General Election Is On

[Cryssys]

The only people who should be voting for Labour at present time are descendants from the Indian sub-continent and absolute lunatics.

On the basis of the above I take it you'll be voting Labour then?

[AndyClaret]

We've all done it...

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/alexwi ... SX4wNZfQXJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CombatClaret]

If Johnson campaigned to give the whole of the UK the same "great deal" Northern Ireland will have I'd vote for him.

[Jakubclaret]

I know it's early days in the campaign, but is that really the best the mail can come up with? An MP claiming a £17 wreath on expenses? Desperate stuff.

I think that’s another one we can add to the collection of things you don’t care about & eager to dismiss & brush under the carpet when it suits, credit where credits due you’ve got quite a accumulation going.

[AlargeClaret]

We've all done it...

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/alexwi ... SX4wNZfQXJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another Labour MP repeatedly called his colleague a “poof” during a raucous late-night bus trip last year.

“ a raucous late night bus journey” sounds like these mp’s really know how to party...

In fairness though all this tit for tat “you called me/tweeted 6 yrs ago ,a poof/gay/tranny/pak1/slut/ holocaust denier etc etc “ is ridiculous for all parties . I’m hearing of unpaid researchers on both sides simply digging every bit of social media and articles /quotes to find some minor indiscretion and it’s farcical . Let he who casts the first stone... springs to mind

[tiger76]

If Johnson campaigned to give the whole of the UK the same "great deal" Northern Ireland will have I'd vote for him.

It is curious if this is such a "great deal" for Northern Ireland,why doesn't he roll it out over the whole UK.

He's also presented NS and the SNP with an open goal,as their campaign message is simple,Scotland like NI voted to remain in the EU,and yet NI are being granted special status and a bespoke deal,however when Scotland asked for consideration regarding SM/CU access they were pointedly ignored.

My issue with this is once you start treating different countries of the UK as seperate entities,it becomes much harder for unionists to claim it's a partnership of equals.

Now if i as a staunch unionist can see problems with this policy,imagine how the pro-independence supporters must be feeling,it's all fine and well for Boris Johnson to rule out a 2nd independence referendum,but if the reaction of the QT audience in Glasgow is anything to go by he's derided north of the border.

And not only that but BJ has also lost the trust of the DUP,their overriding commitment is unionism,and all the constituent parts of the UK being treated as one.

Whatever ultimately happens with brexit the UK has to be treated as a single unit,If the right-wing Conservatives continue to pursue a brexit at all costs strategy,then they will be risking the union,but they are so blinkered in their approach,that they are sleepwalking into a constitutional crisis entirely of their own making.

[AndrewJB]

Labour's potential ppc for Birmingham Hall Green

A criminal defence solicitor who ranted online about shooting ‘Zionists’ and blowing up the ‘chosen people’ has been fined £25,000 for his conduct.

Majid Mahmood posted abusive messages twice on social media site Facebook in 2015 and 2016, with the comments captured using a screen-grab.

Mahmood, a solicitor for 12 years, said that ‘somebody needs to shoot all the Israeli Zionists dead then send their bodies to America as a present for Obama and his Zionist pals’.

When told by a member of the public his comments would be shared with the SRA, he responded: ‘Yeah feel free to report me.’

On the second occasion, Mahmood had referred to ‘chosen people’ and said it was a shame a plane carrying Israelis ‘didn’t blow up mid air’. This was posted on a Facebook page entitled ‘Israel is a War Criminal’s post’.

In a further response, he told a Facebook user ‘don’t threaten me go and **** yourself’. The comments appeared with his name in a hyperlink enabling the reader to navigate to a page showing his name, job title as ‘senior solicitor’ and displaying the name of his firm at the time, Luton-based City Law Chambers.

Mahmood, 40, denied being anti-Semitic and said he was entitled to freedom of speech. The matter was reported by the SRA to the police but no action had been taken. He had admitted as far back as April 2016 he had been ‘offensive’ and his comments were ’wholly inappropriate’. He maintained he had barrister friends who are Jewish.

He stressed the posts were taken down quickly after they were made and he deleted his entire Facebook account before the SRA investigation started. He was not acting as a solicitor at the time of the posts being made but in his private capacity. Mahmood said the SRA’s initial reaction was to deal with the matter informally until it was ‘leaned on’ by the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism group.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal said the SRA had not proven the allegation of anti-Semitisim in relation to his first post, but it was proven in relation to the second. He had demonstrated a lack of integrity in relation to both.

Mahmood had shown a ‘worrying lack of self-discipline and common sense’, and inflamed and promoted a backlash of comment, the SDT said.

The tribunal judgment added: ‘The intemperate language used, the hatred manifested, including against anti-Zionists as well as Jewish people, and wishing them dead by graphic means were terrible ideas for a solicitor to be promoting.’

Mahmood, who now works for Hertfordshire firm Liberty Law Solicitors, was fined £25,000 and handed a one-year suspension from practice, suspended for 12 months. He will also pay around £9,500 in costs.

Following publication of the judgment, Gideon Falter, Chairman of Campaign Against Antisemitism, who was a witness at the hearing, said: 'Whilst we do not agree with the decision to allow Mr Mahmood, who has repeatedly made vile statements calling for death and destruction, to remain in practice as an officer of the court, we nonetheless welcome this decision.

’We commend the Solicitors Regulation Authority for doing the right thing in bringing this action, and we applaud the tribunal for sending this strong message that antisemitism within the legal profession will be severely punished.’

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/defen ... 86.article" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You might want to write a retraction to this, because the Labour candidate is actually a different person.

[RMutt]

If AndyClaret’s apology is anything like the ones in newspapers it will be a tiny thing in something like the rate the ref thread.

[AndyClaret]

You might want to write a retraction to this, because the Labour candidate is actually a different person.

Apparently so, got it from Jonathan friedlands tweet,

[Mala591]

It is curious if this is such a "great deal" for Northern Ireland,why doesn't he roll it out over the whole UK.

He's also presented NS and the SNP with an open goal,as their campaign message is simple,Scotland like NI voted to remain in the EU,and yet NI are being granted special status and a bespoke deal,however when Scotland asked for consideration regarding SM/CU access they were pointedly ignored.

My issue with this is once you start treating different countries of the UK as seperate entities,it becomes much harder for unionists to claim it's a partnership of equals.

Now if i as a staunch unionist can see problems with this policy,imagine how the pro-independence supporters must be feeling,it's all fine and well for Boris Johnson to rule out a 2nd independence referendum,but if the reaction of the QT audience in Glasgow is anything to go by he's derided north of the border.

And not only that but BJ has also lost the trust of the DUP,their overriding commitment is unionism,and all the constituent parts of the UK being treated as one.

Whatever ultimately happens with brexit the UK has to be treated as a single unit,If the right-wing Conservatives continue to pursue a brexit at all costs strategy,then they will be risking the union,but they are so blinkered in their approach,that they are sleepwalking into a constitutional crisis entirely of their own making.

On the other hand some might see this as a welcome first step toward English independence.

[dsr]

It is curious if this is such a "great deal" for Northern Ireland,why doesn't he roll it out over the whole UK.

Because the EU wouldn't agree. Obviously.

[dsr]

Why is the economy suddenly so important to Brexiteers. You’ve spent the last couple of years telling us that the economic disaster that may come from Brexit is unimportant because it’s about more than that.

You're confusing two issues. One, your absolute certainty that Brexit will cause an economic disaster; two, your absolute belief that everyone else accepts you to be right.

Brexiteers do not believe that Brexit will cause an economic disaster. Obviously. We all know that; I suspect your pretence that you believe the opposite is just an invention to use as a bogus argument. But very few, if any, Brexit supporters are voting for economic meltdown in the same way as very few Labour voters will be voting for economic meltdown. By all means stick to your beliefs that economic meltdown will happen after Brexit, but if you can accept that not everyone accepts your beliefs as gospel, you mignt at least understand the 'enemy' a little better.

[tiger76]

Because the EU wouldn't agree. Obviously.

Did the UK even inquire about such an arrangement,i've not seen any evidence to suggest we did,if the Conservatives had moderated their stance and brought some form of CU arrangements before parliament it's likely that the WA would have passed and instead of a GE we'd now be debating the PD.

[AndyClaret]

Did the UK even inquire about such an arrangement,i've not seen any evidence to suggest we did,if the Conservatives had moderated their stance and brought some form of CU arrangements before parliament it's likely that the WA would have passed and instead of a GE we'd now be debating the PD.

N Ireland has special status, free access to the single market, they would never give GB this.

[Jakubclaret]

N Ireland has special status, free access to the single market, they would never give GB this.

I don't think some of the leave voters wanted to be in the single market, the whole idea for some leave voters was to reduce immigration & stop/reduce free movement, but for a large amount of leave supporters sovereignty was the most important reason.

[TheFamilyCat]

I don't think some of the leave voters wanted to be in the single market, the whole idea for some leave voters was to reduce immigration & stop/reduce free movement, but for a large amount of leave supporters sovereignty was the most important reason.

But what most/some/all leave voters wanted has absolutely nothing to do with the deal we negotiate with the EU.

[Jakubclaret]

But what most/some/all leave voters wanted has absolutely nothing to do with the deal we negotiate with the EU.

It doesn't if you ignore the wishes of the majority.

[TheFamilyCat]

It doesn't if you ignore the wishes of the majority.

You were lied to during the campaign, you've been lied to for the last three years. What you want really isn't important to them.

Do you really think Boris went to the EU and said "this is the deal the people want?"

[Jakubclaret]

You were lied to during the campaign, you've been lied to for the last three years. What you want really isn't important to them.

Do you really think Boris went to the EU and said "this is the deal the people want?"

No of course not, it's impossible to ask such a question anyhow with a certain section unwilling to accept a democratic decision, so that's a bizarre sort of reasoning, I'm watching football now so won't reply until later if you counter.

[martin_p]

You're confusing two issues. One, your absolute certainty that Brexit will cause an economic disaster; two, your absolute belief that everyone else accepts you to be right.

Brexiteers do not believe that Brexit will cause an economic disaster. Obviously. We all know that; I suspect your pretence that you believe the opposite is just an invention to use as a bogus argument. But very few, if any, Brexit supporters are voting for economic meltdown in the same way as very few Labour voters will be voting for economic meltdown. By all means stick to your beliefs that economic meltdown will happen after Brexit, but if you can accept that not everyone accepts your beliefs as gospel, you mignt at least understand the 'enemy' a little better.

Here’s you admonishing someone for worrying about the post Brexit economy.

Is money all that matters to you? Do you choose your wife (or husband) that way? That's all we hear from Remainers - money, money, money. If they aren't getting more money, they don't want to know.

Yet now money seems to have become important because Jeremy Corbyn wants to spend some.

[Elizabeth]

While Brexit remains the talking point, the election will provide the Conservatives with the majority they need to get the deal into law. The public have been fed up with Brexit for a long time and want it over.

[dsr]

Did the UK even inquire about such an arrangement,i've not seen any evidence to suggest we did,if the Conservatives had moderated their stance and brought some form of CU arrangements before parliament it's likely that the WA would have passed and instead of a GE we'd now be debating the PD.

No, the full text of the UK#s negotiations with the EU haven't been published, and probably never will be. But if the deal is on offer, that we get free access to the single market without having to be in it, then it does sound like a very good deal. Perhaps Corbyn could put it in his manifesto?

[dsr]

Yet now money seems to have become important because Jeremy Corbyn wants to spend some.

It's a tricky point to get across, I know, but I'll have another go.

If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term.

If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge.

It's like the difference between losing a tenner and losing a grand. In the former case, it's a lot easier to say "it's only money".

[TheFamilyCat]

It's a tricky point to get across, I know, but I'll have another go.

If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term.

If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge.

It's like the difference between losing a tenner and losing a grand. In the former case, it's a lot easier to say "it's only money".

Ok, are these the rules then:

1. Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable.
2. Having the opinion that a Labour government
will be bad for the economy is acceptable.

Have I got that right?

[martin_p]

It's a tricky point to get across, I know, but I'll have another go.

If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term.

If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge.

It's like the difference between losing a tenner and losing a grand. In the former case, it's a lot easier to say "it's only money".

But you seem to be basing your opinion on nothing more than not liking Corbyn and McDonnell.

[Jakubclaret]

While Brexit remains the talking point, the election will provide the Conservatives with the majority they need to get the deal into law. The public have been fed up with Brexit for a long time and want it over.

It's akin to a boxer on the ropes getting relentlessly pummeled whilst some people want the fight to continue in a perverse warped sort of way, just throw the towel in it's done.

[dsr]

Ok, are these the rules then:

1. Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable.
2. Having the opinion that a Labour government
will be bad for the economy is acceptable.

Have I got that right?

No, nowhere near right. But then, I think you were more interested in a soundbite than getting anything right. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind think that having an opinion on which way the economy would go, to be unacceptable? I presume you are in your right mind, so I presume you are on the wind-up.

[dsr]

But you seem to be basing your opinion on nothing more than not liking Corbyn and McDonnell.

It's based on the idea that taking all the assets off the rich does no good for the economy. It was disastrous last time, and will be again. It's all very well telling Mike Ashley "stuff your taxes, and stuff your 80,000 employees too" - but it is no good for those of us who have to make up the taxes, or the 80,000 people whose jobs are in danger.

I mean, obviously we can look at all the success stories of socialism and/or communism and/or Marxism, and hope to be like them. But looking at the success stories won't take long, will it?

[Bordeauxclaret]

It's based on the idea that taking all the assets off the rich does no good for the economy

Who’s asking for this?

[martin_p]

It's based on the idea that taking all the assets off the rich does no good for the economy. It was disastrous last time, and will be again. It's all very well telling Mike Ashley "stuff your taxes, and stuff your 80,000 employees too" - but it is no good for those of us who have to make up the taxes, or the 80,000 people whose jobs are in danger.

I mean, obviously we can look at all the success stories of socialism and/or communism and/or Marxism, and hope to be like them. But looking at the success stories won't take long, will it?

No ones taking all the assets off the rich, they’re being asked to pay a bit more tax that’s all!

[TheFamilyCat]

No, nowhere near right. But then, I think you were more interested in a soundbite than getting anything right. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind think that having an opinion on which way the economy would go, to be unacceptable? I presume you are in your right mind, so I presume you are on the wind-up.

Not on a wind up, just trying to understand your logic. If you can call it logic.

[claretonthecoast1882]

No ones taking all the assets off the rich, they’re being asked to pay a bit more tax that’s all!

Seems a fair question to ask why should people who work hard and are successful have to pay extra for the lazy element

[TheFamilyCat]

It's akin to a boxer on the ropes getting relentlessly pummeled whilst some people want the fight to continue in a perverse warped sort of way, just throw the towel in it's done.

Yeah, we should just stop trying to get a deal that doesn't knacker us and just accept it because people like you voted for it.

[martin_p]

Seems a fair question to ask why should people who work hard and are successful have to pay extra for the lazy element

Also seems a fair question as to why you assume people who need help are lazy or that high earners necessarily work hard.

[martin_p]

Seems a fair question to ask why should people who work hard and are successful have to pay extra for the lazy element

And another fair question is why do you think that the extra tax Labour want to raise from the rich is for ‘the lazy element’? Labour have announced a massive investment in infrastructure that will benefit all.

[dsr]

No ones taking all the assets off the rich, they’re being asked to pay a bit more tax that’s all!

Who was it said that there should be no billionaires in Britain?

[claretonthecoast1882]

Also seems a fair question as to why you assume people who need help are lazy or that high earners necessarily work hard.

Envy is a horrible trait. You could always donate more of your earnings to the needy

[dsr]

Not on a wind up, just trying to understand your logic. If you can call it logic.

I said "If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term." and "If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge."

You interpreted this to mean "Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable." and "Having the opinion that a Labour government will be bad for the economy is acceptable."

I am totally at a loss as how you get from my words to yours, without any intervening posts to blur the issue. Please explain?

[martin_p]

Envy is a horrible trait. You could always donate more of your earnings to the needy

I do thanks for asking, and some of my time too. But you aren’t listening, the money is for infrastructure not needy.

[martin_p]

I said "If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term." and "If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge."

You interpreted this to mean "Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable." and "Having the opinion that a Labour government will be bad for the economy is acceptable."

I am totally at a loss as how you get from my words to yours, without any intervening posts to blur the issue. Please explain?

I think it’s more about your historical posts than today’s. When people expressed opinions that Brexit would be bad for the economy your response was ‘is money all that’s important to you’ (paraphrased).

[dsr]

I think it’s more about your historical posts than today’s. When people expressed opinions that Brexit would be bad for the economy your response was ‘is money all that’s important to you’ (paraphrased).

Still doesn't make sense. It's still a nonsensical step to go from "is money is all that's important to you" to "Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable."

[TheFamilyCat]

I said "If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term." and "If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge."

You interpreted this to mean "Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable." and "Having the opinion that a Labour government will be bad for the economy is acceptable."

I am totally at a loss as how you get from my words to yours, without any intervening posts to blur the issue. Please explain?

Good god. You have spent three year telling people they are overreacting when they dare suggest that brexit may cause financial disaster. Yet you now voice your opinion that a labour government will result in financial disaster.

Maybe I should have just called you a hypocrite, you might have understood a more direct approach.

[taio]

Good god. You have spent three year telling people they are overreacting when they dare suggest that brexit may cause financial disaster. Yet you now voice your opinion that a labour government will result in financial disaster.

Maybe I should have just called you a hypocrite, you might have understood a more direct approach.

It's not hypocritical at all to be fair.

[AndrewJB]

While Brexit remains the talking point, the election will provide the Conservatives with the majority they need to get the deal into law. The public have been fed up with Brexit for a long time and want it over.

Johnson’s deal doesn’t end Brexit.

[AndrewJB]

I said "If we leave the EU, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO if there is it will be small and short term." and "If Corbyn becomes PM, there may (or may not) be an economic hit, but IMO there will be and it will be huge."

You interpreted this to mean "Having the opinion that Brexit will be bad for the economy is not acceptable." and "Having the opinion that a Labour government will be bad for the economy is acceptable."

I am totally at a loss as how you get from my words to yours, without any intervening posts to blur the issue. Please explain?

What a fear monger.

Example A: a country chooses to erect barriers to trade, and that’s a “small hit”

Example B: a party borrows money and taxes the wealthy to invest in the country - creating employment and economic growth, and that will be a “big hit” to the economy. I don’t think you understand economics.

[Jakubclaret]

Yeah, we should just stop trying to get a deal that doesn't knacker us and just accept it because people like you voted for it.

That's a fair stretch from what I initially meant, you do have form for distorting & misinterpretating people's posts, on this occasion there's no other choice but to let you off, it actually makes more sense to let you carry on dreaming about the brexit you hope & envisage that remains as close as possible aligned to the EU & the shebang that's part & parcel.

[Elizabeth]

Andrew , I take it from your reply that you don't disagree with me that the public are fed up with Brexit or that Brexit remains the talking point in this election .
You fail to mention what you think are the alternatives that will resolve this

[AndrewJB]

Andrew , I take it from your reply that you don't disagree with me that the public are fed up with Brexit or that Brexit remains the talking point in this election .
You fail to mention what you think are the alternatives that will resolve this

After the government has faffed about for three years achieving two very poor deals, it’s no surprise the country is tired of it.

As for what could have been done differently - a much softer Brexit could have been achieved several years ago, as it would have involved far less negotiation time. From there those wanting yet looser ties could no be making their case, but we would be out, which would have fulfilled the referendum wish. But we are stuck where we are, and depending on how the election goes, we might not have Brexit at all, and all due to a very poor government.

I’m afraid I disagree about the main issue of this election, which I think is our response to climate change, and I think this will come to the fore more as the election progresses.

[bfcjg]

Why do labour have a problem with Jewish people ? They really are a nasty bunch perhaps Corbyn and co should wear black shirts.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50360863" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Spijed]

Why do labour have a problem with Jewish people ? They really are a nasty bunch perhaps Corbyn and co should wear black shirts.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50360863" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Probably no more so than the Conservatives have with ethnic minorities. When you have JRM saying those who died in the Grenfell Tower are thick (mainly black people), that is far worse surely?