|
Post by andystokey on May 6, 2024 18:49:24 GMT
I don't disagree but why did she choose her to come on and then let her spout?. Tommy Robinson, Nick Griffin or Jeremy Corbyn can't get a gig. Braverman is one of the group of plotters trying to overthrow the PM. I’d rather never hear from her or the likes of her again. But she could have made headlines. She is irrelevant to the majority of the electorate. Following the council elections there was plenty of possible guests. It's a machine designed to suck itself off and the LK show is a part of it's machinery. I'm not surprised democracy is dying on its arse. Do you think this tripe appeals to young voters, or anyone?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on May 6, 2024 19:11:41 GMT
Braverman is one of the group of plotters trying to overthrow the PM. I’d rather never hear from her or the likes of her again. But she could have made headlines. She is irrelevant to the majority of the electorate. Following the council elections there was plenty of possible guests. It's a machine designed to suck itself off and the LK show is a part of it's machinery. I'm not surprised democracy is dying on its arse. Do you think this tripe appeals to young voters, or anyone? Yes, all good points with which I agree. The BBC, like every other media outlet, wants a so called rebel to rebel. That’s why they got her in.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 6, 2024 20:29:44 GMT
Why would they follow orders from "f*cking pakis".
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 7, 2024 19:51:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 7, 2024 19:58:37 GMT
I wonder if Prince Andrew thinks the same.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 7, 2024 20:26:09 GMT
Fuck Peter Mandleson. Warmonger and Epstein Island regular…..
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 7, 2024 22:12:24 GMT
Clearly sees Greens as a threat
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 7, 2024 23:24:18 GMT
Why would they follow orders from "f*cking pakis". I think this video is a bit sus ( sorry GAWA I supported you last night) It's from the Tik Tok Lawyer Akhmed Mahmoud He finished a very creditable 3rd in the West Midlands Mayoral Election but in my mind Grifters don't only come in Right-wing guise This is another of Mahmoud's Tik Tok's claiming to be the best Lawyer in UK, you can find many more of his online https://www.tiktok.com/@akhmedyakoob/video/7211601728754470149 I can understand why Newhamindparty a breakaway of disgruntled Gaza supporting ex Labour members would do anything to discredit Labour but they have no chance of unsettling Stephen Timms in East Ham where they are campaigning
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 8:44:27 GMT
Why would they follow orders from "f*cking pakis". I think this video is a bit sus ( sorry GAWA I supported you last night) It's from the Tik Tok Lawyer Akhmed Mahmoud He finished a very creditable 3rd in the West Midlands Mayoral Election but in my mind Grifters don't only come in Right-wing guise This is another of Mahmoud's Tik Tok's claiming to be the best Lawyer in UK, you can find many more of his online https://www.tiktok.com/@akhmedyakoob/video/7211601728754470149 I can understand why Newhamindparty a breakaway of disgruntled Gaza supporting ex Labour members would do anything to discredit Labour but they have no chance of unsettling Stephen Timms in East Ham where they are campaigning Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true. The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue. If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 9:41:44 GMT
I think this video is a bit sus ( sorry GAWA I supported you last night) It's from the Tik Tok Lawyer Akhmed Mahmoud He finished a very creditable 3rd in the West Midlands Mayoral Election but in my mind Grifters don't only come in Right-wing guise This is another of Mahmoud's Tik Tok's claiming to be the best Lawyer in UK, you can find many more of his online https://www.tiktok.com/@akhmedyakoob/video/7211601728754470149 I can understand why Newhamindparty a breakaway of disgruntled Gaza supporting ex Labour members would do anything to discredit Labour but they have no chance of unsettling Stephen Timms in East Ham where they are campaigning Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true. The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue. If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain. Further to that I see a Birmingham newspaper trying to claim its fake. Feels very James Cleverly Stockton Shithole-esque now. Not sure if we will find out the truth.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 14:52:25 GMT
Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true. The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue. If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain. Further to that I see a Birmingham newspaper trying to claim its fake. Feels very James Cleverly Stockton Shithole-esque now. Not sure if we will find out the truth. It absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL The young Teacher has been subjected to Vile Abuse and Death Threats Yacoub Ahmed should be prosecuted for a hate crime www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/teachers-life-blown-apart-onslaught-29128108The West Midlands Police have confirmed that they examined the original Doorbell Footage and confirmed no Racist Language was used and the Video posted was doctored including adding false subtitles www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/police-confirm-no-racist-slurs-29132238This is an outrage, but I'm afraid it is the type of thing we are likely to be subjected to leading up to GE with some people all too willing to believe it if it supports their position Left/Right
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on May 8, 2024 14:56:59 GMT
Further to that I see a Birmingham newspaper trying to claim its fake. Feels very James Cleverly Stockton Shithole-esque now. Not sure if we will find out the truth. It absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL The young Teacher has been subjected to Vile Abuse and Death Threats Yacoub Ahmed should be prosecuted for a hate crime www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/teachers-life-blown-apart-onslaught-29128108The West Midlands Police have confirmed that they examined the original Doorbell Footage and confirmed no Racist Language was used and the Video posted was doctored including adding false subtitles www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/police-confirm-no-racist-slurs-29132238This is an outrage, but I'm afraid it is the type of thing we are likely to be subjected to leading up to GE with some people all too willing to believe it if it supports their position Left/Right It’s exactly the problem with a) videos, and b) social media. People see and hear something and believe it must be true because they’ve witnessed a video of it. The problem is nowadays that these concepts of the past no longer exist (did they ever?). He should be prosecuted (doubt he will). The woman should sue him to the point where the only time she’s seen on that camera again is when she’s answering the door of her new home. He probably thought it was a harmless thing to do, assuming she wouldn’t be identified. He should be taken to the fucking cleaners, then to prison. All this shit does is ruin people’s lives while also giving others examples of people crying wolf to state that these things never actually happen.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 15:13:56 GMT
Further to that I see a Birmingham newspaper trying to claim its fake. Feels very James Cleverly Stockton Shithole-esque now. Not sure if we will find out the truth. It absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL The young Teacher has been subjected to Vile Abuse and Death Threats Yacoub Ahmed should be prosecuted for a hate crime www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/teachers-life-blown-apart-onslaught-29128108The West Midlands Police have confirmed that they examined the original Doorbell Footage and confirmed no Racist Language was used and the Video posted was doctored including adding false subtitles www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/police-confirm-no-racist-slurs-29132238This is an outrage, but I'm afraid it is the type of thing we are likely to be subjected to leading up to GE with some people all too willing to believe it if it supports their position Left/Right I'm pretty sure James Cleverly also stands by not using offensive language too. I've heard the video clip and it sounded like paki to me and many others. So I don't think it's disingenuous to flag it at all. Just like Labour don't see an issue with flagging James Cleverleys language which he still continues to claim has been misheard, and which some including myself believe he is lying about.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on May 8, 2024 15:20:17 GMT
I'm pretty sure James Cleverly also stands by not using offensive language too. I've heard the video clip and it sounded like paki to me and many others. So I don't think it's disingenuous to flag it at all. Just like Labour don't see an issue with flagging James Cleverleys language which he still continues to claim has been misheard, and which some including myself believe he is lying about. So, the police saying that the video that was released has been doctored means nothing?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 15:24:34 GMT
It’s exactly the problem with a) videos, and b) social media. People see and hear something and believe it must be true because they’ve witnessed a video of it. The problem is nowadays that these concepts of the past no longer exist (did they ever?). He should be prosecuted (doubt he will). The woman should sue him to the point where the only time she’s seen on that camera again is when she’s answering the door of her new home. He probably thought it was a harmless thing to do, assuming she wouldn’t be identified. He should be taken to the fucking cleaners, then to prison. All this shit does is ruin people’s lives while also giving others examples of people crying wolf to state that these things never actually happen. Couldn't agree more but I doubt a School Teacher has the financial ability to sue him unlike those that recently successfully sued Lozza Fox. He on the other hand besides being a self publicist on Tik Tok is also a Director of a Law Firm As she was canvassing on behalf of a Labour Candidate they should underwrite her costs to restore her reputation in full with compensation I very much doubt Ahmed Yacoub thought it was harmless as he named her which brought her name into the Public Domain As you say this sort of behaviour can ruin people's lives shit sticks and even when it is proved conclusively that Vile Racist Allegations are false some people will always say, oh well she must have done something
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 15:30:29 GMT
Another U turn
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 15:34:09 GMT
I'm pretty sure James Cleverly also stands by not using offensive language too. I've heard the video clip and it sounded like paki to me and many others. So I don't think it's disingenuous to flag it at all. Just like Labour don't see an issue with flagging James Cleverleys language which he still continues to claim has been misheard, and which some including myself believe he is lying about. So, the police saying that the video that was released has been doctored means nothing? The police said the subtitles added on top are doctored because a ring doorbell camera doesn't provide subtitles. They've not said the audio is doctored. The alleged transcript provided in the article even has unaudible listed for parts. I don't see it as conclusive at all. It's more a case of they can't prove "Fucking paki" was said. But they've not proved what was said instead apart from alleging the number 90 was said instead of paki. Maybe it's confirmation bias from seeing reputable people hear the same as me. Listen back to it yourself and see what you think is said. Its in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 15:38:14 GMT
It’s exactly the problem with a) videos, and b) social media. People see and hear something and believe it must be true because they’ve witnessed a video of it. The problem is nowadays that these concepts of the past no longer exist (did they ever?). He should be prosecuted (doubt he will). The woman should sue him to the point where the only time she’s seen on that camera again is when she’s answering the door of her new home. He probably thought it was a harmless thing to do, assuming she wouldn’t be identified. He should be taken to the fucking cleaners, then to prison. All this shit does is ruin people’s lives while also giving others examples of people crying wolf to state that these things never actually happen. Couldn't agree more but I doubt a School Teacher has the financial ability to sue him unlike those that recently successfully sued Lozza Fox. He on the other hand besides being a self publicist on Tik Tok is also a Director of a Law Firm As she was canvassing on behalf of a Labour Candidate they should underwrite her costs to restore her reputation in full with compensation I very much doubt Ahmed Yacoub thought it was harmless as he named her which brought her name into the Public Domain As you say this sort of behaviour can ruin people's lives shit sticks and even when it is proved conclusively that Vile Racist Allegations are false some people will always say, oh well she must have done something And that I don't agree with at all. He shouldn't have been listing her name, employer or anything else. As well as those who provided her personal details. But I don't think it's crystal clear what was said either and I don't think I'm the only one who thought they heard "fucking paki" however the subtitles overlaid maybe made me biasly see that? Lowkey a very credible Palestine commentator also thought he heard "effing paki" so other credible people thought they heard the same. I accept I may be wrong and I also don't under any circumstances think her details should have been put into the public domain. At the same time though I don't think the police have provided a credible explanation either in the sense that they couldn't provide a transcript aside from implying it was 90 instead of paki and everything said prior and after that word is inaudible.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 15:44:03 GMT
I'm pretty sure James Cleverly also stands by not using offensive language too. I've heard the video clip and it sounded like paki to me and many others. So I don't think it's disingenuous to flag it at all. Just like Labour don't see an issue with flagging James Cleverleys language which he still continues to claim has been misheard, and which some including myself believe he is lying about. When I originally questioned the authenticity of the Video and you replied that it was genuine and the person had been named I took it at face value and liked your post, now removed I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Labour you continue to justify the action which had the potential, a person who is not even a Labour Party Member just helping a friend, to have her Reputation and Career ruined by someone, just because they can. An independent investigation has found the Video to have been Digitally Altered, the Police have found no evidence of a Facial Slur, but still you persist. Bad Darts. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/08/viral-hate-campaign-against-dudley-teacher-after-fake-racist-video-shared
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on May 8, 2024 15:54:25 GMT
So, the police saying that the video that was released has been doctored means nothing? The police said the subtitles added on top are doctored because a ring doorbell camera doesn't provide subtitles. They've not said the audio is doctored. The alleged transcript provided in the article even has unaudible listed for parts. I don't see it as conclusive at all. It's more a case of they can't prove "Fucking paki" was said. But they've not proved what was said instead apart from alleging the number 90 was said instead of paki. Maybe it's confirmation bias from seeing reputable people hear the same as me. Listen back to it yourself and see what you think is said. Its in the thread. I’ve listened to it. I can’t tell what was said. If you’re interested in how people can make you hear what they want you to hear, Peter Kay used to do a skit where he would mouth new words to a song. It’s as easy as that. I don’t think that the police need to go into detail about their findings. A prominent person makes an allegation and that goes viral. They are under pressure to act. They find no evidence of racism. This twat has tried to ruin someone’s life. I hope she ruins his.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 16:04:49 GMT
I'm pretty sure James Cleverly also stands by not using offensive language too. I've heard the video clip and it sounded like paki to me and many others. So I don't think it's disingenuous to flag it at all. Just like Labour don't see an issue with flagging James Cleverleys language which he still continues to claim has been misheard, and which some including myself believe he is lying about. When I originally questioned the authenticity of the Video and you replied that it was genuine and the person had been named I took it at face value and liked your post, now removed I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Labour you continue to justify the action which had the potential, a person who is not even a Labour Party Member just helping a friend, to have her Reputation and Career ruined by someone, just because they can. An independent investigation has found the Video to have been Digitally Altered, the Police have found no evidence of a Facial Slur, but still you persist. Bad Darts. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/08/viral-hate-campaign-against-dudley-teacher-after-fake-racist-video-sharedAnd I replied to your question and told you it came from a credible source (Lowkey on twitter - one of the most reliable commentators on Gaza) and yes the woman's name was listed too - not that I agree with it. I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Reform/Tory and biased towards Labour but that's where we are Wannabe. We all have our political preferences and show subconscious and conscious bias towards those who we agree with. I vehemently dislike and oppose this Labour party and leadership and I'll continue to report on and flag things which I don't agree with the party on. Just like you, and myself, have been doing about the Tory party for the last few years and that wasn't something which disappointed you. By digitally altered we should really provide the full facts on what that altering is as someone reading this may think the audio was edited. I know as someone who is impartial and not bias you wouldn't want someone to read your comment and think that fake audio was used. So to clarify "digitally altered" means: "The analysis of the video, which examined the waveforms and audio playback speeds, suggested there had been changes to the volume in the second section of the video where the alleged racist comments were made." "The video, taken on a Ring doorbell in Dudley, used subtitles to suggest the woman had used a slur against Pakistani people" So digitally altered = Audio increased and subtitles added. I look forward to your comments about the new labour MP for Dover and Starmers changes to his workers rights pledges. I presume the reason you've not commented on those yet is simply because you've not seen the national news today and only have been reading the local birmingham newspapers. Certainly nothing to do with any biased views
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 16:44:35 GMT
When I originally questioned the authenticity of the Video and you replied that it was genuine and the person had been named I took it at face value and liked your post, now removed I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Labour you continue to justify the action which had the potential, a person who is not even a Labour Party Member just helping a friend, to have her Reputation and Career ruined by someone, just because they can. An independent investigation has found the Video to have been Digitally Altered, the Police have found no evidence of a Facial Slur, but still you persist. Bad Darts. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/08/viral-hate-campaign-against-dudley-teacher-after-fake-racist-video-sharedAnd I replied to your question and told you it came from a credible source (Lowkey on twitter - one of the most reliable commentators on Gaza) and yes the woman's name was listed too - not that I agree with it. I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Reform/Tory and biased towards Labour but that's where we are Wannabe. We all have our political preferences and show subconscious and conscious bias towards those who we agree with. I vehemently dislike and oppose this Labour party and leadership and I'll continue to report on and flag things which I don't agree with the party on. Just like you, and myself, have been doing about the Tory party for the last few years and that wasn't something which disappointed you. By digitally altered we should really provide the full facts on what that altering is as someone reading this may think the audio was edited. I know as someone who is impartial and not bias you wouldn't want someone to read your comment and think that fake audio was used. So to clarify "digitally altered" means: "The analysis of the video, which examined the waveforms and audio playback speeds, suggested there had been changes to the volume in the second section of the video where the alleged racist comments were made." "The video, taken on a Ring doorbell in Dudley, used subtitles to suggest the woman had used a slur against Pakistani people" So digitally altered = Audio increased and subtitles added. I look forward to your comments about the new labour MP for Dover and Starmers changes to his workers rights pledges. I presume the reason you've not commented on those yet is simply because you've not seen the national news today and only have been reading the local birmingham newspapers. Certainly nothing to do with any biased views You didn't say where your source was that verified the video but it wasn't relevant as I said I took you at your word. The source of video you originally posted was from Newhamindparty who have now taken it down This is what you said: "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true.The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue.If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain"I don't believe I am biased against Reform/Tory but it's sufficient for you to believe it. What I don't do is post Fake Videos and certainly not stand over them if they were proved to be fake. I see Labour as the only credible alternative to Tories currently but as I have said to you before I have been critical of Starmer on this thread many times, There has been no official change to Labour Policy on Workers rights, I don't engage in rumours, it may become clearer after TUC meet Starmer next Tuesday but definitively when Labour publishes it's Manifesto. At that point I will likely have a view. Regarding the MP for Dover I find her to be an odious woman only marginally better than her former husband and MP for Dover who was the Naughty Tory sent to Gaol for sexual offences And no I don't normally read the Birmingham Press but did so today to investigate the False Videos you posted
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 16:45:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 17:41:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 8, 2024 18:41:17 GMT
Don't know if they've improved in the last few years but when I was a union rep for them they were an absolute shambles.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 19:36:26 GMT
And I replied to your question and told you it came from a credible source (Lowkey on twitter - one of the most reliable commentators on Gaza) and yes the woman's name was listed too - not that I agree with it. I find it extremely disappointing that you are so biased against Reform/Tory and biased towards Labour but that's where we are Wannabe. We all have our political preferences and show subconscious and conscious bias towards those who we agree with. I vehemently dislike and oppose this Labour party and leadership and I'll continue to report on and flag things which I don't agree with the party on. Just like you, and myself, have been doing about the Tory party for the last few years and that wasn't something which disappointed you. By digitally altered we should really provide the full facts on what that altering is as someone reading this may think the audio was edited. I know as someone who is impartial and not bias you wouldn't want someone to read your comment and think that fake audio was used. So to clarify "digitally altered" means: "The analysis of the video, which examined the waveforms and audio playback speeds, suggested there had been changes to the volume in the second section of the video where the alleged racist comments were made." "The video, taken on a Ring doorbell in Dudley, used subtitles to suggest the woman had used a slur against Pakistani people" So digitally altered = Audio increased and subtitles added. I look forward to your comments about the new labour MP for Dover and Starmers changes to his workers rights pledges. I presume the reason you've not commented on those yet is simply because you've not seen the national news today and only have been reading the local birmingham newspapers. Certainly nothing to do with any biased views You didn't say where your source was that verified the video but it wasn't relevant as I said I took you at your word. The source of video you originally posted was from Newhamindparty who have now taken it down This is what you said: "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true.The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue.If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain"I don't believe I am biased against Reform/Tory but it's sufficient for you to believe it. What I don't do is post Fake Videos and certainly not stand over them if they were proved to be fake. I see Labour as the only credible alternative to Tories currently but as I have said to you before I have been critical of Starmer on this thread many times, There has been no official change to Labour Policy on Workers rights, I don't engage in rumours, it may become clearer after TUC meet Starmer next Tuesday but definitively when Labour publishes it's Manifesto. At that point I will likely have a view. Regarding the MP for Dover I find her to be an odious woman only marginally better than her former husband and MP for Dover who was the Naughty Tory sent to Gaol for sexual offences And no I don't normally read the Birmingham Press but did so today to investigate the False Videos you posted What do you mean "I took your word". You said you don't believe it and I said "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true". Nobody forced you to think or believe anything. This might sound really fucking crazy to you wannabe but what I did was listen to the audio and think "oh that does sound like Effing Paki" and then posted the video. On hindsight maybe I should have dropped Lowkey a DM on twitter and asked him if he could verify it for me and then when a subsequent article came out claiming the audio says otherwise, I could have then messaged him blaming him for me thinking it was real and claiming all he does is post fake videos It doesn't make a blind bit of difference which account shared the video does it? Are Newham Independants not reliable now either? The video was all over the internet and shared by thousands of people. Lowkey was just another of them. You could easily listen to the video yourself and decide whether you think you heard "f*cking pakis" or not. I thought I did along with thousands of others. Why didn't you challenge me on the video of worker party activists being run over by people allegedly linked to Labour? Could it not have been just as easily manipulated? For all I know it could have been an old historic video reposted to spread rumours. Literally no different in any way from the other video except there's been no article to attempt to disprove it. I'm sure if there was an article though you'd suddenly be quoting it in an attempt to discredit me. Given you've been active on the forum multiple times between when I posted that video and you finally quoted it. I honestly would not put it past you at all to have done some digging and read otherwise at the time you quoted and challenged me. All so you could try and weaponize it against me in this pathetic display. You were very quick on the ball when the Birmingham mail started reporting it weren't you? I have to say your attitude over this fake video is a huge polar contrast to your attitude towards Paul Spencer for his posts about Kate Middleton (I defended him). Maybe you didn't see any worth jumping on that pile on on Paul because he doesn't criticise your Labour party so he's a good ally for you to have on here. But you have really taken a fancy for me all of a sudden. (To add I still think the Kate Middleton stuff is a bit suss) A bit like your attempts at the weekend to discredit me because you didn't like me pointing out the low turnout for the blackpool by election and me stating people aren't inspired to come out and vote for Starmer. And then you posted a load of jibberish to try and justify the low turnout which I believe was the 19th lowest out of 23 by elections. And of course you being completely impartial and not biased in any shape or form when it comes to Labour, you also took into account the fact that the by election was in spring, on the same day as many other local elections etc.. and how that naturally should have a positive influence on turnout rather than resulting in one of the lowest by election turnouts recently (PS: You didn't). But you did eventually stop replying when I quoted the BBC also acknowledging it as a poor turnout. Not sure if the BBC is credible or not in your barometer, maybe a source from the birmingham mail would be better. What I'd say you're blatantly trying to do here Wannabe is be very calculated in how you behave but lacking the self awareness that others see through it. You clearly have an issue with me rightfully criticising the actions of this right wing Labour party and that's grinding your gears so at every possible opportunity where you think I've got something wrong you're there trying to discredit me. Whether it be this thread, the tory thread, the George Galloway thread. But guess what pal. It's not going to silence me. I'm sorry that you think a party which has evicted it's most left wing members and replaced them with further right wing tories isn't the party for me. I'm sorry that I'm not a fan of a party which takes advice from Epsteins best mates. I'm sorry that I'm not supportive of more austerity. I'm sorry that nationalising the railways when 3/4 countries already have nationalised railways doesn't get me off my feet. And I'm sorry that I'm unwilling to EVER vote for anyone who represents a party lead by a man who think it's ok to turn off electric and water to innocent people being bombed. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a man who LIED to be elected labour leader and then U-turned on everything. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a party led by a man who banned his MPS from joining picket lines to support WORKING PEOPLE. These are things which YOU need to own and you need to accept because YOU support that leader. So attack me all you like but I'll not be taking any lessons on morals from someone who votes for the above. When I criticise the tories I meant it. I'm not going to have the brass neck to sit here and criticise Boris for bringing parliment into disrepute while at the same time say I'm going to vote for Starmer who with his sidekick speaker of the house brought opposition day into disrepute to try and save face. It's not one rule for Labour and another rule for Tories with me. Strap in fella because I'm not going anywhere and while you may want to sweep Labour corruption under the carpet (You never post any original articles in relation to their activities - simply commenting on what others have posted), I'll very much be posting what they do just like I do with the tories. xxx
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 8, 2024 19:55:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 8, 2024 21:14:51 GMT
You didn't say where your source was that verified the video but it wasn't relevant as I said I took you at your word. The source of video you originally posted was from Newhamindparty who have now taken it down This is what you said: "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true.The woman's identity has been leaked and she is a teacher at a local school which has confirmed it's looking into the issue.If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told given that the accused name is now in public domain"I don't believe I am biased against Reform/Tory but it's sufficient for you to believe it. What I don't do is post Fake Videos and certainly not stand over them if they were proved to be fake. I see Labour as the only credible alternative to Tories currently but as I have said to you before I have been critical of Starmer on this thread many times, There has been no official change to Labour Policy on Workers rights, I don't engage in rumours, it may become clearer after TUC meet Starmer next Tuesday but definitively when Labour publishes it's Manifesto. At that point I will likely have a view. Regarding the MP for Dover I find her to be an odious woman only marginally better than her former husband and MP for Dover who was the Naughty Tory sent to Gaol for sexual offences And no I don't normally read the Birmingham Press but did so today to investigate the False Videos you posted What do you mean "I took your word". You said you don't believe it and I said "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true". Nobody forced you to think or believe anything. This might sound really fucking crazy to you wannabe but what I did was listen to the audio and think "oh that does sound like Effing Paki" and then posted the video. On hindsight maybe I should have dropped Lowkey a DM on twitter and asked him if he could verify it for me and then when a subsequent article came out claiming the audio says otherwise, I could have then messaged him blaming him for me thinking it was real and claiming all he does is post fake videos It doesn't make a blind bit of difference which account shared the video does it? Are Newham Independants not reliable now either? The video was all over the internet and shared by thousands of people. Lowkey was just another of them. You could easily listen to the video yourself and decide whether you think you heard "f*cking pakis" or not. I thought I did along with thousands of others. Why didn't you challenge me on the video of worker party activists being run over by people allegedly linked to Labour? Could it not have been just as easily manipulated? For all I know it could have been an old historic video reposted to spread rumours. Literally no different in any way from the other video except there's been no article to attempt to disprove it. I'm sure if there was an article though you'd suddenly be quoting it in an attempt to discredit me. Given you've been active on the forum multiple times between when I posted that video and you finally quoted it. I honestly would not put it past you at all to have done some digging and read otherwise at the time you quoted and challenged me. All so you could try and weaponize it against me in this pathetic display. You were very quick on the ball when the Birmingham mail started reporting it weren't you? I have to say your attitude over this fake video is a huge polar contrast to your attitude towards Paul Spencer for his posts about Kate Middleton (I defended him). Maybe you didn't see any worth jumping on that pile on on Paul because he doesn't criticise your Labour party so he's a good ally for you to have on here. But you have really taken a fancy for me all of a sudden. (To add I still think the Kate Middleton stuff is a bit suss) A bit like your attempts at the weekend to discredit me because you didn't like me pointing out the low turnout for the blackpool by election and me stating people aren't inspired to come out and vote for Starmer. And then you posted a load of jibberish to try and justify the low turnout which I believe was the 19th lowest out of 23 by elections. And of course you being completely impartial and not biased in any shape or form when it comes to Labour, you also took into account the fact that the by election was in spring, on the same day as many other local elections etc.. and how that naturally should have a positive influence on turnout rather than resulting in one of the lowest by election turnouts recently (PS: You didn't). But you did eventually stop replying when I quoted the BBC also acknowledging it as a poor turnout. Not sure if the BBC is credible or not in your barometer, maybe a source from the birmingham mail would be better. What I'd say you're blatantly trying to do here Wannabe is be very calculated in how you behave but lacking the self awareness that others see through it. You clearly have an issue with me rightfully criticising the actions of this right wing Labour party and that's grinding your gears so at every possible opportunity where you think I've got something wrong you're there trying to discredit me. Whether it be this thread, the tory thread, the George Galloway thread. But guess what pal. It's not going to silence me. I'm sorry that you think a party which has evicted it's most left wing members and replaced them with further right wing tories isn't the party for me. I'm sorry that I'm not a fan of a party which takes advice from Epsteins best mates. I'm sorry that I'm not supportive of more austerity. I'm sorry that nationalising the railways when 3/4 countries already have nationalised railways doesn't get me off my feet. And I'm sorry that I'm unwilling to EVER vote for anyone who represents a party lead by a man who think it's ok to turn off electric and water to innocent people being bombed. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a man who LIED to be elected labour leader and then U-turned on everything. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a party led by a man who banned his MPS from joining picket lines to support WORKING PEOPLE. These are things which YOU need to own and you need to accept because YOU support that leader. So attack me all you like but I'll not be taking any lessons on morals from someone who votes for the above. When I criticise the tories I meant it. I'm not going to have the brass neck to sit here and criticise Boris for bringing parliment into disrepute while at the same time say I'm going to vote for Starmer who with his sidekick speaker of the house brought opposition day into disrepute to try and save face. It's not one rule for Labour and another rule for Tories with me. Strap in fella because I'm not going anywhere and while you may want to sweep Labour corruption under the carpet (You never post any original articles in relation to their activities - simply commenting on what others have posted), I'll very much be posting what they do just like I do with the tories. xxx I think you take me, this MB and yourself far too seriously judging by the above post the approximate length of a Mr Coke Epistle and as such I shall reply to to in a General sense rather than point by point. When you posted the fake video last night I immediately had doubts and said so but I had no evidence to be conclusive. When I saw your reply this morning with apparent verification I was happy to concede I was wrong and liked your post. Having been out most of the day when I signed in again you had added a further reply to me that questions were being asked about the authenticity so I began to investigate myself and it didn't take long to establish that the video was bollocks. The previous evening you posted a video which some questioned it's authenticity, some said you wouldn't be the first or last to be fooled. I posted defending the video Since you invoke Paul Spencer into the conversation when Paul posted an unverified video which proved to be fake he had the good grace to accept he should have been more cautious. You seem intent on performing a rearguard action defending the fake video As a matter of record Paul and I have diametrically different views on Covid and Age of consent between adults and have debated as such. If you want to engage in a crusade on behalf of WPB fill your boots but don't be surprised if you are challenged on any dubious postings. I'm no particular fan of Starmer and have said so several times on this thread, I'm quite convinced Paul would be offended if he was described as a Starmer fanboy I know you don't live on the mainland but here in England the Economy is in shit. It has been in stagnation for at least 2 years and anaemic for 16. Through a series self centred and crazy decisions this Tory Administration has wrecked havoc. A previous comment of mine which you took particular exception to was "I could accept a period of dull" I have no problems repeating it. Public and Private Investment has been crap for many years, unless you believe Mr Coke. Labour if elected can't afford to "frighten the horses" like Liz did. I find Rachel Reeves Economic direction coherent most importantly she knows that it will require State and Private Investment to shake the UK Economy out of its slumber, this has been absent for years because Business doesn't know what direction UK is going. The competitors US via IRA and EU with Green Deal are providing multi billions of grants and tax breaks. It's disappointing that the £28Bn Green incentives have been delayed but it's a factor of the UK Economy. Regarding Workers Rights which you are currently posting on, as an example Zero Hours Contracts under Labour has not been abandoned but revised where a worker who has been employed for 12 weeks can, at their option, become an employee with sick pay and other benefits, OR NOT if they decide Your passion is fine mate but this is an obscure Football Forum where people exchange opinions
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 8, 2024 22:05:28 GMT
What do you mean "I took your word". You said you don't believe it and I said "Of course you're welcome to believe it's not true". Nobody forced you to think or believe anything. This might sound really fucking crazy to you wannabe but what I did was listen to the audio and think "oh that does sound like Effing Paki" and then posted the video. On hindsight maybe I should have dropped Lowkey a DM on twitter and asked him if he could verify it for me and then when a subsequent article came out claiming the audio says otherwise, I could have then messaged him blaming him for me thinking it was real and claiming all he does is post fake videos It doesn't make a blind bit of difference which account shared the video does it? Are Newham Independants not reliable now either? The video was all over the internet and shared by thousands of people. Lowkey was just another of them. You could easily listen to the video yourself and decide whether you think you heard "f*cking pakis" or not. I thought I did along with thousands of others. Why didn't you challenge me on the video of worker party activists being run over by people allegedly linked to Labour? Could it not have been just as easily manipulated? For all I know it could have been an old historic video reposted to spread rumours. Literally no different in any way from the other video except there's been no article to attempt to disprove it. I'm sure if there was an article though you'd suddenly be quoting it in an attempt to discredit me. Given you've been active on the forum multiple times between when I posted that video and you finally quoted it. I honestly would not put it past you at all to have done some digging and read otherwise at the time you quoted and challenged me. All so you could try and weaponize it against me in this pathetic display. You were very quick on the ball when the Birmingham mail started reporting it weren't you? I have to say your attitude over this fake video is a huge polar contrast to your attitude towards Paul Spencer for his posts about Kate Middleton (I defended him). Maybe you didn't see any worth jumping on that pile on on Paul because he doesn't criticise your Labour party so he's a good ally for you to have on here. But you have really taken a fancy for me all of a sudden. (To add I still think the Kate Middleton stuff is a bit suss) A bit like your attempts at the weekend to discredit me because you didn't like me pointing out the low turnout for the blackpool by election and me stating people aren't inspired to come out and vote for Starmer. And then you posted a load of jibberish to try and justify the low turnout which I believe was the 19th lowest out of 23 by elections. And of course you being completely impartial and not biased in any shape or form when it comes to Labour, you also took into account the fact that the by election was in spring, on the same day as many other local elections etc.. and how that naturally should have a positive influence on turnout rather than resulting in one of the lowest by election turnouts recently (PS: You didn't). But you did eventually stop replying when I quoted the BBC also acknowledging it as a poor turnout. Not sure if the BBC is credible or not in your barometer, maybe a source from the birmingham mail would be better. What I'd say you're blatantly trying to do here Wannabe is be very calculated in how you behave but lacking the self awareness that others see through it. You clearly have an issue with me rightfully criticising the actions of this right wing Labour party and that's grinding your gears so at every possible opportunity where you think I've got something wrong you're there trying to discredit me. Whether it be this thread, the tory thread, the George Galloway thread. But guess what pal. It's not going to silence me. I'm sorry that you think a party which has evicted it's most left wing members and replaced them with further right wing tories isn't the party for me. I'm sorry that I'm not a fan of a party which takes advice from Epsteins best mates. I'm sorry that I'm not supportive of more austerity. I'm sorry that nationalising the railways when 3/4 countries already have nationalised railways doesn't get me off my feet. And I'm sorry that I'm unwilling to EVER vote for anyone who represents a party lead by a man who think it's ok to turn off electric and water to innocent people being bombed. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a man who LIED to be elected labour leader and then U-turned on everything. I'm sorry that I don't want to vote for a party led by a man who banned his MPS from joining picket lines to support WORKING PEOPLE. These are things which YOU need to own and you need to accept because YOU support that leader. So attack me all you like but I'll not be taking any lessons on morals from someone who votes for the above. When I criticise the tories I meant it. I'm not going to have the brass neck to sit here and criticise Boris for bringing parliment into disrepute while at the same time say I'm going to vote for Starmer who with his sidekick speaker of the house brought opposition day into disrepute to try and save face. It's not one rule for Labour and another rule for Tories with me. Strap in fella because I'm not going anywhere and while you may want to sweep Labour corruption under the carpet (You never post any original articles in relation to their activities - simply commenting on what others have posted), I'll very much be posting what they do just like I do with the tories. xxx I think you take me, this MB and yourself far too seriously judging by the above post the approximate length of a Mr Coke Epistle and as such I shall reply to to in a General sense rather than point by point. You've came at my posts numerous times over the past fortnight which I have no issue with and enjoy the debate. What you've tried to do however this time is exaggerate the impact of me posting this video and try to guilt trip me. Maybe it's not intended but that's how it's been received.
When you posted the fake video last night (The video was posted two evenings ago) I immediately had doubts and said so (You didn't as you didn't comment till 27 hours later) but I had no evidence to be conclusive. When I saw your reply this morning with apparent verification I was happy to concede I was wrong and liked your post. (I never verified anything this morning - I ended the post saying "If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told") Having been out most of the day when I signed in again you had added a further reply to me that questions were being asked about the authenticity (Yes correct. I was the one to highlight it.) so I began to investigate myself and it didn't take long to establish that the video was bollocks. And the language I got: "It absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL" - The capitals and language as if it's crime of the century. You either listened to the video and thought you heard it or you didn't. It's quite clear how people could easily believe that's what they heard. But where you're impartiality is evident is that when James Cleverley has denied what he was accused of saying (and still stands by it), that isn't FALSE and DISGRACEFUL. You likely joined in on that and still believe he said that. Has it been verified by the police he said that? Should you be prosecuted for a hate crime for belieiving it when you can't be 100% sure. Alot of the videos of James had the video doctored with the audio increased when he said those words on Stockton and it also had subtitles. Maybe those doctored videos make you think you heard something you didn't?" Video posted was doctored" - Obtuse language you use throughout your posts. Subtitles overlayed and audio increased is all that was doctored. Not making that clear makes it seem like the audio was edited to add the word "paki""This is an outrage" - Again completely over the top reaction. "subjected to leading up to GE with some people all too willing to believe it if it supports their position Left/Right" - You indirectly announcing that anything I say should be scrutinised because it's only being posted to support my position. (Which is ironic given I'm the one who posted to announce it was fake).
I'd like for you again to reflect on the James Cleverley accusations in relation to the language he used in the house of commons. You seem to be under the impression in the above scenario that everyone who shared that video has been involved in a false, disgraceful hate crime and it's outrageous for anyone to possibly believe that video was true unless it supported their position. So does that mean those who believe James said Stockton was a shite hole (despite him denying it till this day) are also involved in a false, disgraceful hate crime and it's outrageous for anyone to possibly believe that video was true unless it supported their position?
The previous evening you posted a video which some questioned it's authenticity, some said you wouldn't be the first or last to be fooled. (It was a picture. And I believe still it is true) I posted defending the video. Since you invoke Paul Spencer into the conversation when Paul posted an unverified video which proved to be fake he had the good grace to accept he should have been more cautious. (That's good for Paul but if someone comes at me shouting THAT'S FALSE AND DISGRACEFUL, after I've already pointed out it may be fake and made no attempt to pull the wool over peoples eyes by being honest and the first to disclose it - then that feels like a personal attack. Maybe your approach to Paul was less personal which resulted in a kinder reply and likely wasn't proceeded by you challenging him on multiple other things in the days before.) You seem intent on performing a rearguard action defending the fake video As a matter of record Paul and I have diametrically different views on Covid and Age of consent between adults and have debated as such. (I know you and Paul don't agree on everything - I compliment the fact that many of us "lefties" often disagree. I was mostly defending why I could believe it was real after being shouted at that it was fake and disgraceful despite being the one to disclose the news. I've also came to learn through the Corbyn years that many media outlets will discredit politicians they don't like. So naturally I am going to have a slight doubt too as I've seen smear campaigns before. The person in question who you think should be charged with a hate crime performed very well in the mayor election as an independant and intends to stand as an MP. Senior Labour sources were quoted saying they were concerned about the muslim vote at the weekend. It's in labours best interests to disprove this allegation. But I still think when I listen to the audio it sounds more like what I read on the subtitle than their translation. No refute has came out however so it is what it is. And thus I conceded that I disagree with the accused's details being shared. But I don't apologise for thinking I heard what I heard. Do you apologise for thinking James Cleverely said Stocktons a shithole despite there being no investigation to prove he did?)
If you want to engage in a crusade on behalf of WPB fill your boots but don't be surprised if you are challenged on any dubious postings. I'm no particular fan of Starmer and have said so several times on this thread, I'm quite convinced Paul would be offended if he was described as a Starmer fanboy. (I mentioned Paul in relation to one subject - Kate Middleton. Paul is not a Starmer fan boy. I don't agree with Galloway on everything and I won't be voting Workers Party plus The Greens movements over the past week have really impressed me particularly their deputy leader. But... I agree with alot more with Galloway than I do with Starmer.)I know you don't live on the mainland but here in England the Economy is in shit. It has been in stagnation for at least 2 years and anaemic for 16. Through a series self centred and crazy decisions this Tory Administration has wrecked havoc. A previous comment of mine which you took particular exception to was "I could accept a period of dull" I have no problems repeating it. Public and Private Investment has been crap for many years, unless you believe Mr Coke. Labour if elected can't afford to "frighten the horses" like Liz did. (I've lived through all of this in 2010 during the Cameron feeling the pinch years and the main difference between then and now is inequality. Any party which represents the working class will have this top of their agenda. Labour don't. I didn't accept Tory austerity then and I don't accept Labour austerity now. There are MANY things which can be done to tackle inequality and labour can't even speak the word. I can accept austerity if it means inequality being tackled but Labours Neoliberalism makes me believe it's more than likely going to be the poor taking the cuts and the wealthiest taking the gains. Enough is enough.) I find Rachel Reeves Economic direction coherent most importantly she knows that it will require State and Private Investment to shake the UK Economy out of its slumber, this has been absent for years because Business doesn't know what direction UK is going. The competitors US via IRA and EU with Green Deal are providing multi billions of grants and tax breaks. It's disappointing that the £28Bn Green incentives have been delayed but it's a factor of the UK Economy. Regarding Workers Rights which you are currently posting on, as an example Zero Hours Contracts under Labour has not been abandoned but revised where a worker who has been employed for 12 weeks can, at their option, become an employee with sick pay and other benefits, OR NOT if they decide Your passion is fine mate but this is an obscure Football Forum where people exchange opinions (I have no personal issue with you or anyone. But we are no longer in "stop the tories" territory now. Starmer is the incumbent PM and all we can do is decide on how big a majority he may have. This is a real opportunity for parties on the left like the Greens or Workers Party or Independents to make gains and offer a left wing alternative which can be built on. The parallels between this Labour party and Camerons are uncanny and that's a real indication of just how far right the left has shifted and will continue to shift. Being better than the tories is not enough. If Starmers party gets a resounding majority then I think it will be a very long time, if ever, that politics shift back towards the left. And voting for them is us accepting that as our left wing alternative which I can't accept) No kisses in return for me? xox
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 9, 2024 0:09:36 GMT
I think you take me, this MB and yourself far too seriously judging by the above post the approximate length of a Mr Coke Epistle and as such I shall reply to to in a General sense rather than point by point. You've came at my posts numerous times over the past fortnight which I have no issue with and enjoy the debate. What you've tried to do however this time is exaggerate the impact of me posting this video and try to guilt trip me. Maybe it's not intended but that's how it's been received. If that's how you received it, it was not intended. I take an a la carte approach to posts not the poster. If I find it agreeable I may like, if I find it disagreeable or questionable I may reply with a rebuttal, most posts I ignore. I doubt your post had very little impact nor my nor my questioning of it but I do find it unusual your defence of it.When you posted the fake video last night (The video was posted two evenings ago) I immediately had doubts and said so (You didn't as you didn't comment till 27 hours later) but I had no evidence to be conclusive. When I saw your reply this morning with apparent verification I was happy to concede I was wrong and liked your post. (I never verified anything this morning - I ended the post saying "If its all fabricated then I've no doubt we will be told") Having been out most of the day when I signed in again you had added a further reply to me that questions were being asked about the authenticity (Yes correct. I was the one to highlight it.) so I began to investigate myself and it didn't take long to establish that the video was bollocks. And the language I got: "It absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL" - The capitals and language as if it's crime of the century. You either listened to the video and thought you heard it or you didn't. It's quite clear how people could easily believe that's what they heard. But where you're impartiality is evident is that when James Cleverley has denied what he was accused of saying (and still stands by it), that isn't FALSE and DISGRACEFUL. You likely joined in on that and still believe he said that. Has it been verified by the police he said that? Should you be prosecuted for a hate crime for belieiving it when you can't be 100% sure. Alot of the videos of James had the video doctored with the audio increased when he said those words on Stockton and it also had subtitles. Maybe those doctored videos make you think you heard something you didn't?" Video posted was doctored" - Obtuse language you use throughout your posts. Subtitles overlayed and audio increased is all that was doctored. Not making that clear makes it seem like the audio was edited to add the word "paki""This is an outrage" - Again completely over the top reaction. "subjected to leading up to GE with some people all too willing to believe it if it supports their position Left/Right" - You indirectly announcing that anything I say should be scrutinised because it's only being posted to support my position. (Which is ironic given I'm the one who posted to announce it was fake).You are being both Paranoid and Misinterpreting, IN FULL what I posted wasIt absolutely is FALSE and DISGRACEFUL
The young Teacher has been subjected to Vile Abuse and Death Threats
Yacoub Ahmed should be prosecuted for a hate crime It is perfectly clear that the FALSE and DISGRACEFUL accusation is directed towards Akhmed Yacoub NOT you.I'd like for you again to reflect on the James Cleverley accusations in relation to the language he used in the house of commons. You seem to be under the impression in the above scenario that everyone who shared that video has been involved in a false, disgraceful hate crime and it's outrageous for anyone to possibly believe that video was true unless it supported their position. So does that mean those who believe James said Stockton was a shite hole (despite him denying it till this day) are also involved in a false, disgraceful hate crime and it's outrageous for anyone to possibly believe that video was true unless it supported their position?"When asked about the resulting abuse on account of her being 'outed' as a racist, he (Akhmed Yacoob) denied culpability, telling us: "I have not made any such claims (other than posting the video to his 200,000 followers and shared the ladys nsme telephone number and email) and would like to see the findings made (by the Labour party and West Midlands Police) and will not make any further comment."
Others who posted the original video - including rapper Lowkey and local supporters of Yakoob - have since deleted it. When asked if he had carefully analysed the video originally before using it on his channels, he did not reply. Nazir Afzal, a son of Birmingham and former chief prosecutor, said in response to our story today: "The candidate and his allies need to respond with correction, with the same force that he and others circulated the false information. Online abuse has real-world consequences."
Qasim Mughal, new councillor in Dudley, whose friend was out canvassing and supporting him on the election trail when she became a victim of an online onslaught One city linguist said the mass 'mishearing' of the words was potentially an example of 'confirmation bias', especially when shared via a 'trusted source" The previous evening you posted a video which some questioned it's authenticity, some said you wouldn't be the first or last to be fooled. (It was a picture. And I believe still it is true)And so do I which is why I posted in support of it I posted defending the video. Since you invoke Paul Spencer into the conversation when Paul posted an unverified video which proved to be fake he had the good grace to accept he should have been more cautious. (That's good for Paul but if someone comes at me shouting THAT'S FALSE AND DISGRACEFUL, after I've already pointed out it may be fake and made no attempt to pull the wool over peoples eyes by being honest and the first to disclose it - then that feels like a personal attack. Maybe your approach to Paul was less personal which resulted in a kinder reply and likely wasn't proceeded by you challenging him on multiple other things in the days before.)I have already said that the FALSE and DISGRACEFUL comment was directed towards Akhmed Yacoob, it was obvious from the complete post. You seem intent on performing a rearguard action defending the fake video As a matter of record Paul and I have diametrically different views on Covid and Age of consent between adults and have debated as such. (I know you and Paul don't agree on everything - I compliment the fact that many of us "lefties" often disagree. I was mostly defending why I could believe it was real after being shouted at that it was fake and disgraceful despite being the one to disclose the news. I've also came to learn through the Corbyn years that many media outlets will discredit politicians they don't like. So naturally I am going to have a slight doubt too as I've seen smear campaigns before. The person in question who you think should be charged with a hate crime performed very well in the mayor election as an independant and intends to stand as an MP. Senior Labour sources were quoted saying they were concerned about the muslim vote at the weekend. It's in labours best interests to disprove this allegation. But I still think when I listen to the audio it sounds more like what I read on the subtitle than their translation. No refute has came out however so it is what it is. And thus I conceded that I disagree with the accused's details being shared. But I don't apologise for thinking I heard what I heard. Do you apologise for thinking James Cleverely said Stocktons a shithole despite there being no investigation to prove he did?)
Nobody shouted at you but who else would a reply be directed towards other than the person that posted the video.
In my first post I said that Akhmed Yacoub "came a creditable 3rd" I'm sure it will be repeated in the GE from Left/Right Parties, but not enough to get over the line or influence the outcome like it didn't in West Midlands.
The allegation that a non Labour Party Member who was helping a friend made a Racial Slur has been disproved, Akhmed Yacoob isn't even continuing this fantasy, why are you?
Why THE FUCK would I need to apologise for anything Jimmy Dimley said or didn't say? What investigation do you think should have taken place and by whom? Calling someone a F'kin P is a Racist Slur, saying falsely that someone called a person a F'kin P is a Hate Crime.
If you want to engage in a crusade on behalf of WPB fill your boots but don't be surprised if you are challenged on any dubious postings. I'm no particular fan of Starmer and have said so several times on this thread, I'm quite convinced Paul would be offended if he was described as a Starmer fanboy. (I mentioned Paul in relation to one subject - Kate Middleton. Paul is not a Starmer fan boy. I don't agree with Galloway on everything and I won't be voting Workers Party plus The Greens movements over the past week have really impressed me particularly their deputy leader. But... I agree with alot more with Galloway than I do with Starmer.)
I agree with Starmer or more broadly Labour on certain things, I agree with Galloway on others. I've said so on this MB weeks backI know you don't live on the mainland but here in England the Economy is in shit. It has been in stagnation for at least 2 years and anaemic for 16. Through a series self centred and crazy decisions this Tory Administration has wrecked havoc. A previous comment of mine which you took particular exception to was "I could accept a period of dull" I have no problems repeating it. Public and Private Investment has been crap for many years, unless you believe Mr Coke. Labour if elected can't afford to "frighten the horses" like Liz did. (I've lived through all of this in 2010 during the Cameron feeling the pinch years and the main difference between then and now is inequality. Any party which represents the working class will have this top of their agenda. Labour don't. I didn't accept Tory austerity then and I don't accept Labour austerity now. There are MANY things which can be done to tackle inequality and labour can't even speak the word. I can accept austerity if it means inequality being tackled but Labours Neoliberalism makes me believe it's more than likely going to be the poor taking the cuts and the wealthiest taking the gains. Enough is enough.)
Your reading of Labour's Economic Strategy in the dire circumstances the Economy is in is far different to my reading of it. Rachel Reeves spelt it out in her Mais Lecture. If its any consolation Paul Spencer disagreed with me too.
I find Rachel Reeves Economic direction coherent most importantly she knows that it will require State and Private Investment to shake the UK Economy out of its slumber, this has been absent for years because Business doesn't know what direction UK is going. The competitors US via IRA and EU with Green Deal are providing multi billions of grants and tax breaks. It's disappointing that the £28Bn Green incentives have been delayed but it's a factor of the UK Economy. Regarding Workers Rights which you are currently posting on, as an example Zero Hours Contracts under Labour has not been abandoned but revised where a worker who has been employed for 12 weeks can, at their option, become an employee with sick pay and other benefits, OR NOT if they decide Your passion is fine mate but this is an obscure Football Forum where people exchange opinions (I have no personal issue with you or anyone. But we are no longer in "stop the tories" territory now. Starmer is the incumbent PM and all we can do is decide on how big a majority he may have. This is a real opportunity for parties on the left like the Greens or Workers Party or Independents to make gains and offer a left wing alternative which can be built on. The parallels between this Labour party and Camerons are uncanny and that's a real indication of just how far right the left has shifted and will continue to shift. Being better than the tories is not enough. If Starmers party gets a resounding majority then I think it will be a very long time, if ever, that politics shift back towards the left. And voting for them is us accepting that as our left wing alternative which I can't accept)
The Greens may increase the number of MPs from 1 to maybe 2/3 I doubt it. Gorgeous George will do well to retain his seat but no hope of other WPB MPs and it is highly unlikely, I presume you mean Pro Gaza, MPs gaining any seats, If Corbyn and Abbott are still Independents they will win. No kisses in return for me? xoxX
|
|