Elizabeth wrote:Cheer up Ringo , this does have a funny side.

You lost your way when you fell into the trap of trying too hard to convince the remoaners I wasn't you.

Still very weird.

Drink responsibly, think on.

ClaretAndJew wrote:Any reason you're trying to use "ladies" as a derogatory term, Ringo?

It's because he hates women.

Don't know if this has already been posted but a non-aggression pact between the Lib Dems and Conservative rebels is being mooted.

Rebel Tories expelled from the party are in talks with the Liberal Democrats about a non-aggression pact.

The former Lib Dem leader Tim Farron is helping to broker a deal between Rory Stewart, an expelled Conservative and neighbouring Cumbrian MP, and the new leader, Jo Swinson, insiders say.

Under the proposal, Stewart would stand as an independent MP at the next general election but agree to accept a soft Lib Dem whip in exchange for the party not fielding a candidate against him. It is understood that the Green Party would also stand aside in Stewart’s Penrith seat.

At least three other expelled Tory rebels, including the former universities minister Sam Gyimah, former business minister Margot James and former attorney-general Dominic Grieve, have had similar…

The rest of the article you have to log in to read,but this gives an idea of some type of informal remain alliance if you will.

Boris caused this himself by kicking out all the one-nation Tories,the man's a bleeding idiot.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Boom! You got 'em, Detective.

Clearly you don't have the capacity to understand the context in which that sentence was made. I will let you review the whole of my comment again to see if you understand that simple sentence.

Times article:
Don’t blame Boris Johnson for the Tory meltdown

Matthew Parris

The prime minister’s turbulent leadership is a symptom, not the cause, of a disease that infected my party years ago

The Conservative Party is dying. What happened this week cannot be erased. A substantial and senior group of Conservative members of parliament joined forces with a hard-left Labour Party and almost all the other opposition parties to wrest control from their own leadership: a government they believe is intent on wrecking their country.

This is incendiary and necessary. Things have been said that cannot be unsaid, friendships broken that cannot be healed, loyalties ruptured beyond reconstruction; and all this in plain sight of an electorate that never loved the Conservative Party but trusted its competence and solidity. A once-respectful audience is in shock. They say that trust arrives on foot but leaves on horseback; the sound of hoofs fills the air. This party’s most precious asset is shattered.

Who killed the Conservative Party? Boris Johnson? Your columnist, a long-standing critic, feels the temptation to join the claque of his political and media supporters who this week discovered his uselessness as suddenly as last week they discovered his powers of decisive leadership. They frown at his feeble and tetchy dispatch box performances. They forget that Mr Johnson has never made an effective parliamentary speech in his life. So blame comes easy.

And it’s true that Johnson is a bag of wind and a sordid opportunist: he always was, but there will always be such individuals — Nigel Farage is another — hovering in predatory fashion around the fringes of trouble in politics. They do not, however, make the trouble; they feed on it. It would be wrong to blame Johnson for the Tory misfortune. His plumage may be exotic but this bird is a scavenger.

No, the blame should rest on the shoulders of the Conservative Party, the whole Conservative Party and only the Conservative Party. They alone brought this Brexit trouble upon us. Our age rightly disapproves of the careless use of mental disorder as a metaphor for wrongheadedness but I am serious. Something mad has taken root in our party, and our internal defences — our immune system — seem to have been too feeble to identify this new jihadism, stand up to it and repel it.

Almost in tears, a friend said to me this week: “All those years we argued about withdrawing the whip and throwing these madcaps out of the party and draining the poison but we murmured ‘broad church’ and ‘tolerance’ and ‘due process’. We were wrong.”

Still, there are brave souls like the 21 Tory MPs who joined Tuesday’s move to take control of government business but they are just representatives of a larger, as yet silent group on the government benches who preferred — keep preferring — to stay their hand and fight another day, always another day.

Why are these 21 called rebels? Stalwarts (some of them) of Thatcherite policy, centrists, most of them, towers of strength in the Conservative Party as it used to be before it was taken over. Rebels? That anyone could dream of calling them rebels shows just how far the old party has been pushed towards the extremes.

The real rebellion has been by what was at first a minority in the parliamentary party: the hardline, Brexit-at-all-costs insurgency that is the European Research Group of Tory MPs.

This is where the madness started. This is where the project to relocate the party on the populist right began. This is what Theresa May proved cannot be tamed by a blank stare, and Boris Johnson is now proving cannot be managed by strut and bluster. It is these elements that have brought my party to the edge.

This week has also shown something else: that, even though we are on the precipice, it is still possible for parliament and the country to draw back from a no-deal Brexit.

But for the Conservative Party? I fear it is too late for retreat. There remain too few of what was once the party’s core to pull the whole Tory enterprise back to sanity, though it is true that the size of the rebellion on Tuesday understates the potential resistance.

As Johnson flails and national derision mounts, numbers may grow: he has only fairweather friends in politics. Even his brother Jo, a thoughtful moderate, found he could not support him any more and quit the government and parliament. More backbenchers may find their voice and even some of Johnson’s cabinet colleagues may rediscover their spines. But so many of the sensible people are not standing for election again, while others may be deselected, and those centrists who do make it back to dry land after the coming election will have to ask themselves whether the brand “Tory” even remains an asset in a newly fragmented politics. Some, such as the former international development secretary Rory Stewart, have already made that decision.

I am writing this in northern Pakistan, a distant place from which to observe these remarkable days in our politics. From a country where questions of constitutional propriety remain hotly disputed, it’s dismaying to see the certainties we British took for granted being revisited so easily by opportunist politicians.

How thin is that civilised veneer, even in a country like ours that prides itself on being governed by conventions and precedent to the extent that we do not need a written constitution!

I have been horrified to hear from Conservative politicians a jokey disregard for other voices anxious about a slipping-away from constitutionality. “What a fuss about nothing!” they jeer, echoing that oh-so-public-school “bor-ing, bor-ing” ducking of the actual question that some tedious little grammar-school squit has got his knickers in a twist about.

They should remember that the rotting of politics does not always start with armed coups but with small, sneaky steps; with the normalisation of cheating and with sneers at people who are worried by it, dismissed with giggles about “alarmism”, “overreaction” and “hyperbole”.

We are closer to the edge than we may think. My own Conservative Party is lost to the pragmatism and precaution for which it was once noted. After a general election we must see where the pieces fall. A parting with former comrades is already happening. We may need to find new ones.

tiger76 wrote:Don't know if this has already been posted but a non-aggression pact between the Lib Dems and Conservative rebels is being mooted.

Rebel Tories expelled from the party are in talks with the Liberal Democrats about a non-aggression pact.

The former Lib Dem leader Tim Farron is helping to broker a deal between Rory Stewart, an expelled Conservative and neighbouring Cumbrian MP, and the new leader, Jo Swinson, insiders say.

Under the proposal, Stewart would stand as an independent MP at the next general election but agree to accept a soft Lib Dem whip in exchange for the party not fielding a candidate against him. It is understood that the Green Party would also stand aside in Stewart’s Penrith seat.

At least three other expelled Tory rebels, including the former universities minister Sam Gyimah, former business minister Margot James and former attorney-general Dominic Grieve, have had similar…

The rest of the article you have to log in to read,but this gives an idea of some type of informal remain alliance if you will.

Boris caused this himself by kicking out all the one-nation Tories,the man's a bleeding idiot.

If the leave parties form a pact, they will win a GE easily. The Brexit Party's price for this appears to be a 'No-deal' policy from the Tories.
If the remain parties form a pact, they will win easily.
If both do, it's likely the remain parties will just about win.

If I was a remainer I'd be very cautious of the Lib Dems sliding towards the expelled Tories, because that would make a Lib Dem/Labour/SNP pact (ultimately the only winning 'remain' combination) very difficult indeed. Whereas the Tory/Brexit Party pact looks fairly low resistance to me, especially now that most of the ardent remainers have been expelled. I can't, therefore, see the above working.

ClaretAndJew wrote:Any reason you're trying to use "ladies" as a derogatory term, Ringo?

I can answer this one, it's because Ringo thinks most of the posters on here could be women. Admittedly Ringo still refers to the aforementioned posters as he but that's because, in Ringo's words, it's quicker to type he than she (that one was possibly my favourite Ringo squirm to try not to admit he was wrong).

That is a well written piece from Parris.

At last the Johnson mirage has been seen for what it is and his Emperor's new clothes need darning.

There is just a sliver of a chance that sanity may return, following this electric shock treatment and the UK will remain in the economically safe Eurozone.

The pound is destroyed. Manufacturing disappearing and investment being moved away. Time for a back to the future vote.

Spijed wrote:But don't you think some of the rhetoric from some Brexiteers has increased the rise of racism towards players like Sterling?

In all honesty Spijed apart from a few (and I mean a few ) who have used it as an excuse, (not that they previously needed one) no, it is merely a reaction to a fall in the standard of living. When times are good, racism is drastically reduced. When it isn’t then immigrants and minorities become the scapegoats. Corbyn has chosen a good British historical standard in picking on Jews...that one goes back to the turn of the first century; the right prefer on the whole to aim their bile at none Western European’s of whichever are making the news.

Ironically, it is what Boris is trying to do with all his rallying calls... get the feel good back into the country that checks racism.

elwaclaret wrote:In all honesty Spijed apart from a few (and I mean a few ) who have used it as an excuse, (not that they previously needed one) no, it is merely a reaction to a fall in the standard of living. When times are good, racism is drastically reduced. When it isn’t then immigrants and minorities become the scapegoats. Corbyn has chosen a good British historical standard in picking on Jews...that one goes back to the turn of the first century; the right prefer on the whole to aim their bile at none Western European’s of whichever are making the news.

Ironically, it is what Boris is trying to do with all his rallying calls... get the feel good back into the country that checks racism.

Be useful if you can point out where Corbyn has ‘picked on Jews’. Also some examples of Johnson trying to ch ck racism would be good (to counterbalance all the well known examples where he’s fed it).

martin_p wrote:Be useful if you can point out where Corbyn has ‘picked on Jews’. Also some examples of Johnson trying to ch ck racism would be good (to counterbalance all the well known examples where he’s fed it).

As you are aware, or I’m wasting my time with further explanation; racism increases with economic slowdown. The world is in all likelihood heading into recession. The infrastructure spending announcements are a proven way of stabilising an economy during difficult times... less racism

The government needs cash changing hands like any business does. The worse people feel the more likely they are to blame minorities.

elwaclaret wrote:As you are aware, or I’m wasting my time with further explanation; racism increases with economic slowdown. The world is in all likelihood heading into recession. The infrastructure spending announcements are a proven way of stabilising an economy during difficult times... less racism

The government needs cash changing hands like any business does. The worse people feel the more likely they are to blame minorities.

A quick smear of Corbyn, and then insist that when a senior government figure calls Muslim women wearing hijabs “letterboxes” that’s neither picking on a minority nor stoking hatred? Everyone has their own bias, but you have no balance at all.

AndrewJB wrote:A quick smear of Corbyn, and then insist that when a senior government figure calls Muslim women wearing hijabs “letterboxes” that’s neither picking on a minority nor stoking hatred? Everyone has their own bias, but you have no balance at all.

You are entitled to your opinion... the letterbox thing remains front and centre being mention in parliament and tv only this week... I did not think I need mention it. I used Corbyn as an example that the Left are not blameless, either. But I make no apologies for stating that the surest way to fight racism is through the economy, not enforcing political correctness. Read into it as you wish

elwaclaret wrote:You are entitled to your opinion... the letterbox thing remains front and centre being mention in parliament and tv only this week... I did not think I need mention it. I used Corbyn as an example that the Left are not blameless, either. But I make no apologies for stating that the surest way to fight racism is through the economy, not enforcing political correctness. Read into it as you wish

Link the times Corbyn has been racist.

elwaclaret wrote:As you are aware, or I’m wasting my time with further explanation; racism increases with economic slowdown. The world is in all likelihood heading into recession. The infrastructure spending announcements are a proven way of stabilising an economy during difficult times... less racism

The government needs cash changing hands like any business does. The worse people feel the more likely they are to blame minorities.

That’s not an answer to my question.

AndrewJB wrote:Link the times Corbyn has been racist.

I really cannot be bothered title tattling with you about who said what, and when. As I said I don’t think political correctness should be seen as the be all anyway. If they spent less time on political correctness, we might start knowing what people actually think. Good or bad at least we’d know.

What amazes me is most sensible people hate popularist politics and yet so many of you jump into the game with such elan.
I want a parliament that represents the people and works for the nations welfare. Not a bunch of halfwits more suited to a playground. So nots let indulge in the nonsense, please.

elwaclaret wrote:You are entitled to your opinion... the letterbox thing remains front and centre being mention in parliament and tv only this week... I did not think I need mention it. I used Corbyn as an example that the Left are not blameless, either. But I make no apologies for stating that the surest way to fight racism is through the economy, not enforcing political correctness. Read into it as you wish

elwaclaret wrote:I really cannot be bothered title tattling with you about who said what, and when. As I said I don’t think political correctness should be seen as the be all anyway. If they spent less time on political correctness, we might start knowing what people actually think. Good or bad at least we’d know.

What amazes me is most sensible people hate popularist politics and yet so many of you jump into the game with such elan.
I want a parliament that represents the people and works for the nations welfare. Not a bunch of halfwits more suited to a playground. So nots let indulge in the nonsense, please.

It’s always a tricky phrase to pin down, but in this context “political correctness” appears to mean “not being racist”.

Greenmile wrote:It’s always a tricky phrase to pin down, but in this context “political correctness” appears to mean “not being racist”.

I mean the whole lot of it. Racism comes from self worth. Self worth is effected by many things, but economic pressure is right up there. If someone says something it does not mean the individual Sober attitude. There are any number of circumstances that could lead to a “racist comment” so it is context that is key. Without context it is a jumble of words. One thing I’m unaware of ever having been considered a racist by anyone who really knew me...but yes I’ve said many “racist” things to my mates.... when I saw Naser took into a ham butty... being just one example where I used his race and religion as weapons. If it was written down, and used out of context I would be doing time.

Edit for clarity. Second edit to say so.

AndrewJB wrote:Link the times Corbyn has been racist.

Every time he has ignored the behaviour of the anti Semitic members of HIS party, it’s not what he says it’s what he doesn’t do.

AND THAT is what an ill thought out quote out of context can do.... page deleted and member possibly banned. can we now get away from constantly trying to point score and belittle please and discuss things... like they should in parliament, not as they do.

elwaclaret wrote:AND THAT is what an ill thought out quote out of context can do.... page deleted and member possibly banned. can we now get away from constantly trying to point score and belittle please and discuss things... like they should in parliament, not as they do.

To be fair you started it by accusing Corbyn of ‘picking on Jews’!

martin_p wrote:To be fair you started it by accusing Corbyn of ‘picking on Jews’!

In retrospect I accept it was a poor turn of phrase, and was meant purely as shorthand for Labour’s much publicised problems.

Which in itself illustrates the point I was trying to make.

Dominic Cummings talk from 2017 on how how he ran the vote leave campaign. Thought it was really interesting so here's the link in case anyone else fancy's a gander

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbRxH9Kiy4

Devils_Advocate wrote:Dominic Cummings talk from 2017 on how how he ran the vote leave campaign. Thought it was really interesting so here's the link in case anyone else fancy's a gander

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbRxH9Kiy4

Is it long? I really cannot say I’m a fan of his.

elwaclaret wrote:In all honesty Spijed apart from a few (and I mean a few ) who have used it as an excuse, (not that they previously needed one) no, it is merely a reaction to a fall in the standard of living. When times are good, racism is drastically reduced. When it isn’t then immigrants and minorities become the scapegoats. Corbyn has chosen a good British historical standard in picking on Jews...that one goes back to the turn of the first century; the right prefer on the whole to aim their bile at none Western European’s of whichever are making the news.

Ironically, it is what Boris is trying to do with all his rallying calls... get the feel good back into the country that checks racism.

When did Corbyn pick on Jews?

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:When did Corbyn pick on Jews?

See post 13122.

If you are genuinely interested, three or four of the usual suspects decided me saying context was vital, before deciding what was racist and what wasn’t; was code for defending racism. One poster decided he would ridicule me... I merely re-posted his quote.... but naturally, due to my point without any explanation. Instead of attacking me, without context, the point came across as vile racism....

Proving my point in the most literal way possible.

Edited - for clarity and full explanation of events from last night.

Damo wrote:

IMG_20190908_143324.jpg

http://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"But nobody wants a no deal Brexit"

See, Boris is really starting to unite the people

Well, according to the private polling that the Conservatives have done they think it'll be far closer due to losing seats in London, Scotland and the South West. The guy on Sky news said they'd probably have to win 35 seats in the North just to break even.

I think it's fair to say Boris has had it!

Shame!

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status ... 9809130497" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spijed wrote:I think it's fair to say Boris has had it!

Shame!

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status ... 9809130497" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems strange then, that Corbyn, who has begged for an election for the past 2 years, is absolutely terrified of the prospect of one now

Farage reckons that Boris is going for May's deal with the backstop shifted to solely Northern Ireland
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status ... 2024718337" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's also trying to rebrand No Deal Brexit as Clean Break Brexit. I would say that people aren't gullible enough to buy something like that but ...

Spiral wrote:Admit it, you don't know what precocious means, do you? And for the record I'm not above calling someone a dumb c.unt and being done with it when the occasion suits. God forbid, people express themselves clearly and articulately, (I actually enjoy the better written posts on here, even those with which I disagree - they're usually more insightful and better expressed than is typical in other social media), but you're a bit of a try-hard yourself, so I suppose the difference between precociousness (a characteristic of a person) and verbosity (a characteristic of rhetoric) would be lost on you, Elizabeth. I can be verbose as f.uck, but only because I can't be arsed following up my posts with clarifications for the benefit of idiots like you.

Admit it, you know, virtually, nothing about me do you!

Admit it , you know the parody account known as Elizabeth, isn't me but feel its something to discredit me if you say you think it's me!

Admit it, you previously claimed you blocked my posts and your reply proves you were telling fibs and I've hit a raw nerve!

ClaretAndJew wrote:Any reason you're trying to use "ladies" as a derogatory term, Ringo?

I'm not. I'm using it as a term of endearment. What's derogatory about addressing other posters as ladies. ? That's a rather misogynistic attitude you seem to have.

Damo wrote:Seems strange then, that Corbyn, who has begged for an election for the past 2 years, is absolutely terrified of the prospect of one now

Apparently he did want one but was talked out of if by the whips and Keir Starmer. There is talk of him being deselected by Momentum because of that decision.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/po ... emy-corbyn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

elwaclaret wrote:See post 13122.

If you are genuinely interested, three or four of the usual suspects decided me saying context was vital, before deciding what was racist and what wasn’t; was code for defending racism. One poster decided he would ridicule me... I merely re-posted his quote.... but naturally, due to my point without any explanation. Instead of attacking me, without context, the point came across as vile racism....

Proving my point in the most literal way possible.

Edited - for clarity and full explanation of events from last night.

John Mann , Labour MP who's announced hes stepping down to become an anti semitism tsar


"Corbyn is an enabler. His unwillingness to undo the damage he has done has had huge consequences.

"He's not just an enabler - he's the enabler in this country. 

"His refusal to sort things out - and the things he's done and said in the past - gives an open licence to it."


John Mann knows far far more about the subject, than the bunch of self appointed football message board "political experts" who refuse to accept reality.

No man is so blind than he who refuses to see.

Greenmile wrote:It's because he hates women.

That'll come as a surprise to my mum, sister, daughter, partner, customers, friends and family!

My favourite Beatle.


https://youtu.be/I45l5ezEBWI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Gu'lad Ringo!!!

Damo wrote:Seems strange then, that Corbyn, who has begged for an election for the past 2 years, is absolutely terrified of the prospect of one now

When you're opponent say's 'It's do or die' why would you help him do?
Corbyn will get his election, once he's let Boris sink in the quicksand a little more, he's not running scared.

We all know what's going on, just like when Boris said proroguing parliament was nothing to do with Brexit, lets stop pretending shall we.

RingoMcCartney wrote:John Mann , Labour MP who's announced hes stepping down to become an anti semitism tsar


"Corbyn is an enabler. His unwillingness to undo the damage he has done has had huge consequences.

"He's not just an enabler - he's the enabler in this country. 

"His refusal to sort things out - and the things he's done and said in the past - gives an open licence to it."


John Mann knows far far more about the subject, than the bunch of self appointed football message board "political experts" who refuse to accept reality.

No man is so blind than he who refuses to see.

It does seem to be a case of being unable to defend the indefensible, so instead pointing fingers to deflect. However, anyone who witnessed first hand last night episode, can surely no longer be in any doubt context is everything. The mods had no context to a post and banned (I assume) a remainder on the pure strength of his “racist rant” that was intended to show the idiocy of my position. As I defended my position, he got banned for racism, it’s called kudos I think.

Elwa's actual supposition was that Corbyn likes to pick on Jews whilst Johnson is trying to check racism.

The counter argument was have you got any examples of Corbyn picking on Jews and how do you arrive at that conclusion about Johnson when to the contrary there has been high profile examples of him feeding racism (Letter box comments as one example)

So far Elwa or anyone else haven't actually attempted to back up the original claims and instead are shifting the conversation and goalpost to something they are more comfortable talking about.

If people like Ringo want to throw their hat into the ring then feel free to actually address what the discussion was about as it might actually be an interesting discussion. But if you just avoid any questions you find difficult and instead just continue to trumpet your own nonsense then the conversation becomes very boring very quickly

Devils_Advocate wrote:Elwa's actual supposition was that Corbyn likes to pick on Jews whilst Johnson is trying to check racism.

The counter argument was have you got any examples of Corbyn picking on Jews and how do you arrive at that conclusion about Johnson when to the contrary there has been high profile examples of him feeding racism (Letter box comments as one example)

So far Elwa or anyone else haven't actually attempted to back up the original claims and instead are shifting the conversation and goalpost to something they are more comfortable talking about.

If people like Ringo want to throw their hat into the ring then feel free to actually address what the discussion was about as it might actually be an interesting discussion. But if you just avoid and difficult questions and instead just continue to trumpet your own nonsense then the conversation becomes very boring very quickly

Or that the person in question has no issue with me, as I did nothing wrong... accepting I did nothing wrong... despite us having many disagreements.... now there is a remainder that I can discuss things with, even if we disagree.

Which if you care about fairness at all you would also point out that I apologised later for my poor short hand terminology, for Labours ongoing issues, and pointed out I felt no need to comment on Johnson, as it has been all over the media, and mentioned in the commons again only a couple of days ago.....

But no one said you had to be impartial.

You did mention Johnson though. You painted it like his actions are a force of good for combating racism whilst looking to single out Corbyn (before finally backtracking and making it more general about Labour once called out on it several times) for displaying racism.

Your views and posts on politics are getting into the realms of DSR - full of lies, falsehoods, absolute nonsense and unable to stand up to any scrutiny

I'm impartial on this to be fair

I think Corbyn has questions to answer on anti-semitism and I think Johnson has questions to answer on islamophobia.

What worries me more is that supporters of both are prepared to ignore that because its not what they want to believe.

Devils_Advocate wrote:You did mention Johnson though. You painted it like his actions are a force of good for combating racism whilst looking to single out Corbyn (before finally backtracking and making it more general about Labour once called out on it several times) for displaying racism.

Your views and posts on politics are getting into the realms of DSR - full of lies, falsehoods, absolute nonsense and unable to stand up to any scrutiny

No, I merely pointed out pointed racism increases during times of financial hardship. The spending plans announced to ride out the expected global recession, are by creating work reducing racism by default. Which part of that do you have a problem with, exactly... for clarity?

elwaclaret wrote:No, I merely pointed out pointed racism increases during times of financial hardship. The spending plans announced to ride out the expected global recession, are by creating work reducing racism by default. Which part of that do you have a problem with, exactly... for clarity?

Don't you think thats a bit too simplistic though?

Surely you concede that the language being used by politicians and certain media outlets is certainly contributing to it?

Lancasterclaret wrote:Don't you think thats a bit too simplistic though?

Surely you concede that the language being used by politicians and certain media outlets is certainly contributing to it?

Absolutely agree Lancaster. Parliament has rarely if ever had a poorer intellect level, on all sides. I am in no way defending ANY of them including BJ. However the outrage this week, is nothing more than political point scoring.... it was well covered at the time. Though I fully accept Johnson’s comment was at best unfortunate, ill advised and asking for trouble... as I thought the second I heard them... six months... a year ago. Nevertheless he should have apologised unreservedly, so no argument with anyone about that.

As I was trying so hard to point out... a comment CAN be unintentional... just as last night, was in no way meant as a racist comment, however out of context no one would ever have believed it... simply by quoting him. CONTEXT. I attempted to defend him as I knew what he meant... but what better way to show how easy it is for people to misread a situation, when their is no context... just a quote.

Trying to argue that Johnson is trying to check racism whilst he's trying to normalise racism as part of his dog whistle politics is a tough argument to make (which is probably why most seem to deflect to anti-semitism and the Labour party leaving both sides to bitch and whine and nothing actually get sorted out).

Anyway, back to the current situation. This looks like it would be a laugh. I have no idea of how likely it is to succeed or not, I imagine not:

aggi wrote:Trying to argue that Johnson is trying to check racism whilst he's trying to normalise racism as part of his dog whistle politics is a tough argument to make (which is probably why most seem to deflect to anti-semitism and the Labour party leaving both sides to bitch and whine and nothing actually get sorted out).

Anyway, back to the current situation. This looks like it would be a laugh. I have no idea of how likely it is to succeed or not, I imagine not:

Without getting involved in rights or wrongs... it is a short sighted resolution, a typical of how ill thought out parliament (and if you like Johnson) are behaving with knee jerks; no account has been made of the president this would set for future legislation.

Next we will be having a similar motion that those signatories do the same for all communications they have with the EU negotiating team, EU officials and their legal teams, together with communications with opposition MPs whilst they were members of the Cabinet.

Burnley Ace wrote:Next we will be having a similar motion that those signatories do the same for all communications they have with the EU negotiating team, EU officials and their legal teams, together with communications with opposition MPs whilst they were members of the Cabinet.

And every other act of parliament, an opposition opposes for all time.

elwaclaret wrote:And every other act of parliament, an opposition opposes for all time.

Or at least where they don’t trust the leader of a government with a fair sized minority in parliament. In all other circumstances it has little chance of working.