Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by BigFatPie View Post
    His is still an ongoing legal case so the best thing would be is to not comment at all.

    Connolly pleaded guilty to incitement during nationwide race based riots. If she was a brown person there would be a lot less upset about it.
    Yet your man Starmer referred to the ones convicted in the Southport riots as criminals before they were convicted, he's very choosy about who he condemns.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Observerpie View Post
      Yet your man Starmer referred to the ones convicted in the Southport riots as criminals before they were convicted, he's very choosy about who he condemns.
      Because you can look at a video of a group of people rioting and say *theyre criminals* or *thats criminal behaviour*. What you cant do (or shouldnt) is name an individual and say *hes a criminal* while that legal case is still ongoing and he hasnt pleaded guilty or been convicted.

      Comment


      • It seems that POTUS has been approached and asked to consider offering political asylum to those convicted of free speech issues as well as Tommy Robinson.

        There has also been an approach to POTUS to consider using tariffs to leverage the release of LC.

        This would be a huge, stain on the reputation of the UK and this government if any of this were (true) even considered by Trump.
        Last edited by Med Pie; 24-05-2025, 09:00 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BigFatPie View Post
          I recognise those words as English but the way theyve been put together make no sense. She committed the crime, she pleaded guilty, she was sentenced accordingly, she has now lost an appeal. It?s very simple.
          I think that history will show you are on the wrong side of this argument. I think it will show that there was little justification in this sentence.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Med Pie View Post
            These are the same politics that espouse freedoms whilst locking people up for things they say. The same politics that claim to support free speech.
            Inciting people to kill others isn't free speech, it's breaking the law.

            It applies in both cases, so both should face the consequences.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Med Pie View Post
              It seems that POTUS has been approached and asked to consider offering political asylum to those convicted of free speech issues as well as Tommy Robinson.

              There has also been an approach to POTUS to consider using tariffs to leverage the release of LC.

              This would be a huge, stain on the reputation of the UK and this government if any of this were (true) even considered by Trump.
              To be honest here, the actions of Trump are not going to be considered a stain on anyone but Trump and those alleged to be consulting him on this.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by forwardmagpie View Post
                I think that history will show you are on the wrong side of this argument. I think it will show that there was little justification in this sentence.
                Yes Im sure history will decide that a woman who wrote in the middle of race related riots

                *Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f*****g hotels full of the *******s for all I care ? if that makes me racist so be it.*

                has been treated very harshly indeed. Especially when people were trying to set fire to hotels.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Elite_Pie View Post
                  Inciting people to kill others isn't free speech, it's breaking the law.

                  It applies in both cases, so both should face the consequences.
                  You may struggle to see the difference, I don?t and think her sentence is disgraceful.

                  Comment


                  • How would 'Tommy Robinson' qualify for a VISA to enter the USA, with a list of criminal convictions as long as your arm even before the so-called political prisoner status.

                    Criminal offences

                    Robinson's criminal record includes convictions for violence, financial, and immigration frauds, cocaine possession with intent to supply, and public order offences.[135][136][137] He had previously served at least three separate custodial sentences: in 2005 for assault, in 2012 for using false travel documents, and in 2014 for mortgage fraud.[13][138][139]

                    Use of false passport

                    In October 2012, Robinson was arrested and held on the charge of having entered the United States illegally. He had used a passport in the name of Andrew McMaster to board a Virgin Atlantic flight from London Heathrow to New York City.[13] He had been banned from entering the US due to his criminal record.

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by forwardmagpie View Post
                      You may struggle to see the difference, I don?t and think her sentence is disgraceful.
                      What sentence do you think someone inciting mass murder should get?

                      Comment


                      • Starmer has been reported to the official, statistics, watchdog, in relation to what he says is going to be the cost of the Chagos deal. He has allegedly lied to the British public about the true cost of this deal. He was actually pulled up on it the other day and came out with some waffle about 'net' figures which according to him, is the way that things like this are costed.

                        The real cost is said to be up to ten times what Starmer quoted, bare-faced liar.
                        Last edited by Med Pie; 24-05-2025, 10:40 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Med Pie View Post
                          Starmer has been reported to the official, statistics, watchdog, in relation to what he says is going to be the cost of the Chagos deal. He has allegedly lied to the British public about the true cost of this deal. He was actually pulled up on it the other day and came out with some waffle about 'net' figures which according to him, is the way that things like this are costed.The real cost is said to be up to ten times what Starmer quoted, bare-faced liar.
                          Perhaps they'll find that the government has actually used the long-established method for calculating the cost of long-term projects. This shows the cost as a representative amount in 'today's money'. Interesting that our '5 Eyes' security partners are OK with this agreement. Those opposed seem to mainly be China, Russia, Iran, Reform and the Tories. It will be interesting to see the outcome. Bloody Stattos eh?
                          Last edited by SwalePie; 24-05-2025, 11:42 AM. Reason: Fixed typos

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BigFatPie View Post
                            What sentence do you think someone inciting mass murder should get?
                            Sometimes BFP I despair of people, a bereaved and traumatised woman makes a stupid tweet and realises how stupid it is and deletes it but gets a totally inappropriate 31 month sentence. Do you really believe she is dangerous and was really inciting mass murder?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by forwardmagpie View Post
                              You may struggle to see the difference, I don?t and think her sentence is disgraceful.
                              I can’t see how anyone can find her sentence disgraceful she deserved all she got.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by i961pie View Post
                                I can’t see how anyone can find her sentence disgraceful she deserved all she got.
                                We will disagree then1961pie.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X