|
Post by Veritas on Feb 22, 2024 9:57:08 GMT
This will appeal to the nutjobs on the far right of the party who really need to find a new political home. There is a real chance Truss & co are in the process of creating the new party from within the Tory party leaving most of the 'normal' Tories looking for somewhere to go. The irony of them achieving what Militant failed to do in Labour!
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Feb 22, 2024 10:52:02 GMT
This will appeal to the nutjobs on the far right of the party who really need to find a new political home. There is a real chance Truss & co are in the process of creating the new party from within the Tory party leaving most of the 'normal' Tories looking for somewhere to go. The irony of them achieving what Militant failed to do in Labour! I'm convinced there'll be some sort of populist movement for the 2029 election - particularly if Starmer continues to offer the electorate absolutely nothing to vote for (rather than against).
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 22, 2024 11:10:26 GMT
I see people are jumping on those to distract from what the tories and sn p were trying to do and that's erode labour lead and create devision not in supporting the people in gazza Hoyle saw through this and allowed 3 votes the order was labour sn p then government what should have happened was labours fell first then sn p then government success because of tory majority Tories then played politics and walked out then sn p then during this dep speaker called a vote ahes independent but was aa tory mp thee was then a verbal vote which approved labour Tories haad been beaten by one of their own and them and snp came up with lies to deflect from them being outflank So don't be fooled this was not about gala but about domestic politics and avoiding labour's unity and pole lead If you look at the 3 options if you agree to a ermanant sense fire labiurs proposal was best Tories was only for temp pause and then killing to return snp was one sided Why did Labour not raise the motion in one of their many opposition days then? You can't be opposed to tory corruption and sleeze while cheerleading it when it's starmer doing it. Is this the only issue out there or ate there domestic issues that the government need holding account to What has been ghmappeniing with labour minions the tories just haven't turned up. The wording of snp motion was deliberately divisive as they know their going to lose many seats so we're politicaling to mitigate the effects if a labour surge Why if this was such a big issue for the tories did they 1 nit table the debate themselves and 2 walk out when they had numbers to win ??? This was an international problem that 2 domestic parties were trying to use for domestic political gain So I say again don't be fooled by tgen
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 22, 2024 11:14:45 GMT
Under the tories legal migration has trippled a fact they try to hide by spouting tripe in Rwanda and stop the boats
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 22, 2024 12:05:19 GMT
Why did Labour not raise the motion in one of their many opposition days then? You can't be opposed to tory corruption and sleeze while cheerleading it when it's starmer doing it. Is this the only issue out there or ate there domestic issues that the government need holding account to What has been ghmappeniing with labour minions the tories just haven't turned up. The wording of snp motion was deliberately divisive as they know their going to lose many seats so we're politicaling to mitigate the effects if a labour surge Why if this was such a big issue for the tories did they 1 nit table the debate themselves and 2 walk out when they had numbers to win ??? This was an international problem that 2 domestic parties were trying to use for domestic political gain So I say again don't be fooled by tgen What do you mean the SNP motion was deliberately divisive? What was divisive? And if it was, are you saying opposition parties should only use their opposition days to table motions which other parties agree with? The SNP motion was known about 10 days ago. Starmer decided 3 days ago to do a u turn and suddenly support a ceasefire for the first time after 30,000 innocent people died. That's not the SNPs fault, that's not the tories fault, that's not the house of commons fault. Should the SNP have instead written a motion with a crystal ball in their hand knowing labour would u turn and to make their motion worded so that when labour suddenly u turn they'll also agree with it. If labour cared they could have raised it on their own opposition days. Their leader could have supported a ceasefire in November. Their leader could have publicly supported a ceasefire anytime between October 7th and the beginning of this week. But they didn't. The only party playing politics and corruption yesterday was the labour party. They're corrupt and they used their corruption to oust the last actual left wing leader. Now they're trying to pretend it's all about MP safety to ignite another culture war. Strange that the tory mps weren't afraid for their safety or any other party. Also weird that MP safety was only a reason after the backlash. Yet when Hoyle listed the reasoning it was because it was a sensitive issue and he felt all parties should get a say. It's corruption. Its like defending boris for his rule breaking.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2024 12:19:44 GMT
This will appeal to the nutjobs on the far right of the party who really need to find a new political home. She knows her audience. It’s the same crap that Republicans spout. She’ll be a hero over here. It’s always nice to blame being a car crash on someone else, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 22, 2024 12:41:07 GMT
Why did Labour not raise the motion in one of their many opposition days then? You can't be opposed to tory corruption and sleeze while cheerleading it when it's starmer doing it. Is this the only issue out there or ate there domestic issues that the government need holding account to This was a MASIIVE issue for Labour, hence why 56 Labour MP's had voted for a ceasefire (against Starmer) in November and over a 100 were going to vote with the SNP yesterday. Over the weekend Starmer realised he was in big trouble and that he was going to have to play dirty to save face. This is exactly the sort of stunt that Johnson would have pulled, we can't have spent the last few year's moaning our bag off about the underhand tactics of The Tories and then as soon Starmer does something similar, we at best turn a blind eye to it, or even worse, try and defend it, god forbid.
|
|
|
Post by knype on Feb 22, 2024 13:07:28 GMT
Is this the only issue out there or ate there domestic issues that the government need holding account to This was a MASIIVE issue for Labour, hence why 56 Labour MP's had voted for a ceasefire (against Starmer) in November and over a 100 were going to vote with the SNP yesterday. Over the weekend Starmer realised he was in big trouble and that he was going to have to play dirty to save face. This is exactly the sort of stunt that Johnson would have pulled, we can't have spent the last few year's moaning our bag off about the underhand tactics of The Tories and then as soon Starmer does something similar, we at best turn a blind eye to it, or even worse, try and defend it, god forbid. Fair play to you Paul !
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 22, 2024 14:08:41 GMT
A very good thread from Owen Jones on "Mp safety" (multiple tweets)
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 22, 2024 15:08:23 GMT
On three occasions, Starmer is asked if Labour MP's threatened the Speaker and on all three occasions, he refuses to give an answer ...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2024 15:46:16 GMT
On three occasions, Starmer is asked if Labour MP's threatened the Speaker and on all three occasions, he refuses to give an answer ... He does a great job at deflecting an honest answer. Being a lawyer has served his political ambitions well.
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Feb 22, 2024 16:12:56 GMT
On three occasions, Starmer is asked if Labour MP's threatened the Speaker and on all three occasions, he refuses to give an answer ... This is very disappointing from him - I'm no fan of Starmer but I did expect him to at least bring a degree of integrity to the next government. This doesn't bode well when he's not even in power yet.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Feb 22, 2024 16:48:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Feb 22, 2024 17:32:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 22, 2024 22:01:14 GMT
I do find the selected Rochdale candidate for Reform a bit ironic.
Simon Danczuk a former Labour MP suspended from the party for grooming a 17 year old girl... So now he's standing in Rochdale which has a history of grooming.
And to add to the irony. In a time when the right wish to send people to Rwanda. Simon brought a bride back from Rwanda 🤣
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2024 22:44:24 GMT
I do find the selected Rochdale candidate for Reform a bit ironic. Simon Danczuk a former Labour MP suspended from the party for grooming a 17 year old girl... So now he's standing in Rochdale which has a history of grooming. And to add to the irony. In a time when the right wish to send people to Rwanda. Simon brought a bride back from Rwanda 🤣 Could not make that up if you tried 😂 Maybe his argument is that the only way you can tackle a grooming gang is to understand them at heart first.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 22, 2024 22:47:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2024 23:02:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 22, 2024 23:14:49 GMT
It's not unusual for a hustings to not invite every candidate either. The green party weren't invited to that hustings. Neither were the independants either. Likewise the independants weren't invited to the bbc hustings either - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-68369620Simon has seemingly just tried to create a needless headline.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 22, 2024 23:23:28 GMT
It's not unusual for a hustings to not invite every candidate either. The green party weren't invited to that hustings. Neither were the independants either. Likewise the independants weren't invited to the bbc hustings either - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-68369620Simon has seemingly just tried to create a needless headline. So are these selective events then?
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 23, 2024 0:11:49 GMT
It's not unusual for a hustings to not invite every candidate either. The green party weren't invited to that hustings. Neither were the independants either. Likewise the independants weren't invited to the bbc hustings either - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-68369620Simon has seemingly just tried to create a needless headline. So are these selective events then? A hustings can be selective or non selective even if all candidates aren't invited. Although it does have to meet a certain criteria - www.electoralcommission.org.uk/are-you-holding-a-hustings/non-selective-hustings-good-practice-recommendationsFor what it's worth I think all candidates should get an opportunity to speak but can understand why you'd want a cap on it too as 11 people would be far too many. Thing is Simon knew a long time ago he wasn't on the list for this but it's being made out that a mob has intimidated him and stopped him. Perfect timing with the "mp intimidation" shouts. He wasn't allowed on the stage because he wasn't listed as a speaker. Had he sat in the crowd he'd likely have got an opportunity to speak at the end, or at some stage, like some of the other independant candidates in the crowd.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 23, 2024 0:58:19 GMT
This is a different Hustings Event than the one Ian posted a Video of The Hustings you refer to is where Simon Danczuk Reform attempted to dictate which members of the Press could attend and ask questions The Video relates to thisThursday 22 February 20247pm - 9pmWardleworth Community CentreSouth StreetRochdaleOL16 2EPDETAILS:This Thursday Rochdale by-election hustings organised by members of the community will take place at Wardleworth Community Centre.Meet and hear from the candidates as they are challenged on the issues that matter.George Galloway, Workers Party confirmedAzhar Ali, formerly Labour invitedIain Donaldson, Liberal Democrat confirmedPaul Ellison, Conservative Party confirmedTo register and book your free place, please visit the link below. You can submit questions when registering.For press enquiries please contact the mobile number below.Entry fee: FreeReform Candidate Simon Danczuk didn't register to attend/speak at the Hustings but turned up at the Door and was filmed gaining entry which was never denied. He was told as can be clearly heard in the Video that as he hadn't registered he would be last to speak. Having made his point Danczuk flounced off but it was sufficient for Farage etc to Tweet and call foul. Many I'm sure will be taken in by the charade Two other Candidates who had registered to speak at the Hustings Azhar Ali Labour and Paul Ellison Conservative had informed the Hustings they would not attend although previously registered
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2024 1:10:26 GMT
This is a different Hustings Event than the one Ian posted a Video of The Hustings you refer to is where Simon Danczuk Reform attempted to dictate which members of the Press could attend and ask questions The Video relates to thisThursday 22 February 20247pm - 9pmWardleworth Community CentreSouth StreetRochdaleOL16 2EPDETAILS:This Thursday Rochdale by-election hustings organised by members of the community will take place at Wardleworth Community Centre.Meet and hear from the candidates as they are challenged on the issues that matter.George Galloway, Workers Party confirmedAzhar Ali, formerly Labour invitedIain Donaldson, Liberal Democrat confirmedPaul Ellison, Conservative Party confirmedTo register and book your free place, please visit the link below. You can submit questions when registering.For press enquiries please contact the mobile number below.Entry fee: FreeReform Candidate Simon Danczuk didn't register to attend/speak at the Hustings but turned up at the Door and was filmed gaining entry which was never denied. He was told as can be clearly heard in the Video that as he hadn't registered he would be last to speak. Having made his point Danczuk flounced off but it was sufficient for Farage etc to Tweet and call foul. Many I'm sure will be taken in by the charade Two other Candidates who had registered to speak at the Hustings Azhar Ali Labour and Paul Ellison Conservative had informed the Hustings they would not attend although previously registered Apologies, yes I did not make my point clear. I was trying to highlight that he doesn’t care much about free speech or democracy when it affects him directly (and would actually appear to want to oppress it to help his own ends). At this point, I believe he was with Labour. And Farage wouldn’t deceive people though, would he? He’s a man of the people after all. He must not of known about the mix up.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 23, 2024 8:13:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 23, 2024 8:27:05 GMT
Taking aside that he’s a Tory (I’ve never actually heard of Percy so know nothing of him )and it’s GB News. He talks quite well. It may be that my lack of knowledge of the whole picture makes it a little simplistic but I think his point re politicians living in fear and being afraid to vote is a good one and very worrying that things have got to this point in what is supposed to be a civilised and democratic country.
There should never be a situation where politicians what ever there party are afraid of doing there job through fear of violence.
As he says it sets a precedent and will the same happen when the next inflamatory issue arise. It’s just not acceptable.
There’s a huge difference between protest and open abuse / threatening people.
Do we want to live in a country where aggression and fear makes the call re our political decisions and not the majority.
It’s a mess.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 23, 2024 8:38:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 23, 2024 9:25:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2024 10:53:09 GMT
Taking aside that he’s a Tory (I’ve never actually heard of Percy so know nothing of him )and it’s GB News. He talks quite well. It may be that my lack of knowledge of the whole picture makes it a little simplistic but I think his point re politicians living in fear and being afraid to vote is a good one and very worrying that things have got to this point in what is supposed to be a civilised and democratic country. There should never be a situation where politicians what ever there party are afraid of doing there job through fear of violence. As he says it sets a precedent and will the same happen when the next inflamatory issue arise. It’s just not acceptable. There’s a huge difference between protest and open abuse / threatening people. Do we want to live in a country where aggression and fear makes the call re our political decisions and not the majority. It’s a mess. I do agree that politicians shouldn’t get death threats. It must be awful and terrifying. GB News aren’t the only ones to publish it: amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/22/death-threats-mps-politicians-protestersWhat I would say though is that it’s kind of rich for politicians to cry about the world being more incendiary when it’s their messages of hate that fuel it. When do politicians ever talk about coming together as communities or even as colleagues to address issues. It’s always some form of “you are being screwed” and “they (pick a group, any group) hate you”. Every politician runs on this kind of platform. Now, they want to have their cakes and eat it too. People who decide not to vote should also, rather simply, be fined or removed from office for not bothering to do their jobs. Edit: this goes for the media too. I remember a story about Tucker Carlson being confronted shopping while out with his kid. I think it’s wrong that it happened but also laughable that he blew up about it after. People who live on creating hate should expect hate to blow back on them. It’s not right that it happens but there is such a thing as consequence.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 23, 2024 11:34:32 GMT
Taking aside that he’s a Tory (I’ve never actually heard of Percy so know nothing of him )and it’s GB News. He talks quite well. It may be that my lack of knowledge of the whole picture makes it a little simplistic but I think his point re politicians living in fear and being afraid to vote is a good one and very worrying that things have got to this point in what is supposed to be a civilised and democratic country. There should never be a situation where politicians what ever there party are afraid of doing there job through fear of violence. As he says it sets a precedent and will the same happen when the next inflamatory issue arise. It’s just not acceptable. There’s a huge difference between protest and open abuse / threatening people. Do we want to live in a country where aggression and fear makes the call re our political decisions and not the majority. It’s a mess. 100% agree Cobham. Jo Cox was brutally murdered by an extremist, Jeremy corbyn was used as target practice by the army, punched in the street and had articles in the telegraph saying he needed to be killed. Unfortunately I forsee more attacks coming in the future with pro establishment pushing a narrative that we are now an Islamic state. Unfortunately none of this does alot for the 36000 innocent civillians murdered in Gaza who no longer have a voice. It's a real shame to see MPs now try to act the victim while an innocent person dies every 4 minutes. Kier Starmer and his front bench get my deepest sympathies. The threat of intimidation was so much that they broke convention in the house of commons to prevent the SNP from getting to vote on a motion for a ceasefire and condemning Israel for its collective punishment. I always thought when you were intimidated or threatened and fearing for your life you'd be pushed to do something by those intimidating you. But these MPs were so scared that they actually broke convention to do the opposite of what the public were "intimidating" them to do. Very very brave individuals who should probably be getting a Victoria Cross. The people of gaza may even erect a statue of Starmer for his bravery. Incredibly impressed that after a call with the Israel president and after 13 of 31 people in labours shadow cabinet received donations from the pro Israel Lobby group that they defied all that intimidation to do the opposite of what these Islamic extremists want. It's nearly as if the actual people putting pressure on politicians and intimidating them is the Israeli government and pro Israel Lobby. You know the ones who made starmer break convention so that he could put through a motion which doesn't call out Israel for its collective punishment of Palestine people. A new person dies every 4 minutes so that's probably another 5 deaths in the time I've written this post. Not 5 deaths of MPs, 5 deaths of mostly innocent women and children. I wonder if the Islamic extremists will intimidate MPs into saying Israel has committed no war crimes next.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2024 12:50:36 GMT
Taking aside that he’s a Tory (I’ve never actually heard of Percy so know nothing of him )and it’s GB News. He talks quite well. It may be that my lack of knowledge of the whole picture makes it a little simplistic but I think his point re politicians living in fear and being afraid to vote is a good one and very worrying that things have got to this point in what is supposed to be a civilised and democratic country. There should never be a situation where politicians what ever there party are afraid of doing there job through fear of violence. As he says it sets a precedent and will the same happen when the next inflamatory issue arise. It’s just not acceptable. There’s a huge difference between protest and open abuse / threatening people. Do we want to live in a country where aggression and fear makes the call re our political decisions and not the majority. It’s a mess. 100% agree Cobham. Jo Cox was brutally murdered by an extremist, Jeremy corbyn was used as target practice by the army, punched in the street and had articles in the telegraph saying he needed to be killed. Unfortunately I forsee more attacks coming in the future with pro establishment pushing a narrative that we are now an Islamic state. Unfortunately none of this does alot for the 36000 innocent civillians murdered in Gaza who no longer have a voice. It's a real shame to see MPs now try to act the victim while an innocent person dies every 4 minutes. Kier Starmer and his front bench get my deepest sympathies. The threat of intimidation was so much that they broke convention in the house of commons to prevent the SNP from getting to vote on a motion for a ceasefire and condemning Israel for its collective punishment. I always thought when you were intimidated or threatened and fearing for your life you'd be pushed to do something by those intimidating you. But these MPs were so scared that they actually broke convention to do the opposite of what the public were "intimidating" them to do. Very very brave individuals who should probably be getting a Victoria Cross. The people of gaza may even erect a statue of Starmer for his bravery. Incredibly impressed that after a call with the Israel president and after 13 of 31 people in labours shadow cabinet received donations from the pro Israel Lobby group that they defied all that intimidation to do the opposite of what these Islamic extremists want. It's nearly as if the actual people putting pressure on politicians and intimidating them is the Israeli government and pro Israel Lobby. You know the ones who made starmer break convention so that he could put through a motion which doesn't call out Israel for its collective punishment of Palestine people. A new person dies every 4 minutes so that's probably another 5 deaths in the time I've written this post. Not 5 deaths of MPs, 5 deaths of mostly innocent women and children. I wonder if the Islamic extremists will intimidate MPs into saying Israel has committed no war crimes next. Indeed mate, what we've seen over the last 24 hours is one of the most vulgar displays of gaslighting in British politics, erm ... ever! The speakers decision had absolutely NOTHING to do with protecting the safety of MP's, he said at the time (after his meeting with Starmer) that it was because he believed the current rules were archaic and unfair, it was THIS, that had made him turn protocol on it's head. The bullshit safety of MP's excuse was something which was cooked up much later. If you think the safety of MP's is at risk, you DO NOT allow this to trump British democracy, you inform the police FFS! Did Thatcher allow the Brighton bombing to influence rulings in the HOC? Did she buggery, she dusted herself down and went back to work the very next day. And the whole excuse is actually completely illogical ... Which terrorists was Hoyle so apparently scared of? If there had been an unconditional call for a ceasefire, then is he suggesting that it would have been Israel we would have been under threat from FFS? And as a result of Starmer's treachery (I use that word intentionally), look what he (and Hoyle) have unleashed ... a brand new platform from which right wing nut jobs can now spew their hate. British politics is so far into the gutter at the moment, it really sickens me to the core.
|
|