Get prepared for when football returns - Stock up on PPE now!
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61

Thread: O/T Naz Sha

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    15,762
    Quote Originally Posted by ragingpup View Post
    It sure was. But that doesn't mean that we should ignore the broad scope of appointments to the shadow front bench that hugely eclipse the one controversial appointment, and maintain that "nothing has changed" with Labour as has been suggested. I think that there are many great appointments unifying centre and left and hope that we can at last unite after years of infighting to be an effective opposition.
    A number of these Grooming Gang crimes have been committed in heartland communities , Huddersfield , Rochdale and Rotherham off the top of my head and there's a few more too .

    At a time when the party is fighting for it's political existence in the heartlands it seems to me to be an appointment that's lacking in any kind of thought .

    The three towns mentioned are surrounded by other towns and city's and so the crimes are greatly felt by a huge number of people who do not necessarily live within the borough of those towns .

    When people vote Tory for the first time as they did at the last election they will find anything to justify doing just that because it was for many a very uncomfortable thing to do .

    This is another one of those London type decisions in my opinion from the Labour Party and show there's a huge amount of work to be done in the heartlands to reconnect with the electorate .

    Extremely poor appointment .

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    2,173
    This is how I see it.

    When read in the context of the Owen Twitter account I can understand why people would agree with comment. Id think 'yes, totally ridiculous that there are people out there that believe these girls should just shut up'. Because I understand the context of why its being said.

    However, if written by someone else with a different background I may have a different understanding of the comment.

    'Liking' or Retweeting comment does not mean you agree with the literal mean - it could be to agree with the implied understanding.

    Bit like ironic comment. When taken out of context it has a different meaning.

    Retweeting places it out of the context of the Owen account that brings on a totally different meaning.

    Now she could just be a racist idiot t*at that doesnt deserve anyones time defending her. But, looking at her record, I dont think thats true (in this situation). Just my opinion. Get as upset with me if you like.

    However, this is without question a bad appointment because it gives people ammo against the Labour party (bit like Corbyns insistance on sticking with Abbott).

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    21,912
    Ms Shah later deleted the retweet and unliked the post.

    A spokesman in her office said it was a “genuine accident” and to suggest otherwise was “absolute nonsense,” but did not offer her apologies.

    Name:  DD2961EA-61CD-4F20-9531-A2A8AEB357A1.jpg
Views: 156
Size:  6.1 KB

    Not sure how you accidentally do it oh and she didn’t just retweet it she agreed with him but still defend her is you feel the need
    Last edited by millertop; 10-04-2020 at 10:10 AM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    15,762
    Quote Originally Posted by WanChaiMiller View Post
    This is how I see it.

    When read in the context of the Owen Twitter account I can understand why people would agree with comment. Id think 'yes, totally ridiculous that there are people out there that believe these girls should just shut up'. Because I understand the context of why its being said.

    However, if written by someone else with a different background I may have a different understanding of the comment.

    'Liking' or Retweeting comment does not mean you agree with the literal mean - it could be to agree with the implied understanding.

    Bit like ironic comment. When taken out of context it has a different meaning.

    Retweeting places it out of the context of the Owen account that brings on a totally different meaning.

    Now she could just be a racist idiot t*at that doesnt deserve anyones time defending her. But, looking at her record, I dont think thats true (in this situation). Just my opinion. Get as upset with me if you like.

    However, this is without question a bad appointment because it gives people ammo against the Labour party (bit like Corbyns insistance on sticking with Abbott).
    If you deny the opportunity in the first place then you can't be criticised .

    This is the world we now live in and it might be an idea for the party to start recognising the modern world rules of engagement .

    Political baggage loses elections for the Labour Party , I thought the party might have realised that by now .

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    6,420
    Quote Originally Posted by millertop View Post
    Ms Shah later deleted the retweet and unliked the post.

    A spokesman in her office said it was a “genuine accident” and to suggest otherwise was “absolute nonsense,” but did not offer her apologies.

    Name:  DD2961EA-61CD-4F20-9531-A2A8AEB357A1.jpg
Views: 156
Size:  6.1 KB

    Not sure how you accidentally do it oh and she didn’t just retweet it she agreed with him but still defend her is you feel the need
    It's the Corbyn defence: her brain was present, but not engaged.
    Last edited by KerrAvon; 10-04-2020 at 10:28 AM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,925
    Quote Originally Posted by WanChaiMiller View Post
    This is how I see it.

    When read in the context of the Owen Twitter account I can understand why people would agree with comment. Id think 'yes, totally ridiculous that there are people out there that believe these girls should just shut up'. Because I understand the context of why its being said.

    However, if written by someone else with a different background I may have a different understanding of the comment.

    'Liking' or Retweeting comment does not mean you agree with the literal mean - it could be to agree with the implied understanding.

    Bit like ironic comment. When taken out of context it has a different meaning.

    Retweeting places it out of the context of the Owen account that brings on a totally different meaning.

    Now she could just be a racist idiot t*at that doesnt deserve anyones time defending her. But, looking at her record, I dont think thats true (in this situation). Just my opinion. Get as upset with me if you like.

    However, this is without question a bad appointment because it gives people ammo against the Labour party (bit like Corbyns insistance on sticking with Abbott).
    You've not read her anti-semitic views then?

    She's a racist.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    2,173
    Quote Originally Posted by howdydoo View Post
    You've not read her anti-semitic views then?

    She's a racist.
    I have (which is why I said in 'in this situation').

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    6,420
    Quote Originally Posted by WanChaiMiller View Post
    This is how I see it.

    When read in the context of the Owen Twitter account I can understand why people would agree with comment. Id think 'yes, totally ridiculous that there are people out there that believe these girls should just shut up'. Because I understand the context of why its being said.

    However, if written by someone else with a different background I may have a different understanding of the comment.

    'Liking' or Retweeting comment does not mean you agree with the literal mean - it could be to agree with the implied understanding.

    Bit like ironic comment. When taken out of context it has a different meaning.

    Retweeting places it out of the context of the Owen account that brings on a totally different meaning.

    Now she could just be a racist idiot t*at that doesnt deserve anyones time defending her. But, looking at her record, I dont think thats true (in this situation). Just my opinion. Get as upset with me if you like.

    However, this is without question a bad appointment because it gives people ammo against the Labour party (bit like Corbyns insistance on sticking with Abbott).
    I recall commenting in the past that Labour supporters (mosty raging) in the Corbyn era seemed to have to spend an inordinate amount of time 'interpreting' and concocting excuses for comments made by Party officials. Looks like nowt has changed.

    I was wondering whether Keir would deal with the nutter element that grew up within the party on Corbyn’s watch (in both ways in which the word ‘deal ‘can be used). I’m surprised at the speed with which I got my answer.

    I’m disappointed

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,925
    Quote Originally Posted by WanChaiMiller View Post
    I have (which is why I said in 'in this situation').
    In 'that' situation, she WAS being a racist.

    I see this week, she has a bee in her bonnet about return flights from Pakistan. Does she only represent her Pakistani constituents stranded overseas?

    She's a joke.

    ... and a racist.

    You're fast to condemn any inkling of what you deem to be a racist view on here and ready to label people as such.

    It's a two way street.

    Cohesion shadow minister my ar$e.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    3,059
    People should take there political view specs off when looking at this.
    She has said done terrible things and canít be viewed as a good appointment.

    You only have to read twitter to look at some of the things she has said.
    Sarah champion criticised the grooming gangs and got shunned from her colleagues.
    It seems that double standards are at play here.
    Labour never learn.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •