To be honest I don’t how bad it is.
It’s certainly laxed at best considering what the fucking idiots have been up to.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Labour Party
- Thread starter Ban-jani
- Start date
To be honest I don’t how bad it is.
It’s certainly laxed at best considering what the fucking idiots have been up to.
Chris Smithson
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 208
Imagine if they’d wished the Muslim community Happy Eid & illustrated it with a pork chop & a bottle of champagne. Or inviting them to a Ramadan lunch. That’s how much of an issue it is.
Nowhere near the same
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Banned Tosspot
Well-Known Member
Is this comedian paying you to post these?
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Is this comedian paying you to post these?
I dont think he has watched it and doesnt understand it is a piss take out of those that want to label everything as right wing lol
Banned Tosspot
Well-Known Member
He is THAT stupid.I dont think he has watched it and doesnt understand it is a piss take out of those that want to label everything as right wing lol
Thank god he doesn't go out and talk shit in the real world.
Well well well...
Britain’s equalities watchdog is expected to launch a full investigation into Labour after its failure to stamp out antisemitism in the party
Ancient Citizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 15,712
Seems to be, they're shoved up that quickly that this one, is actually a contradiction of what I thinkIs this comedian paying you to post these?
was expected to be a right wing slating exercise, when its actually one slating the left.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,616
Imagine if people didn’t get offended by ridiculous things such as someone wishing you well and forgetting that you don’t eat bread on a particular day.Imagine if they’d wished the Muslim community Happy Eid & illustrated it with a pork chop & a bottle of champagne. Or inviting them to a Ramadan lunch. That’s how much of an issue it is.
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
May could go down as the worst Tory leader of all time.
She's walked that already mate. Done, dusted, she is it.
She's walked that already mate. Done, dusted, she is it.
I think back to that speech on the day she was sworn in.
What has happened is the exact opposite.
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
Yes. In any normal circumstances, she'd have lost her job IMMEDIATELY after the last GE fiasco. That on its own was 10x worse than needed for any normal PM to be ousted.I think back to that speech on the day she was sworn in.
What has happened is the exact opposite.
In defence of May. She was dealt an impossible hand, albeit she played it very badly. But, unlike Anthony Eden, she did not embark on a disastrous war. Unlike Chamberlain, she did not play a major role in the most immoral British act of modern times throwing an ally to the tender mercies or Hitler. So she is not the worst tory leader of modern times.
Now consider Blair and the invasion of Iraq.
Now consider Blair and the invasion of Iraq.
In defence of May. She was dealt an impossible hand, albeit she played it very badly. But, unlike Anthony Eden, she did not embark on a disastrous war. Unlike Chamberlain, she did not play a major role in the most immoral British act of modern times throwing an ally to the tender mercies or Hitler. So she is not the worst tory leader of modern times.
Now consider Blair and the invasion of Iraq.
Blair was a fantastic PM that oversaw years of prosperity.
Iraq was a disaster in hindsight but the removal of dangerous and murderous dictators isn’t the act of a poor leader.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
It wasn't that people were offended but the sheer stupidity of it, when they should be building bridges. It was so stupid that one might have come to the conclusion that they were just trolling.Imagine if people didn’t get offended by ridiculous things such as someone wishing you well and forgetting that you don’t eat bread on a particular day.
Fair enough, except that Blair said before the invasion that regime change was not his objective. The justificiation of removing a dictator was post hoc rewriting of history.. You are wrong to suggest that removal of a dictator is somehow ok. History of uk involvement in the ME showsthat to be nonsense. See Iraq post WW1 and 1956 invasion of Egypt eg. Blair by all accounts was ignorant of UKs previous involvement in Iraq.Blair was a fantastic PM that oversaw years of prosperity.
Iraq was a disaster in hindsight but the removal of dangerous and murderous dictators isn’t the act of a poor leader.
If you think the prosperity of the Blair years was his doing, you should study the economic history of the times more closely and consider Browns role and the role of Ken Clark before that.
I can't consider as a great PM a man who refused to talk to his chancellor for several years.
Politically succesful, yes but not the same as great.
PS. Iraq was not a failure "in hindsight". A million ppl marched against it in advance foreseeing the impending disaster.
Last edited:
IMO - There can be no greater wrong than deliberately lying and misleading to take your country into war and thereby causing the deaths of your own soldiers and so many others for purely self-serving reasons
For that he will always be a ****
For that he will always be a ****
Fair enough, except that Blair said before the invasion that regime change was not his objective. The justificiation of removing a dictator was post hoc rewriting of history.. You are wrong to suggest that removal of a dictator is somehow ok. History of uk involvement in the ME showsthat to be nonsense. See Iraq post WW1 and 1956 invasion of Egypt eg. Blair by all accounts was ignorant of UKs previous involvement in Iraq.
If you think the prosperity of the Blair years was his doing, you should study the economic history of the times more closely and consider Browns role and the role of Ken Clark before that.
I can't consider as a great PM a man who refused to talk to his chancellor for several years.
Politically succesful, yes but not the same as great.
PS. Iraq was not a failure "in hindsight". A million ppl marched against it in advance foreseeing the impending disaster.
That’s just simply untrue.
The Iraq Liberation Act was passed through US Congress in the late 90’s which had regime change at the heart of it.
The removal of a murderous dictator is always ok - you’re often judged on what follows though which can sometimes be out of your control.
I have studied the economic history of the times thank you very much and Blair and Brown did talk, they fell out but they did talk.
The economic history was that we had a boom and the growth in living standards was the fastest in history.
What is untrue?That’s just simply untrue.
The Iraq Liberation Act was passed through US Congress in the late 90’s which had regime change at the heart of it.
The removal of a murderous dictator is always ok - you’re often judged on what follows though which can sometimes be out of your control.
I have studied the economic history of the times thank you very much and Blair and Brown did talk, they fell out but they did talk.
The economic history was that we had a boom and the growth in living standards was the fastest in history.
The Iraq Liberation Act had no force in UK. Blair was adament that UK aims were not the same as US aims, even tho' we were acting together.
Edit : See below for what Blair told parliament.. He repeated this statement on TV.
In private letters to Bush, he supported regime change and the difference between his public and private statements was a major point in the Chilcot enquiry and the parliamentary debate on the report.
Last edited: