you!
Albie.
The Sentencing Council doesn't work in a vacuum. They operate in a context of Govt legislation deciding what maximum and minimum sentences should be.
If the Govt legislates to fix the minimum sentence for conviction X to be a custodial one, the Sentencing Council has no authority to countermand that.
In that sense, the Labour tweet has a technical validity. If the Govt wants to have a mandatory custodial sentence for any crime, it can legislate to that effect and that would require the SC to impose that.
The fact that Starmer as DPP sat on the Sentencing Council is irrelevant. The moreso because nothing in the tweet you posted said anything about his being involved in determination of the policy of custodial sentences for adults who have sex with children.
None of the above changes by one jot my original opinion that the tweet Labour posted was disgusting and should be withdrawn.
As regards Savile, I assumed that when you posted "As head of the CPS, the DPP is responsible for all decisions signed off under his watch.
That is how the system works." you were referring to the Savile case. That was the standard attack line (from both far right and far left) when that disgusting smear was first raised. If I misjudged your intention, I apologise. Although I'm struggling to see what else you could have been referring to, because it was a total non sequitur from the rest of the discussion.
-
It wasn't albie who first mentioned Saville on this thread.
I did, in response to your whataboutery.
-
So any that are blaming Starmer for putting out the tweet above, because he is the leader and 'the leader has to take responsibility' has to accept I assume that as leader sunak has to accept responsibility for not prosecuting offenders guilty of child abuse. Does that seem logical at all?
-
So any that are blaming Starmer for putting out the tweet above, because he is the leader and 'the leader has to take responsibility' has to accept I assume that as leader sunak has to accept responsibility for not prosecuting offenders guilty of child abuse. Does that seem logical at all?
No it's not at all logical.
We have an independent judiciary in the UK.
-
So any that are blaming Starmer for putting out the tweet above, because he is the leader and 'the leader has to take responsibility' has to accept I assume that as leader sunak has to accept responsibility for not prosecuting offenders guilty of child abuse. Does that seem logical at all?
No it's not at all logical.
We have an independent judiciary in the UK.
So you reckon a judge could choose to impose the death penalty or community service on a murderer?
-
It wasn't albie who first mentioned Saville on this thread.
I did, in response to your whataboutery.
I see you aren’t saying anything about syds whataboutery below:
So any that are blaming Starmer for putting out the tweet above, because he is the leader and 'the leader has to take responsibility' has to accept I assume that as leader sunak has to accept responsibility for not prosecuting offenders guilty of child abuse. Does that seem logical at all?
-
So any that are blaming Starmer for putting out the tweet above, because he is the leader and 'the leader has to take responsibility' has to accept I assume that as leader sunak has to accept responsibility for not prosecuting offenders guilty of child abuse. Does that seem logical at all?
No it's not at all logical.
We have an independent judiciary in the UK.
So you reckon a judge could choose to impose the death penalty or community service on a murderer?
Do you think that the law in this area is deficient then? And how so? What needs to change in terms of legislation?
If so, given how long it takes to pass an Act of Parliament, how is Rishi Sunak, who has been PM for only a few weeks, personally responsible for this?
And how does that tally with him "not thinking adults convicted of sexually assaulting children should go to prison"?
And how is that comparable to Sir Keir Starmer approving, in advance or retrospect, this poster? Which is the comparison Sydney is drawing and you appear to be defending.
-
Err. I started this thread.
I'm not defending anything that Labour had done on this subject.
I'm merely pointing out that our judiciary is not independent on the issue of sentencing. Parliament has the ultimate authority on that.
Sydney's post is also wrong in saying that the 4500 figure refers to non-prosecutions. It doesn't. It's the number of prosecuted people who weren't imprisoned.
For the record, I suspect that there were very good reasons for those decisions. Technically, a 6th Former having sex with someone who has just finished Year 11 could be classified as an adult sexually abusing a child. But I suspect most of us know of such cases and few of them would pass any sensible definition of "abuse".
Whatever the detail of the decisions, Labour is very, very wrong on several levels to produce and stand by this poster. It doesn't represent how I think a Labour party ought to campaign.
-
Tory sleeze and labour smear.
When/ if labour get power it will be role reversal.
Labour sleeze Tory smear.
-
A lot more to This than “jail time” strap lines.
Child abusers go on the sex offenders register for min 10 years.
And they usually have a Sexual Harm Prevention Order attached too.
I reckon many of those convicted of child abuse offences would rather be in prison.
Huge swathes of the uk community do not tolerate them when outed, and the non sexual offending recidivists have a particular hatred for them.
-
Err. I started this thread.
I'm not defending anything that Labour had done on this subject.
I'm merely pointing out that our judiciary is not independent on the issue of sentencing. Parliament has the ultimate authority on that.
Sydney's post is also wrong in saying that the 4500 figure refers to non-prosecutions. It doesn't. It's the number of prosecuted people who weren't imprisoned.
For the record, I suspect that there were very good reasons for those decisions. Technically, a 6th Former having sex with someone who has just finished Year 11 could be classified as an adult sexually abusing a child. But I suspect most of us know of such cases and few of them would pass any sensible definition of "abuse".
Whatever the detail of the decisions, Labour is very, very wrong on several levels to produce and stand by this poster. It doesn't represent how I think a Labour party ought to campaign.
Ah I see you were just being a Nelly know all and deliberately contradictory.
In fact Parliament only provides guidelines on sentencing. Judges have discretion within those guidelines based on circumstances, the impact on the victim and mitigating factors.
The judiciary have independence on sentencing within those guidelines.
If the law is correct and fair (hence my first question in my response) it is not politicians fault if judges become more lenient within these guidelines - though they do have the option to tighten the guidelines or indeed change the law through legislation.
So Sydney - back to my original point - it's not really comparable to making a decision on whether to approve an election poster is it?
-
Err. I started this thread.
I'm not defending anything that Labour had done on this subject.
I'm merely pointing out that our judiciary is not independent on the issue of sentencing. Parliament has the ultimate authority on that.
Sydney's post is also wrong in saying that the 4500 figure refers to non-prosecutions. It doesn't. It's the number of prosecuted people who weren't imprisoned.
For the record, I suspect that there were very good reasons for those decisions. Technically, a 6th Former having sex with someone who has just finished Year 11 could be classified as an adult sexually abusing a child. But I suspect most of us know of such cases and few of them would pass any sensible definition of "abuse".
Whatever the detail of the decisions, Labour is very, very wrong on several levels to produce and stand by this poster. It doesn't represent how I think a Labour party ought to campaign.
Is
Starter sanctioned the add he needs his bumps feeling, if he didn’t he needs to get a grip of things !
-
Err. I started this thread.
I'm not defending anything that Labour had done on this subject.
I'm merely pointing out that our judiciary is not independent on the issue of sentencing. Parliament has the ultimate authority on that.
Sydney's post is also wrong in saying that the 4500 figure refers to non-prosecutions. It doesn't. It's the number of prosecuted people who weren't imprisoned.
For the record, I suspect that there were very good reasons for those decisions. Technically, a 6th Former having sex with someone who has just finished Year 11 could be classified as an adult sexually abusing a child. But I suspect most of us know of such cases and few of them would pass any sensible definition of "abuse".
Whatever the detail of the decisions, Labour is very, very wrong on several levels to produce and stand by this poster. It doesn't represent how I think a Labour party ought to campaign.
Ah I see you were just being a Nelly know all and deliberately contradictory.
In fact Parliament only provides guidelines on sentencing. Judges have discretion within those guidelines based on circumstances, the impact on the victim and mitigating factors.
The judiciary have independence on sentencing within those guidelines.
If the law is correct and fair (hence my first question in my response) it is not politicians fault if judges become more lenient within these guidelines - though they do have the option to tighten the guidelines or indeed change the law through legislation.
So Sydney - back to my original point - it's not really comparable to making a decision on whether to approve an election poster is it?
Parliament sets both maximum and, frequently, minimum sentences. These aren't guidelines. They are hard boundaries.
-
Err. I started this thread.
I'm not defending anything that Labour had done on this subject.
I'm merely pointing out that our judiciary is not independent on the issue of sentencing. Parliament has the ultimate authority on that.
Sydney's post is also wrong in saying that the 4500 figure refers to non-prosecutions. It doesn't. It's the number of prosecuted people who weren't imprisoned.
For the record, I suspect that there were very good reasons for those decisions. Technically, a 6th Former having sex with someone who has just finished Year 11 could be classified as an adult sexually abusing a child. But I suspect most of us know of such cases and few of them would pass any sensible definition of "abuse".
Whatever the detail of the decisions, Labour is very, very wrong on several levels to produce and stand by this poster. It doesn't represent how I think a Labour party ought to campaign.
Ah I see you were just being a Nelly know all and deliberately contradictory.
In fact Parliament only provides guidelines on sentencing. Judges have discretion within those guidelines based on circumstances, the impact on the victim and mitigating factors.
The judiciary have independence on sentencing within those guidelines.
If the law is correct and fair (hence my first question in my response) it is not politicians fault if judges become more lenient within these guidelines - though they do have the option to tighten the guidelines or indeed change the law through legislation.
So Sydney - back to my original point - it's not really comparable to making a decision on whether to approve an election poster is it?
Parliament sets both maximum and, frequently, minimum sentences. These aren't guidelines. They are hard boundaries.
Correct - these are commonly referred to as 'sentencing guidelines' - judges have discretion (and therefore independence) within these depending on the circumstances of the case. Jeez!
-
Billy,
Yes, the government can produce new guidelines, and they have just done so for certain offences.
That would give a power to judges to act, but it would only result in a different pattern of sentencing if under the current rules judges were unable to impose what they considered a punishment of suitable severity.
Judges retain the right to weight sentencing according to the evidence presented and the sentencing code.
There is no minimum sentence for the offence under discussion.
https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/mandatory-minimum-term-sentences
The issue is whether you believe in an independent judiciary. The more prescriptive the political influence, the less autonomy is retained.
It is perfectly reasonable to leave sentencing to the judge who has heard the evidence, rather than a politician who has not.
So the question hinges on whether there is a restriction in place which materially effects outcomes.
Is there a demand from legal professionals to confer additional powers, or is it simply politicians exploiting a none existent demand to pander to populism?
The figure of 4,500 Labour give is from 2010, long before Sunak was an MP, let alone party leader.
There is no explanation of why that number have not been jailed, which is surely needed.
Starmer was fully aware of the timeline, having been part of the 2013 guidance process, and the Labour tweet looks to pin Sunak on something he has not created himself. Labour signed off on an attack ad despite Starmer knowing the guidance predated Sunak in office.
It is perfectly possible for Labour to say we will change the guidelines in office, without the smear alongside, with Sunak's forged signature.
Whether that would be a good thing will be contested by those in the sector.
-
Billy,
Yes, the government can produce new guidelines, and they have just done so for certain offences.
That would give a power to judges to act, but it would only result in a different pattern of sentencing if under the current rules judges were unable to impose what they considered a punishment of suitable severity.
Judges retain the right to weight sentencing according to the evidence presented and the sentencing code.
There is no minimum sentence for the offence under discussion.
https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/mandatory-minimum-term-sentences
The issue is whether you believe in an independent judiciary. The more prescriptive the political influence, the less autonomy is retained.
It is perfectly reasonable to leave sentencing to the judge who has heard the evidence, rather than a politician who has not.
So the question hinges on whether there is a restriction in place which materially effects outcomes.
Is there a demand from legal professionals to confer additional powers, or is it simply politicians exploiting a none existent demand to pander to populism?
The figure of 4,500 Labour give is from 2010, long before Sunak was an MP, let alone party leader.
There is no explanation of why that number have not been jailed, which is surely needed.
Starmer was fully aware of the timeline, having been part of the 2013 guidance process, and the Labour tweet looks to pin Sunak on something he has not created himself. Labour signed off on an attack ad despite Starmer knowing the guidance predated Sunak in office.
It is perfectly possible for Labour to say we will change the guidelines in office, without the smear alongside, with Sunak's forged signature.
Whether that would be a good thing will be contested by those in the sector.
What I was trying to say but much better put and explained.
-
I'm struggling to get what people are lecturing me about.
I started this thread precisely because I thought the Labour poster was a disgusting way to play politics.
Albie jumped in to imply that Starmer had responsibility for the Sentencing decisions.
I pointed out, in response to a factually incorrect claim that the judicial process is independent of political control, that Parliament has the authority to set maximum and minimum sentences.
Albie now rightly and fairly points out that Sunak wasn't even an MP when some of these decisions took place. I agree entirely. And that just re-emphasises my disgust at that poster.
-
I guess any Labour supporting poster who hasn't condemned it needs a look at their standards eh Billy?
-
I agree Ldr.
-
This is not gospel ................. yet
''Yvette Cooper was ‘not told’ about Labour’s Sunak attack ad in advance''
''It is understood that Cooper and most of the shadow cabinet were caught unawares when it was released on Thursday on social media, causing a storm of controversy and drawing claims that it carried racist undertones''
''Asked on Saturday whether Starmer had approved the graphic or knew about it in advance, a Labour source said the leader had not been aware of it and stressed Starmer would not usually be expected to sign off individual campaign materials''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance
-
...... just cos the usual anti-labour, anti-starmer, anti-starmer/labour hysterical chorus line jump up and down and froth at the mouth ..... at the drop of a hat, it doesn't mean that labour or left supporters need to jump in and condemn whatever the subject matter may be.
-
There is an assumption (and a famous saying by Peter Mandleson) that all left wing voters are Labour voters. They are not. And if the current leadership of the Labour Party continue to pander to the Daily Mail readership rather than left-leaning progressives, there will be a lot less of them.
-
I agree Ldr.
The logical assumption has to be if they don't then they must condone it, which says a lot about who they are
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-ads-rishi-sunak-rape-b2316729.html
And on and on and on..................
-
Syd,
The idea that this twitter campaign was undertaken without approval is barking mad.
Firstly, the original has not been withdrawn, despite the uproar and revulsion.
Secondly, the offensive tweet was the opening salvo in a series, and there have been 2 further tweets since the first which created the furore.
Thirdly, the tweet was re-used by the Labour Press, Labour Whips and members of the shadow cabinet like Jess Phillips and Reed.
Fourthly, Labour Head of Strategy Deborah Mattinson pushed out the tweet on her account.
It is part of a deliberate campaign of fighting dirty going into the local elections.
Labour cannot find enough people to stand for the party, due to the dislike of Keith and loss of local autonomy in choosing reps.
Punching down via social media is the tactic they have chosen to compensate.
Keith has always made great play by insisting he takes full responsabilty for actions by his organisation under his watch.
Here he is bigging up that commitment;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1644777704464560129
A pledge is a pledge....do you think he means it?
-
Syd,
The idea that this twitter campaign was undertaken without approval is barking mad.
Firstly, the original has not been withdrawn, despite the uproar and revulsion.
Secondly, the offensive tweet was the opening salvo in a series, and there have been 2 further tweets since the first which created the furore.
Thirdly, the tweet was re-used by the Labour Press, Labour Whips and members of the shadow cabinet like Jess Phillips and Reed.
Fourthly, Labour Head of Strategy Deborah Mattinson pushed out the tweet on her account.
It is part of a deliberate campaign of fighting dirty going into the local elections.
Labour cannot find enough people to stand for the party, due to the dislike of Keith and loss of local autonomy in choosing reps.
Punching down via social media is the tactic they have chosen to compensate.
Keith has always made great play by insisting he takes full responsabilty for actions by his organisation under his watch.
Here he is bigging up that commitment;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1644777704464560129
A pledge is a pledge....do you think he means it?
Another pledge ......... hmmm ??
-
I get the impression that the Labour hierarchy have taken a leaf from the Tory party's playbook and want to fight fire with fire, its like they've seen the Tories get away with it for so long that they may as well take this low road.
Just remember not everyone who voted Tory agreed with the way the Tories conducted their business, this needs to be a lesson for Starmer, if they have taken the decision to go down the gutter this early what can we expect as things start to tighten up and the overall poll lead starts to close ?
Ive said it before and ill say it again, there are some proper scum bags involved in politics on all sides. The fact that Labour have allowed this gutter PR to continue defines certain individuals.
IF Starmer really wants to fight dirty then he's just stepped into dangerous territory for him, you don't take proper scum bags on at their own game and come out smelling of roses.
Someone ought to whisper this into Starmer's shell like.
-
Now I'm not a fan of Keir Starmer for some of the political decisions, volte faces and general ducking and diving he's employed to get to where he is today.
However those actions were political to further his own (if not mine) political ambitions and views.
In a way I admired him as a political operator. Being a little ruthless and hard-nosed is not a bad thing in a leader or prospective PM. Nice guys don't make good leaders generally.
But beyond that I always considered Starmer to be a professional and generally decent man and human being.
Allowing this campaign sheds him in a totally different light I'm afraid
If anything I'm saddened that our political climate has been reduced to this kind of thing from all sides. Gutter politics.
-
...... just cos the usual anti-labour, anti-starmer, anti-starmer/labour hysterical chorus line jump up and down and froth at the mouth ..... at the drop of a hat, it doesn't mean that labour or left supporters need to jump in and condemn whatever the subject matter may be.
Do you agree with it?
I don't really care, it's politics, but I struggle to see what labour gain from this at all, it would cost them more.
There's enough to criticise the conservatives for to not require this.
-
If we get back on topic, I see good in most people till I'm proved wrong, that's why I would back Starmer in this instance on that tweet, my reading of him says he has boundaries where he won't go. My guess is it will be quietly taken down.
Has the tweet been taken down yet Syd.
-
Syd,
The idea that this twitter campaign was undertaken without approval is barking mad.
Firstly, the original has not been withdrawn, despite the uproar and revulsion.
Secondly, the offensive tweet was the opening salvo in a series, and there have been 2 further tweets since the first which created the furore.
Thirdly, the tweet was re-used by the Labour Press, Labour Whips and members of the shadow cabinet like Jess Phillips and Reed.
Fourthly, Labour Head of Strategy Deborah Mattinson pushed out the tweet on her account.
It is part of a deliberate campaign of fighting dirty going into the local elections.
Labour cannot find enough people to stand for the party, due to the dislike of Keith and loss of local autonomy in choosing reps.
Punching down via social media is the tactic they have chosen to compensate.
Keith has always made great play by insisting he takes full responsabilty for actions by his organisation under his watch.
Here he is bigging up that commitment;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1644777704464560129
A pledge is a pledge....do you think he means it?
Not sure I or anyone should be taking advice from yourself on what who knows what until we do know Albie.
-
I see Starmer has come out saying that he makes no apologies for the advert.
Expect an attack on his time as DPP from the Tories
-
I get the impression that the Labour hierarchy have taken a leaf from the Tory party's playbook and want to fight fire with fire, its like they've seen the Tories get away with it for so long that they may as well take this low road.
Just remember not everyone who voted Tory agreed with the way the Tories conducted their business, this needs to be a lesson for Starmer, if they have taken the decision to go down the gutter this early what can we expect as things start to tighten up and the overall poll lead starts to close ?
Ive said it before and ill say it again, there are some proper scum bags involved in politics on all sides. The fact that Labour have allowed this gutter PR to continue defines certain individuals.
IF Starmer really wants to fight dirty then he's just stepped into dangerous territory for him, you don't take proper scum bags on at their own game and come out smelling of roses.
Someone ought to whisper this into Starmer's shell like.
You are correct Don. The Labour hierarcy noted that playing dirty increases the Tory vote among a certain type of voter. And didn't stop others, who proffessed to dislike it, voting for them either.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
Would you like me to do an auto word count on how many time you've referred to where I live rather than what I've written tyke?
-
It seems the Labour party have officially entered into ‘gutter politics’, given Starmer’s condonement of the tweet.
The ‘they’re all the same’ mantra that has been unequivocally dismissed by so many, I’m afraid, will become more and more obvious as Labour take control of our country.
It won’t get any better.
I am really, really surprised at Starmer’s stance on this. As I said earlier in the thread, he had an opportunity to condemn the tweet whilst secretly chuckling to himself because it remains ‘out there’.
I repeat: gutter politics for a country in the gutter.
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65228859
er.................
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
Would you like me to do an auto word count on how many time you've referred to where I live rather than what I've written tyke?
I think once you board an aircraft with Qantas branding and start a new life on the other side of the world you forfeit a good number of credible UK political opinion privileges .
I wouldn't go as far as to say non bowlers off the green but it's none the less highly irregular to read your opinions on how we should vote , what we should vote for from someone who decided life would be better for them personally in another country .
If it was myself I wouldn't look back other than keep up to speed with how my football team were doing .
Why would I care about the UK political scene ?
I think I should probably care more about the political scene in my adopted country rather than the one I'd left behind .
-
I guess if everyone had shown revulsion and stopped voting for tories each time this sort of thing emanated from their leaders and ministers we wouldn't be discussing it because it wouldn't be happening.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
Would you like me to do an auto word count on how many time you've referred to where I live rather than what I've written tyke?
I think once you board an aircraft with Qantas branding and start a new life on the other side of the world you forfeit a good number of credible UK political opinion privileges .
I wouldn't go as far as to say non bowlers off the green but it's none the less highly irregular to read your opinions on how we should vote , what we should vote for from someone who decided life would be better for them personally in another country .
If it was myself I wouldn't look back other than keep up to speed with how my football team were doing .
Why would I care about the UK political scene ?
I think I should probably care more about the political scene in my adopted country rather than the one I'd left behind .
this doesn't excuse you for your abuse tyke, maybe you don't understand racism.
-
I guess if everyone had shown revulsion and stopped voting for tories each time this sort of thing emanated from their leaders and ministers we wouldn't be discussing it because it wouldn't be happening.
It won’t stop Labour winning the next election either.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
Would you like me to do an auto word count on how many time you've referred to where I live rather than what I've written tyke?
I think once you board an aircraft with Qantas branding and start a new life on the other side of the world you forfeit a good number of credible UK political opinion privileges .
I wouldn't go as far as to say non bowlers off the green but it's none the less highly irregular to read your opinions on how we should vote , what we should vote for from someone who decided life would be better for them personally in another country .
If it was myself I wouldn't look back other than keep up to speed with how my football team were doing .
Why would I care about the UK political scene ?
I think I should probably care more about the political scene in my adopted country rather than the one I'd left behind .
this doesn't excuse you for your abuse tyke, maybe you don't understand racism.
You clearly don’t.
-
I guess if everyone had shown revulsion and stopped voting for tories each time this sort of thing emanated from their leaders and ministers we wouldn't be discussing it because it wouldn't be happening.
It won’t stop Labour winning the next election either.
Maybe you should have shouted louder as the tories were doing it.
-
Would labour do this if the tories hadn't turned it into an art form, their leaders have not only attacked labour but have also abused working people and written a book about their supposed failings.
There has just been an election here in nsw where the leaders complimented each other and showed respect for a clean campaign. Not a normal election at all.
Your acceptance of two wrongs making a right are extraordinary Syd .
If the tweet that came out from the Labour hierarchy was aimed at Brexit Red Wall voters such as myself in an attempt to gather support then I'm afraid it's spectacularly backfired .
Yet more evidence in my opinion of the Labour Party and it's ridiculous reliance on Focus Groups to pursue political strategy .
As out of touch as they were under Blair with Mandelson pulling the strings .
Oh wait a minute ........ Did I say Mandelson ?
Now there's a coincidence .
Getting a lecture on standards from someone that hands out personal abuse is a bit rich tyke and of course you are incorrect to boot as usual.
The only person who makes political debate personal on this board is yourself Syd which is returned in kind .
Your political tribalism is extraordinary , it's extraordinary because you don't actually back your own horse .
Your a Liberal , all day long .
It's actually difficult to find a scintilla of credibility in such circumstances .
Would you like me to do an auto word count on how many time you've referred to where I live rather than what I've written tyke?
I think once you board an aircraft with Qantas branding and start a new life on the other side of the world you forfeit a good number of credible UK political opinion privileges .
I wouldn't go as far as to say non bowlers off the green but it's none the less highly irregular to read your opinions on how we should vote , what we should vote for from someone who decided life would be better for them personally in another country .
If it was myself I wouldn't look back other than keep up to speed with how my football team were doing .
Why would I care about the UK political scene ?
I think I should probably care more about the political scene in my adopted country rather than the one I'd left behind .
this doesn't excuse you for your abuse tyke, maybe you don't understand racism.
You clearly don’t.
So would this be allowed to happen if I was different colour to what you think I am?
-
Would what be allowed?
-
Would what be allowed?
read my replies to tyke
-
I have. You’ve accused him of racially abusing you. That doesn’t mean he has.
-
And how would you know?
-
Racial abuse is a very serious issue.
I have read nothing to suggest that you have been racially abused.
-
Racial abuse is a very serious issue.
I have read nothing to suggest that you have been racially abused.
So telling someone their voice doesn't count v=because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?
-
Sydney take a breather your heads gone
-
Sydney take a breather your heads gone
nc unless you have something to contribute ...............
-
Just trying to help
-
Just trying to help
you have the wrong end of the telescope
-
Lovely talking to you as always Syd
-
Lovely talking to you as always Syd
you not talking though are you, you must think you're being smart I guess
-
Racial abuse is a very serious issue.
I have read nothing to suggest that you have been racially abused.
So telling someone their voice doesn't count v=because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?
This is not about ‘someone’. It really is quite ugly of you to say you are just another victim of racial abuse when there are so many true victims of actual racism.
Shame on you for trivialising it.
-
Racial abuse is a very serious issue.
I have read nothing to suggest that you have been racially abused.
So telling someone their voice doesn't count v=because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?
This is not about ‘someone’. It really is quite ugly of you to say you are just another victim of racial abuse when there are so many true victims of actual racism.
Shame on you for trivialising it.
You didn't answer my question belton
-
In accusing Tyke of being racist you are cheapening the term. I thought you’d know better, hence why I was telling you to stop being irrational and take a breather for the sake of your own mental well-being.
-
I don’t understand your question.
-
In accusing Tyke of being racist you are cheapening the term. I thought you’d know better, hence why I was telling you to stop being irrational and take a breather for the sake of your own mental well-being.
can you answer the question nc?
-
I don’t understand your question.
''So telling someone their voice doesn't count because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?''
this can't be that difficult belton
-
It's telling that this topic is now on four pages.
When Braverman made a far more disgusting and factually wrong statement last week (that paedophile gangs are "almost all British-Pakistani", and that they weren't prosecuted because Labour councils are too woke) it didn't cause an eyelid to flutter.
I'm very, very unhappy about Labour going down this road and I hope the robust discussion going on in the party will mean we don't do this in future. But the Tories have been burning rubber on this road for years, to the point that it is normalised and not even commented on by their supporters.
-
What has your race got to do with living in Australia?
-
What has your race got to do with living in Australia?
the thing is nc telling anyone their voice doesn't count because of where they live .............. you tell me what it is, in your own words.
-
I don’t understand your question.
''So telling someone their voice doesn't count because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?''
this can't be that difficult belton
Thanks for making it a little clearer.
1. Not necessarily
2. Both - depending on the circumstances
3. I think racial abuse towards an individual must also be personal abuse.
-
I don’t understand your question.
''So telling someone their voice doesn't count because of where they live or have lived is not racial abuse? does it depend on their colour or race? or is it just plain old personal abuse?''
this can't be that difficult belton
Thanks for making it a little clearer.
1. Not necessarily
2. Both - depending on the circumstances
3. I think racial abuse towards an individual must also be personal abuse.
So you've read on here many times, if you haven't you're not paying attention, how would you describe it?
-
What has your race got to do with living in Australia?
the thing is nc telling anyone their voice doesn't count because of where they live .............. you tell me what it is, in your own words.
Why does it have to be anything? It’s definitely not racist as you are likely both of the same ethnicity and both British.
Have you got any friends over there of aboriginal heritage?
Maybe you could go ask them about the racism that their ancestors suffered. Once they’re done you can tell them how you (likely a white British man) are a victim of racism from another white British man during a disagreement on an Internet forum.
-
What has your race got to do with living in Australia?
the thing is nc telling anyone their voice doesn't count because of where they live .............. you tell me what it is, in your own words.
Why does it have to be anything? It’s definitely not racist as you are likely both of the same ethnicity and both British.
Have you got any friends over there of aboriginal heritage?
Maybe you could go ask them about the racism that their ancestors suffered. Once they’re done you can tell them how you (likely a white British man) are a victim of racism from another white British man during a disagreement on an Internet forum.
and if you are wrong?
that's the problem on the forum you don't know to whom you are speaking, in most cases I should think and it's why assumptions should be left off the keyboard until you know.
-
What has your race got to do with living in Australia?
the thing is nc telling anyone their voice doesn't count because of where they live .............. you tell me what it is, in your own words.
Why does it have to be anything? It’s definitely not racist as you are likely both of the same ethnicity and both British.
Have you got any friends over there of aboriginal heritage?
Maybe you could go ask them about the racism that their ancestors suffered. Once they’re done you can tell them how you (likely a white British man) are a victim of racism from another white British man during a disagreement on an Internet forum.
and if you are wrong?
Is he wrong though?
-
I don’t, nor should I have a say in what happens in Australia, or any other country.
Granted, your position is slightly different, but if someone believes your views don’t, or shouldn’t hold as much weight (if any) because you live (or imply you live) in another country, that IS NOT racial abuse.
-
I don’t, nor should I have a say in what happens in Australia, or any other country.
Granted, your position is slightly different, but if someone believes your views don’t, or shouldn’t hold as much weight (if any) because you live (or imply you live) in another country, that IS NOT racial abuse.
does the highlighted bit depend on when I left, whether I went by a third country, whether I started in another country before coming to the uk? or stupidly whether I have aboriginal friends"
-
Highlighted bit means I wasn’t born in Australia. so your situation is slightly different..
-
Highlighted bit means I wasn’t born in Australia. so your situation is slightly different..
And again how do you know?
-
How do I know that my situation is different to yours?
You have made it clear that you live in Australia, and once lived in Britain. That may or may not be the case now.
Regardless, whatever bombshell you appear to waiting to drop, please stop playing games with racism.
-
I don't know what your situation is and I wouldn't dream of questioning your right to speak, nor tykes or anyone else for that matter, the only time it comes up is when I hold up the mirror to someone or challenge their views.
To do so is abuse at the very least, and there we get back to the topic, why should I take lessons from anyone about standards that hands abuse out?
-
That’s all very noble Sydney.
Now, if you could work on your trivialisation of racism…
-
That’s all very noble Sydney.
Now, if you could work on your trivialisation of racism…
you explain why you treat people differently because where they may come from or live, I never treat racism trivially.
-
To equate your situation as an expat (correct me if I’m wrong, rather than continuing this leading question game you like to play) to an oppressed people who truly suffer because of where they are from is disgraceful.
-
Having slept on it yes I did push it too far and will just call it as it is 'personal abuse'
-
There's now a new rule on this forum, for every post you make in here you have to make a corresponding one in the main forum(the one where you discuss all things about the football team, for the ones not in the know)
That will sort out your issue and stop you receiving "personal abuse/racist abuse"
And give us all a break.
Or is this personal abuse also?
-
There's now a new rule on this forum, for every post you make in here you have to make a corresponding one in the main forum(the one where you discuss all things about the football team, for the ones not in the know)
That will sort out your issue and stop you receiving "personal abuse/racist abuse"
And give us all a break.
Or is this personal abuse also?
Maybe if you stopped the personal abuse you wouldn't have a lot to say at all, from your first post to explaining every everything you don't know about activists to what I know about business.
-
And by the way the main board takes most of the enjoyment out of following the Rovers with the mob attacking some of our best players, they shouldn't be going at any of the players, maybe you could put your own football brain to the conundrum of how they could possibly play at their best with the shit that gets posted about them.
-
So that must be exactly why you flood this board.
If you can't take it sunshine then don't hand it out.
-
So that must be exactly why you flood this board.
If you can't take it sunshine then don't hand it out.
And I was thinking the same about yourself
-
And by the way the main board takes most of the enjoyment out of following the Rovers with the mob attacking some of our best players, they shouldn't be going at any of the players, maybe you could put your own football brain to the conundrum of how they could possibly play at their best with the shit that gets posted about them.
IF you cared to peruse the main board you would find that its the coach that's getting all the abuse just now, but then i suppose you have to be a supporter to know that.
-
As always you are incorrect, I do follow the main board and most of the players including the youngster get it.
-
As always you are incorrect, I do follow the main board and most of the players including the youngster get it.
Sounds to me like you ve been on the sauce again, what's the name of our club again?
-
As always you are incorrect, I do follow the main board and most of the players including the youngster get it.
Sounds to me like you ve been on the sauce again, what's the name of our club again?
There you go, get it wrong, no answer, true to form abuse.
-
Will you both stop been so racist
-
Will you both stop been so racist
At least I own my mistakes and don't apologise by pm aye Ldr?
-
Will you both stop been so racist
If you could point out who's being racist?
-
Will you both stop been so racist
If you could point out who's being racist?
Think you’ve missed the joke dd, have a read back through the thread
-
Syd if you expended half the energy you have wasted annoying us on this forum, in championing thr Rights of the Indigenous people of your own country the world would be a better place…but don’t do it on here!
-
And by the way the main board takes most of the enjoyment out of following the Rovers with the mob attacking some of our best players, they shouldn't be going at any of the players, maybe you could put your own football brain to the conundrum of how they could possibly play at their best with the shit that gets posted about them.
IF you cared to peruse the main board you would find that its the coach that's getting all the abuse just now, but then i suppose you have to be a supporter to know that.
Less than 1% of his posts are about the football.
-
He was the Black haired very Bobby Progamme seller who used to climb to the back of the South Stand and shout out rumours he had heard, the day he announced he was forsaking Gods country for OZ was a relief to my ears!
-
When I read some posts I think 'why would they write that' now unfortunately I see 'that' in my own posts, I'll take a break.
-
When I read some posts I think 'why would they write that' now unfortunately I see 'that' in my own posts, I'll take a break.
Sometimes you need a break, Sydney.
Credit to you for acknowledging it.
It did me the world of good.
-
It's telling that this topic is now on four pages.
When Braverman made a far more disgusting and factually wrong statement last week (that paedophile gangs are "almost all British-Pakistani", and that they weren't prosecuted because Labour councils are too woke) it didn't cause an eyelid to flutter.
I'm very, very unhappy about Labour going down this road and I hope the robust discussion going on in the party will mean we don't do this in future. But the Tories have been burning rubber on this road for years, to the point that it is normalised and not even commented on by their supporters.
It's also telling on how many of those posts have moved on from serious discussion as to what is/should be acceptable politically, to deflecton and trivilisaton of racisim.
It was also telling that I noticed yesterday that Tory peer & former chair of the party, Sayeeda Warsi, went on national media to say that Braverman was racist and using racist language to stir up hated in the country, and it is has been totally ignored.
It's as though people were not really that interested in the issue but just looking at it to score cheap point's and 'own' other posters here:
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1645821750666559488
-
Longer posts often meander on to other topics, Wilts. What makes this one so telling?
And don’t you think trivialising racism is serious?
-
It's telling that this topic is now on four pages.
When Braverman made a far more disgusting and factually wrong statement last week (that paedophile gangs are "almost all British-Pakistani", and that they weren't prosecuted because Labour councils are too woke) it didn't cause an eyelid to flutter.
I'm very, very unhappy about Labour going down this road and I hope the robust discussion going on in the party will mean we don't do this in future. But the Tories have been burning rubber on this road for years, to the point that it is normalised and not even commented on by their supporters.
It's also telling on how many of those posts have moved on from serious discussion as to what is/should be acceptable politically, to deflecton and trivilisaton of racisim.
It was also telling that I noticed yesterday that Tory peer & former chair of the party, Sayeeda Warsi, went on national media to say that Braverman was racist and using racist language to stir up hated in the country, and it is has been totally ignored.
It's as though people were not really that interested in the issue but just looking at it to score cheap point's and 'own' other posters here:
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1645821750666559488
So what do we know now about this issue.
We know Labour have descended into the gutter and have doubled down on it to boot.
We already knew that the Tory party would take this as a reason to continue their own campaigns as they have always done.
We know that Starmer has had an injection of boll**K growth hormone but it has gone wrong and he is firing in all directions but unfortunately shooting his own side down, this will come back to haunt him at the GE because for all the different traits that voters in this country portray what we all have in common is being decent and wanting to see fair play upheld in life in general. What Starmer has done is in effect sold his soul to the devil to ensure victory at the next election, whatever he and the party big wigs think your typical Labour voter will mark this and remember.
In effect its the same for the Tories, all the lies, deceit and plain corruption that has been demonstrated these last 13 years will not stand them in good stead come election time, people will remember and act accordingly.
When you have the two main parties fighting to see who can sink deeper in the gutter then you really do have a broken society with all the negative spin offs that will ensure.
Said it before and i will continue to say it, politics has always been a very dirty and grubby business with proper animals at both ends of the political spectrum, and the parties are really "all the same"
The electors will not countenance this type of scum bag behaviour.
What's the betting the next election will be much closer than most think, it would not surprise me if NOC ruled the day from an extremely peed off electorate not prepared to give any of these wastrels unfettered power.
-
I think turnout will be lower in the next GE, and that will play a part in some seats.
If you disapprove of both main parties, then it is vote for a smaller party with principles like the Greens, or sit at home and withdraw support.
Long way to go still though, remember the mid term standing of Ed Miliband, then the GE result.
-
Point of fact.
Labour were never more that 10% ahead of the Tories on average under Milliband. 18 months out from the Election in 2015 (which is about where we are now) the lead was about 5%.
By contrast, Labour is currently about 18% ahead and has been as much as 30% ahead.
Very different times to ten years ago. Not to say it can't change, but it'll require a shift that has rarely been seen before.
-
Still a long way to go and a lot of water to pass under the bridge before we know but if Starmer is starting now this early retreat into the sewer then i think its a very wrong move for Labour and him personally for two reasons.
1, Up to know Starmer has been the sober and sane face of politics for many people, safe with a message that you know what you get from me, i'm Mr Uncontroversial, steady and reliable. This was his message for all his leadership tenure and its now been blown open to be this street fighting, i'll take you on at your own game and show you what gutter politics is really about i want to win that much.
This will confuse many people, they will look at him now, compare him to what they have had for a couple of years and wonder, if this is the direction of travel what can i expect next?, is he going to come up with some really radical policies, am i going to be taxed to the hilt, is he going to expand the state beyond French proportions with all the tax implications. He has now made himself be and look like a loose cannon, people will be comparing him with the worst excess of the Tories, he will be seen to be as roguish as the worst of Johnson, and any other extremist. Many people had him down as above this crap and someone who could be looked on as safe, this is not safe.
2, The voting public will be rightly confused by all this, by the time the start of the GE run in starts we could be even further down the road with tit for tat responses to even more extreme media. there will be the very real possibility of a great many voters staying away and not voting for these "all the same" parties. This would be very bad news for a Labour GE because if the vote is down then we all know who's vote will always turn out in these situations and Starmer may just have given the election away with a large proportion staying away.
The next couple of weeks of internal polling will be interesting, we should be able to see the road to go down after this.
Really high stakes for Starmer and Labour this, i wonder who has lobbied this type of action?
-
Latest poll says Cruella would keep her seat, Truss to keep hers, what is wrong with these people?
Johnson to lose his