RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:That moment you realise Banquo is Michael Gove:

So Boris laying down in front of a bulldozer was seemingly a flat out lie from the gutless wanker, finds himself ordered to support the 3rd runway at Heathrow and runs out of the country. He's getting roundly mocked in cabinet though which he'll not be enjoying, unless he's lying to himself about reality (and bulldozers)

https://www.tuc.org.uk/blogs/first-he-b ... iU.twitter
That Chris Chope - blocks the upskirting bill because he objects to Private Members Bills on principal - introduces a Private Members Bill to attack worker's rights (specifically the Working Time Directive)


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44709558
Esther McVey somehow still in her job despite either 1) knowingly lying to Parliament or 2) failing to read - twice! - reports from the National Audit Office to her and making some shit up off the top of her own head. Both are breaches of the Parliamentary Code.
If only we had a competent PM, or even one who wasn't dead-woman-walking



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-w ... e-44707052
Two more people poisoned by the same nerve agent used against the Russian defector in March.
Current theory is that these two people came into contact with the agent in a place the authorities hadn't previously cleaned up. They are now in hospital.
Obviously massively concerning that the agent can still be so toxic four months after its original use, and the fear must be there's more pockets of it lurking in the area.

Apparently the two people are allegedly known drug users in the town and had been in Salisbury a day or two earlier, so the theory is that they found the delivery instrument (possibly a syringe) for the Skripal attack which the attacker had dumped in a park or other public place. 

Meanwhile Corbyn stays silent on Brexit, spends time in Jordan bemoaning the evil West ( a known vote winner in the UK) and then asks a series of questions about buses when he has seemingly no plan to change anything about the buses nor any idea who's responsible.

Will lying about a wreath lay to rest Corbyn's time as leader, or like Trump can he do as he wants and take no hit to his base? And even if they ditch the walking apology machine for terrorism would the next leader be any better?

Digby wrote:Will lying about a wreath lay to rest Corbyn's time as leader, or like Trump can he do as he wants and take no hit to his base? And even if they ditch the walking apology machine for terrorism would the next leader be any better?

Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

canta_brian wrote:

Digby wrote:Will lying about a wreath lay to rest Corbyn's time as leader, or like Trump can he do as he wants and take no hit to his base? And even if they ditch the walking apology machine for terrorism would the next leader be any better?

Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:

Digby wrote:Will lying about a wreath lay to rest Corbyn's time as leader, or like Trump can he do as he wants and take no hit to his base? And even if they ditch the walking apology machine for terrorism would the next leader be any better?

Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

I'm not just as scathing of Boris in this instance, Boris made a self aggrandising comment that distracted from a quite reasonable underlying point, whereas the Dear Leader supported terrorism back when nobody paid attention to him and lies about it now they do

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

I'm not just as scathing of Boris in this instance, Boris made a self aggrandising comment that distracted from a quite reasonable underlying point, whereas the Dear Leader supported terrorism back when nobody paid attention to him and lies about it now they do

Couldn’t agree more.

Both Corbyn and Johnson provide repeated evidence for why neither should be in a position of major responsibility. At some point the grassroots of Labour and Conservatives will wake up to that, but who knows when that will be given that these are strange times politically.

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:

Digby wrote:Will lying about a wreath lay to rest Corbyn's time as leader, or like Trump can he do as he wants and take no hit to his base? And even if they ditch the walking apology machine for terrorism would the next leader be any better?

Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

PLO aren't terrorists

Sandydragon wrote:Both Corbyn and Johnson provide repeated evidence for why neither should be in a position of major responsibility. At some point the grassroots of Labour and Conservatives will wake up to that, but who knows when that will be given that these are strange times politically.

How you can compare someone stirring up racial hatred with someone else promoting peace, I do not know..

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

PLO aren't terrorists

That’s one ticked off the list. Now for all the others.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Both Corbyn and Johnson provide repeated evidence for why neither should be in a position of major responsibility. At some point the grassroots of Labour and Conservatives will wake up to that, but who knows when that will be given that these are strange times politically.

How you can compare someone stirring up racial hatred with someone else promoting peace, I do not know..

This is the funniest thing I’ve read in ages. Kudos.

Mellsblue wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Both Corbyn and Johnson provide repeated evidence for why neither should be in a position of major responsibility. At some point the grassroots of Labour and Conservatives will wake up to that, but who knows when that will be given that these are strange times politically.

How you can compare someone stirring up racial hatred with someone else promoting peace, I do not know..

This is the funniest thing I’ve read in ages. Kudos.

Then you don't read enough

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:Was that the wreath laying ceremony from 2014? I can't imagine why there is a fuss about it now, can you? Any anti-islamic telegraph columns that need attention being drawn away from?

Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

PLO aren't terrorists

Good grief.

Peace maker Corbyn ain’t; at best he is naive at worst he is providing support to terrorists. There was no good reason to visit the graves of dead terrorists. None. Yet he did and then lied about having done so.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Classic whataboutery. Corbyn’s seeming inability to stop himself from with fraternising with those deemed terrorists by the U.K. has been an ongoing theme for decades and has been front and centre ever since he was elected leader of the Labour Party. A lot of those highlighting this latest (in a very long line) of Corbyn’s dodgy circle of friends are being just as scathing about Boris.

PLO aren't terrorists

Good grief.

Peace maker Corbyn ain’t; at best he is naive at worst he is providing support to terrorists. There was no good reason to visit the graves of dead terrorists. None. Yet he did and then lied about having done so.

He laid a wreath to victims of an attack on the PLO in Tunis by Israel, an attack killing civilians, flagrantly violating the UN charter and condemed by almost all the world's governments, including Thatcher, and the UNSC in a vote 14-0 against Israel.

Stop with the lies, it's pathetic and dishonest.

Is that the story Corby is going with now?

It would also seem he was so selfless in his attendance his flights and accommodation were so much cheaper than other attendees he came in below the threshold for reporting expenses. Given other attendees reported paid expenses 50% above the minimum reporting requirements the Dear Leader will likely face a parliamentary enquiry for his failure to avoid the appearance of corruption

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
PLO aren't terrorists

Good grief.

Peace maker Corbyn ain’t; at best he is naive at worst he is providing support to terrorists. There was no good reason to visit the graves of dead terrorists. None. Yet he did and then lied about having done so.

He laid a wreath to victims of an attack on the PLO in Tunis by Israel, an attack killing civilians, flagrantly violating the UN charter and condemed by almost all the world's governments, including Thatcher, and the UNSC in a vote 14-0 against Israel.

Stop with the lies, it's pathetic and dishonest.

Given that Corbyn has a long history of association with extremists, I don’t believe him. If that were his genuine rationale, why deny he attended? Utter nonsense for the gullible young idiots who think he is the Messiah.

This is the quote from the Independent which was provided by Labour

Mr Corbyn has admitted he was “present” at a memorial event which commemorated those from the Black September group responsible for the 1972 attack in Munich, despite his office previously insisting he was only at the event in question honouring Palestinians killed in an Israeli air strike.

So he did attend an act of remembrance to dead terrorists. So just to be clear, he participated in an event designed to commemorate dead terrorists, condemned across the world for their actions. Corbyn has openly sympathised with terrorists.

I think it’s pretty clear. It’s also clear that his presence to be at that location purely to honour dead children was a bit of a lie.

The man isn’t fit to be prime minister. How gullible do you need to be to think otherwise?

This blind devotion to Corbyn by his base is very Trumpian. Who’d have thought that red neck rust belters and woke millennials would have so much in common.

Sandydragon wrote:This is the quote from the Independent which was provided by Labour

Mr Corbyn has admitted he was “present” at a memorial event which commemorated those from the Black September group responsible for the 1972 attack in Munich, despite his office previously insisting he was only at the event in question honouring Palestinians killed in an Israeli air strike.

So he did attend an act of remembrance to dead terrorists. So just to be clear, he participated in an event designed to commemorate dead terrorists, condemned across the world for their actions. Corbyn has openly sympathised with terrorists.

I think it’s pretty clear. It’s also clear that his presence to be at that location purely to honour dead children was a bit of a lie.

The man isn’t fit to be prime minister. How gullible do you need to be to think otherwise?

That 'quote' is a bit contextless. The quote from Labour is that he was present at a gathering in support of Palestine and went to the cemetary in a ceremony to lay a wreath for the civilians killed in the air strike and, while he was there, other members of the delegation laid a different wreath for the terrorist. It's notable that the only word that the Independent has quoted is "present".

I don't like a lot of his past associations and baggage, but I am baffled at the country's selective morality and memory. We have previously had no problems with our leaders and policitians honouring people like Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat, who have committed far worse war crimes, and are quite happy with our current leader's keen associations with Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Why is he less fit than her?

Puja

The past associations bit is easy to understand. When a terrorist, such as Arafat, becomes necessary from a diplomatic point of view, ie they run a country or can reasonably be viewed as the official representative of a national group, then we have to deal with them. If they renounce terrorism then so much the better. It doesn’t mean we have to like them.

Corbyn was in attendance at a commemoration for a group of dead terrorists. He has form for these associations so I don’t believe his protestations that he didn’t realise what was going on.

Sandydragon wrote:The past associations bit is easy to understand. When a terrorist, such as Arafat, becomes necessary from a diplomatic point of view, ie they run a country or can reasonably be viewed as the official representative of a national group, then we have to deal with them. If they renounce terrorism then so much the better. It doesn’t mean we have to like them.

Corbyn was in attendance at a commemoration for a group of dead terrorists. He has form for these associations so I don’t believe his protestations that he didn’t realise what was going on.

I believe the grave the contentious wreath was laid on was that of Arafat's second in command in the PLO, not "a group of dead terrorists". He was generally assumed to have been in charge of the group that did the bombing, but he was also part of the Palestinian leadership, as were the people who laid the wreath. I agree that Corbyn's splitting hairs about being "present but not involved" however if you're politicking on the Palestinian side then they're people you have to associate with, just as dealing with the Israelis used to mean associating with Sharon, dealing with the IRA meant Jerry Adams, etc. Both sides have horrible innocent-murdering fuckpots in charge and we've shown respect to worse.

It's distasteful either way, but I'm not seeing a moral difference.

Puja

I’d suggest there is a big difference to negotiating with a head of state compared to encouraging a terrorist organisation by given th some veneer of legitimacy.

I believe the commereration was for more than one terrorist hence my comment about a group of terrorist, even if it were one grave.