Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pointless as they just create accidents further out than the wall to create traffic jams then cut tgeir way into lorries." exactly this | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pointless as they just create accidents further out than the wall to create traffic jams then cut tgeir way into lorries. exactly this" its a bit late for pointless, its already started  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pointless as they just create accidents further out than the wall to create traffic jams then cut tgeir way into lorries. exactly this its a bit late for pointless, its already started "still pointless, Merkel not letting them come unrestricted would of been better but that's political suicide for you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's get the terms right. It causes outrage. Refugee means you can enter the country. Asylum seeker means you already entered the country and claimed asylum waiting for refugee status. In Calais they are migrants with people looking for better life and /or displaced by war. So if you quoted a paper I'd question their angle." well lets take a pick, you decide which paper or news report Breitbart CNN Independent RT Human Sphere Time CNBC Standard Aljazeera then ofcourse you have all the gutter press, such as sun but then you decide as you are the one whinging have a nice day | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's get the terms right. It causes outrage. Refugee means you can enter the country. Asylum seeker means you already entered the country and claimed asylum waiting for refugee status. In Calais they are migrants with people looking for better life and /or displaced by war. So if you quoted a paper I'd question their angle. well lets take a pick, you decide which paper or news report Breitbart CNN Independent RT Human Sphere Time CNBC Standard Aljazeera then ofcourse you have all the gutter press, such as sun but then you decide as you are the one whinging have a nice day " I'm just saying the terms are defined by the government on their site. Which are legal. Unlike papers who will put any label fit. Because on another thread people who wanted the wall called them migrants and clearly stated that they were not refugees. I don't care about the wall or the numbers. It's Britain's and France's problem. But since my father was a refugee and rescued from torture by Britain over 40 years ago I do care about the labels. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's get the terms right. It causes outrage. Refugee means you can enter the country. Asylum seeker means you already entered the country and claimed asylum waiting for refugee status. In Calais they are migrants with people looking for better life and /or displaced by war. So if you quoted a paper I'd question their angle. well lets take a pick, you decide which paper or news report Breitbart CNN Independent RT Human Sphere Time CNBC Standard Aljazeera then ofcourse you have all the gutter press, such as sun but then you decide as you are the one whinging have a nice day I'm just saying the terms are defined by the government on their site. Which are legal. Unlike papers who will put any label fit. Because on another thread people who wanted the wall called them migrants and clearly stated that they were not refugees. I don't care about the wall or the numbers. It's Britain's and France's problem. But since my father was a refugee and rescued from torture by Britain over 40 years ago I do care about the labels." I know what your saying buddy, that's why I double checked the reports before placing the press . but personally, I stopped giving a fuck many years back . here is the term most are quoting; Politicians, aid groups and activists have condemned Britain's plan to build a wall in the northern French port of Calais in a bid to stop migrants and refugees from entering the UK | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's get the terms right. It causes outrage. Refugee means you can enter the country. Asylum seeker means you already entered the country and claimed asylum waiting for refugee status. In Calais they are migrants with people looking for better life and /or displaced by war. So if you quoted a paper I'd question their angle. well lets take a pick, you decide which paper or news report Breitbart CNN Independent RT Human Sphere Time CNBC Standard Aljazeera then ofcourse you have all the gutter press, such as sun but then you decide as you are the one whinging have a nice day I'm just saying the terms are defined by the government on their site. Which are legal. Unlike papers who will put any label fit. Because on another thread people who wanted the wall called them migrants and clearly stated that they were not refugees. I don't care about the wall or the numbers. It's Britain's and France's problem. But since my father was a refugee and rescued from torture by Britain over 40 years ago I do care about the labels. I know what your saying buddy, that's why I double checked the reports before placing the press . but personally, I stopped giving a fuck many years back . here is the term most are quoting; Politicians, aid groups and activists have condemned Britain's plan to build a wall in the northern French port of Calais in a bid to stop migrants and refugees from entering the UK" A"refugee"is only that in the first safe country they come too and france is not that and we are definitely not that so all those in calais are economic migrants | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? " Your good hearted comment has just opened you up to a battery of abuse. As we as a nation are currently trying to pay off a massive debt, the government has cut services to the bone, (i'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Austerity, I'm just stating how things are at the moment). So paying for new arrivals is not going to go down well with the people who are already here and who aren't getting the services or infrastructures they want. Good luck! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? Your good hearted comment has just opened you up to a battery of abuse. As we as a nation are currently trying to pay off a massive debt, the government has cut services to the bone, (i'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Austerity, I'm just stating how things are at the moment). So paying for new arrivals is not going to go down well with the people who are already here and who aren't getting the services or infrastructures they want. Good luck! " It is not just that, letting them in just encourages more and more to attempt the journney and more and more deaths | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? Your good hearted comment has just opened you up to a battery of abuse. As we as a nation are currently trying to pay off a massive debt, the government has cut services to the bone, (i'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Austerity, I'm just stating how things are at the moment). So paying for new arrivals is not going to go down well with the people who are already here and who aren't getting the services or infrastructures they want. Good luck! " Actually it hasn't and those people who want to say something, guess what, I dont give a shit. I am on the front line providing services for these people, so it may be good natured but its also real. I think people have to think relatively about this and their level of need compared to the terrible lives many children in particular have come from, sorry but there is no comparison. I pay a lot of taxes but I dont begrudge any of the immigrants benefitting from them .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" shoot sum of themrest will scatter" Sigh... really...  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its like rebuilding the berlin wall .... we seem to go in circles ... sounds barbaric to Me "I don't want a holiday in the sun, I wanna go to the new Belsen, I wanna see some history, 'Cos now I've got a resonable economy.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would swap 20,000 refugees for 1 brit who thinks they should be shot, killed, fed to sharks etc. You should be ashamed of yourselves. " Fair enough, but what about the people in Calais? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would swap 20,000 refugees for 1 brit who thinks they should be shot, killed, fed to sharks etc. You should be ashamed of yourselves. " do you have 20,000 refugees? where do you keep them? if you don't have 20,000 refugees then how could you swap them? and I for sure am a Brit and I don't think I should be shot, killed or fed to sharks there are enough sharks in British football | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? " If they wanted a safe haven, why wouldn't they claim asylum in the first safe country they enter? The UK has offered to take a quota from official camps. There is no need to head to France x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Most of the truckers i speak to are waiting for the "refugees" to kill a french cop, before anything gets done about them. Truckers and families placed in danger, making their way to the port won't count apparantly." I fear you may be right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would swap 20,000 refugees for 1 brit who thinks they should be shot, killed, fed to sharks etc. You should be ashamed of yourselves. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum " It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum " fuckinhell, you've been saying for months that it has! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR." True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party." no she didn't get your facts right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party." It's both. The thing aboutt he Tories though, is at least you know what you are getting. They don't pretend to be for anybodys interests but the wealthy, contrary to New Labour, who are the same as the Tories, but lie about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right" Yes, she did! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. It's both. The thing aboutt he Tories though, is at least you know what you are getting. They don't pretend to be for anybodys interests but the wealthy, contrary to New Labour, who are the same as the Tories, but lie about it. " And I cringe when the people of the Labour party now stand up and say they are the voice of the ordinary working people of this country. Myself and my whole family are ordinary working class people and they certainly don't speak for us. They disgust me | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right Yes, she did!" well I'm sure you'll be able to provide a link or quote her here then won't you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right Yes, she did! well I'm sure you'll be able to provide a link or quote her here then won't you?" Yeah, you want to dig yourself an ever deeper hole first?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. It's both. The thing aboutt he Tories though, is at least you know what you are getting. They don't pretend to be for anybodys interests but the wealthy, contrary to New Labour, who are the same as the Tories, but lie about it. And I cringe when the people of the Labour party now stand up and say they are the voice of the ordinary working people of this country. Myself and my whole family are ordinary working class people and they certainly don't speak for us. They disgust me" At least most of the Blairite parasites have had to go now, they showed their true coulors in their death throes, I feel. I'd always doubted their commitment to basic democracy and they proved me right, sadly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right Yes, she did! well I'm sure you'll be able to provide a link or quote her here then won't you? Yeah, you want to dig yourself an ever deeper hole first? "No she didn't " The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] " Umm hole dug | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right Yes, she did! well I'm sure you'll be able to provide a link or quote her here then won't you? Yeah, you want to dig yourself an ever deeper hole first?
No she didn't
The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1]
Umm hole dug "www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/ Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party""So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing. "Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them. CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription."As usual. Cheers guys | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription."The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit. "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party. I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging. We need to reach out to all areas of our society. I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same. We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party" She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party! The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens. But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
"She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs"I think we need a face palm emoji on this forum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs
I think we need a face palm emoji on this forum."are you word blind? How is 'some people call us the nasty party' the same as 'we are the nasty party'? Explain that or face palm yourself | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs
I think we need a face palm emoji on this forum.
are you word blind? How is 'some people call us the nasty party' the same as 'we are the nasty party'? Explain that or face palm yourself"So you dont think that unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain aren't nasty? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs
I think we need a face palm emoji on this forum.
are you word blind? How is 'some people call us the nasty party' the same as 'we are the nasty party'? Explain that or face palm yourself
So you dont think that unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain aren't nasty?"what the fuck does that have to do with it? Did SHE call the Tories the nasty party YES or NO? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
She did not call the Tories the nasty party though did she ffs
I think we need a face palm emoji on this forum.
are you word blind? How is 'some people call us the nasty party' the same as 'we are the nasty party'? Explain that or face palm yourself
So you dont think that unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain aren't nasty?"
You're being a knob | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something "Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate? "Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them. When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob 
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum "I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods. "How can you debate with someone who constantly changes the facts? May did not call the Tories the nasty party! And on another point, did you accept the Brexit point of view from this respected paper or have you constantly tried to rubbish that point of view? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods. "Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR." The BNP allowed the vanity of its "leader" to get the better of him, and make a monkey of himself on Question Time. UKIP had applied rules preventing any former BNP, NF, or any other nationalist party member from joining. The far right has more splinters now than a broken cricket bat, and are thus insignificant. But then the far left have gone even further, they joined the Labour Party en mass, elected Comrade Corbyn, and made sure we would never see another Labour PM in most of our lifetimes. Yep, looks like the Tories are the only show in town these days. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods. "From where i come from saying you're being a knob is a light hearted way of saying you're being daft/ridiculous and not meant as something really bad, unlike calling people racist xenophobic or discriminatory | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods. "some don't need to point any finger, some just know. and where did you get all this shark nonsense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
some don't need to point any finger, some just know.
and where did you get all this shark nonsense"Some just know what exactly? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What a pleasant name for a thread  "Your taxes are paying for it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What a pleasant name for a thread
Your taxes are paying for it "I didn't realise that the Fabs forum was state sponsored. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What a pleasant name for a thread
Your taxes are paying for it
I didn't realise that the Fabs forum was state sponsored. "what polite reply would you care for, best not upset you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What a pleasant name for a thread
Your taxes are paying for it
I didn't realise that the Fabs forum was state sponsored. "Might be one of them quangos | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? Your good hearted comment has just opened you up to a battery of abuse. As we as a nation are currently trying to pay off a massive debt, the government has cut services to the bone, (i'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Austerity, I'm just stating how things are at the moment). So paying for new arrivals is not going to go down well with the people who are already here and who aren't getting the services or infrastructures they want. Good luck! Actually it hasn't and those people who want to say something, guess what, I dont give a shit. I am on the front line providing services for these people, so it may be good natured but its also real. I think people have to think relatively about this and their level of need compared to the terrible lives many children in particular have come from, sorry but there is no comparison. I pay a lot of taxes but I dont begrudge any of the immigrants benefitting from them ...." Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Terumo building a wall is ridiculous and so is this. Every day I encounter very young children who have been displaced and I wonder where the humanity has gone. Why wouldn't we offer a safe haven? Your good hearted comment has just opened you up to a battery of abuse. As we as a nation are currently trying to pay off a massive debt, the government has cut services to the bone, (i'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Austerity, I'm just stating how things are at the moment). So paying for new arrivals is not going to go down well with the people who are already here and who aren't getting the services or infrastructures they want. Good luck! Actually it hasn't and those people who want to say something, guess what, I dont give a shit. I am on the front line providing services for these people, so it may be good natured but its also real. I think people have to think relatively about this and their level of need compared to the terrible lives many children in particular have come from, sorry but there is no comparison. I pay a lot of taxes but I dont begrudge any of the immigrants benefitting from them .... Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place." Agree | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place." Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . " Our overseas aid budget is linked to our GDP, so you don't have to worry about it increasing much as you just voted to drive our economy into a brick wall. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . " I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing." Then maybe your beloved EU should remmove tariffs imposed against these countries to make them more economically viable. Read 'how the EU starves Africa into submission' for a start | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing. Then maybe your beloved EU should remmove tariffs imposed against these countries to make them more economically viable. Read 'how the EU starves Africa into submission' for a start" It's not my beloved EU, it's just the EU. And I've forgotten more about Ugandan bananas than most people would ever care to know. It has been British policy, within the EU to work towards a more liberal and fair approach to trade between the EU and African (in particular Commonwealth countries) and progress towards this end was and has been made. Of course, now we're not going to be in the EU, that pressure will no longer be there. You've not only sold the people of this country out for a load of meaningless slogans, you've sold the peoples of the Commonwealth out to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing. Then maybe your beloved EU should remmove tariffs imposed against these countries to make them more economically viable. Read 'how the EU starves Africa into submission' for a start It's not my beloved EU, it's just the EU. And I've forgotten more about Ugandan bananas than most people would ever care to know. It has been British policy, within the EU to work towards a more liberal and fair approach to trade between the EU and African (in particular Commonwealth countries) and progress towards this end was and has been made. Of course, now we're not going to be in the EU, that pressure will no longer be there. You've not only sold the people of this country out for a load of meaningless slogans, you've sold the peoples of the Commonwealth out to." Progress? With the EU? Hilarious | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing." Yup | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Whilst I totally empathise with what you say and find many of the remarks made by some about these desperate people just simply nasty I really don't think that simply letting them in is a realistic or workable solution. The real solution to this problem is to solve the problem at it's source. That applies for both refugees and so called economic migrants. It also involves more foreign aid being spent in the countries of origin. If we can help to make their own countries secure and economically viable then they simply won't leave in the first place. Has our governments not been trying that for past decades, ploughing cash and foreign aid into these countries Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar to £16 billion by 2020 This will indeed keep the most corrupt countries happy South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home, but then home improvements are essential to good living. . AFGHANISTAN, UK aid: £178m a year - 3rd most corrupt country in the World. . BANGLADESH, UK aid: £189m a year . DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, UK aid: £183m a year . KENYA, UK aid: £129m a year Go check out the corruption involved with all of those countries and don't stop their continue to read about the corruption involved with UK foreign Aid hand outs. . I don't doubt that there is corruption in many of these countries. That to needs to be sorted out. It's not an either or option. We can tackle corruption and help to make their countries of origin both more secure and economically viable at the same time. In fact I'd go far as to say that making their countries of origin more secure and economically viable, and getting rid of corruption were one and the same thing. Then maybe your beloved EU should remmove tariffs imposed against these countries to make them more economically viable. Read 'how the EU starves Africa into submission' for a start" Also right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. True, but we should remember this is not an economic downturn, but an ideologically driven age of austerity from the Tory government. The party that Teresa May even called the Nasty Party. no she didn't get your facts right Yes, she did!" Actually she didn't. What she actually said is thar it was time for the party to face up to the "uncomfortable truth" about the way it was sometimes perceived by the public as the "nasty party". October 2002 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The term Nasty Party is a term used to refer to the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom. It was popularised in October 2002 by Theresa May, the then Chairman of the Conservative Party and future Prime Minister, when she said in a conference speech that: "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us – the Nasty Party."[1] Umm hole dug
www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/theresa-may-style-fashion/theresa-mays-love-of-shoes-was-first-noted-when-she-took-to-the/
Theresa May's love of shoes was first noted when she took to the stage at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth 2002 - the same day she labelled the Conservatives the "Nasty Party"
So she didn't label the tory's as the Nasty Party, she was quoting what other people had said, that's not the same thing.
Exactly, when you read the full speech she did it's as i quoted, what the public was calling the Tories and not what she was calling them.
CLCC's just used a twisted soundbite from a trashy paper not the actual transcription.
The telegraph is a respected broadsheet. You didn't put the full quote did you? You seem to have missed out quite a bit.
"There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
We should not underestimate the extent of this problem. Ask yourselves: how can we truly claim to be the party of Britain, when we don't truly represent Britain in our party"
She also says they are unsympathetic moralising hypocritical finger waggers who dont represent Britain. This is the woman who is now PM talking about her own party!
The conservatives are still the Nasty Party, who call police officers Plebs, who suggest changes to the pensions scheme because pensioners are too old to remember which party screwed them, or they will be dead by the next election so who cares, who make openly racist comments in newspaper columns, who attack the poor so they can give tax breaks to the rich whilst benefiting from off shore tax havens.
But getting back to the OP, calling refugees fuckers and wanting them shot or fed to sharks truely is nasty, what ever party those people vote for.
"I think you do better when you stick to broad principles, especially on the EU, and leave the party politics until after the whole BREXIT thing has been sorted. BREXIT and remain transcends party politics on both sides. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
"To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know if this country is becoming nastier, or if it's just this forum It's quite a well observed phenomenon that in times of downturn, extremism appears to have wider appeal. We have seen a rise in the far-right Europe wide. This forum will be no exception. The BNP lost face slightly, and I think a lot of their support went to UKIP, who are similar but have better suits and PR. The BNP allowed the vanity of its "leader" to get the better of him, and make a monkey of himself on Question Time. UKIP had applied rules preventing any former BNP, NF, or any other nationalist party member from joining. The far right has more splinters now than a broken cricket bat, and are thus insignificant. But then the far left have gone even further, they joined the Labour Party en mass, elected Comrade Corbyn, and made sure we would never see another Labour PM in most of our lifetimes. Yep, looks like the Tories are the only show in town these days. "I guess it would be a vain hope to look to the LibDems to provide some real opposition. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic. "Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive. "Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats."some would say only an uneducated twat would write the comment above, no one knows who voted what, that is the purpose of the ballet vote everyone has the right to vote and express their own views on why they voted that way, people should be willing to accept the outcome but sadly there are far too many cry babies | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats."Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant. "I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me. You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything. And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving. It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people. If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant.
I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me.
You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything.
And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving.
It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people.
If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't."Why would anyone want to discuss anything with someone who wont listen and just calls them names. Time to give up for me you can rant at other people but I will ignore you post in future shame really you do have some valid points but wont accept other peoples views. Have a nice day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's get the terms right. It causes outrage. Refugee means you can enter the country. Asylum seeker means you already entered the country and claimed asylum waiting for refugee status. In Calais they are migrants with people looking for better life and /or displaced by war. So if you quoted a paper I'd question their angle." . Your only displaced if your in your own country still but displaced from your home/village/town etc etc... If your "displaced" in a foreign country, your a refugee?. . . Now let's go back and see what the science said about climate change decades ago!. Increasing refugees... Check Pandemics of disease... Check Water under increasing supply problems... Check Uncontrollable wild fires... Check Devastating storms... Check . . And the solution is.... Let's build another fucking runway!!! Fuck it let's build a bunch of them and maybe a high speed train that goes to the same place the current fucking train does but 30 minutes faster because frankly I wanna get there quick to queue for a Macyds ...... Consumerism...I fucking swear it will be the death of you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant.
I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me.
You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything.
And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving.
It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people.
If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't.
Why would anyone want to discuss anything with someone who wont listen and just calls them names. Time to give up for me you can rant at other people but I will ignore you post in future shame really you do have some valid points but wont accept other peoples views.
Have a nice day. "Don't you think though, that could be said for several people of both sides on here? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant.
I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me.
You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything.
And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving.
It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people.
If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't.
Why would anyone want to discuss anything with someone who wont listen and just calls them names. Time to give up for me you can rant at other people but I will ignore you post in future shame really you do have some valid points but wont accept other peoples views.
Have a nice day.
Don't you think though, that could be said for several people of both sides on here?
"I'm a brexiter of that's how you are spelling it and I'm proud of my vote and I have confidence that the uk will get over this slump, but and a very big but is obviously all of it is down to our politicians and all of them are as you described above about most/some/all Brexit voters I don't really care tbh, but I will happily discuss and listen take in there point and this is the only topic I have ever been arsed to get involved in and I was loving getting deep with my mates who had done politics and business and uni, the main thing is, if dyson and jcb are backing Brexit it's probably just the IMF, the rochschild bank group and the other country controlling money lending scamming wankers who control most of the world, who didn't want the possibility of loosing out money | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Now let's go back and see what the science said about climate change decades ago!. Increasing refugees... Check " So it's nothing to do with wartorn Countries then, it's all down to climate change ? Ooookay " Pandemics of disease... Check " Nothing to do with lack of medical supplies, low quality of hygiene, massive influx of refugee's from wartorn countries and general appaling livings standards for millions of people ? It'scos it's a bit more sunny ? " Water under increasing supply problems... Check " Only places that have bad supply problems are either places where there's hardly been any water for over 10,000 years or wartorn countries, but we'll blame it on climate change instead cos it's the new "in buzz word" " Uncontrollable wild fires... Check " Wild fires happen in the warmest of places that have a supply of combustable materials, always have done, always will do. " Devastating storms... Check " We've always had bad storms, but I guess we'll pretend we haven't and they only happen now because of "climate change" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant.
I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me.
You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything.
And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving.
It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people.
If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't.
Why would anyone want to discuss anything with someone who wont listen and just calls them names. Time to give up for me you can rant at other people but I will ignore you post in future shame really you do have some valid points but wont accept other peoples views.
Have a nice day.
Don't you think though, that could be said for several people of both sides on here?
"Yes I do and I also think if the debates did,nt turn into shouting matches a lot more people would join the debate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""the main thing is, if dyson and jcb are backing Brexit it's probably just the IMF, the rochschild bank group and the other country controlling money lending scamming wankers who control most of the world, who didn't want the possibility of loosing out money" Careful, they will be accusing you of antisemitism! Even if you are almost certainly right. "Dyson may well be backing Brexit but he's not been backing British manufacturing ever since he moved his production overseas....Dyson is a hypocrite. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes We finally agree on something
Just Andy, why do you consistently attack people personally? Is there a reason why you can't stick to the debate?
Pointing out when people are factually wrong or that their twisting the facts or just being plain daft isnt attacking them.
When someone quotes something in plain text then swears blind it says something completely different then their being a bit of a knob
Also pointing out when someone has no rational isn't attacking them.
I think you read too much into peoples posts that you imagine their being racist or xenophobic or discriminatory or not attacking , which you do on many occasions.
You may deem this to be attacking you too, but tbh there's more to life than trying to play the victim on a sex site forum
I'm not playing the victim, I just think its quite sad that instead of debating the issues you call people knobs, instead of posting a counter point you just say something is drivel, instead of accepting something from a respected paper, you just try to rubbish their reputation. You like many others can't seem to keep to the rules of the forum, and yet people like to point a finger at me when people get banned by the mods.
Like I have said before there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you CLCC. Your so full of venom for those that voted to leave you will say anything to try and antagonise them.
To be honest it doesn't take much to antagonise most BREXIT supporters. Just pointing out the likely economic results of leaving seems to send most of them totally apoplectic.
Your last post has made me laugh so much my sides hurt, you should go back and read ALL your posts on ALL threads you have posted on and count how many are aggressive and name calling. You can not say ANYTHING about people being antagonised as you are the MAIN one being aggressive.
Only to BREXIT twats who've sold their own people and country out for a load of meaningless slogans and jingoist flag waving. Just to he clear, not all BREXITers, just the ones who are twats.
Well how could you possibly know one from the other and you call Brexiters intolerant.
I don't think I've called any BREXITer intolerant. I've called some twats because some are; I've called some xenophobic because some are; I've called some Little Englanders because some are; I've called some, maybe quite a few, perfidious because they are. I've even called quite a few seditious because they are but I don't think I've actually called any BREXITers intolerant. But if the cap fits it wouldn't surprise me.
You don't seriously expect reasonable people to just back and let you lot sell our country, our people and our economy down the pan and not to say anything.
And you also can't seriously expect us to continue putting sensible rational arguments to you when the only response we get back is 'I don't give a shit', 'stop winging', 'suck it up and take it' or 'no one cares what the experts say'. I'll start having a sensible, reasonable and rational conversation with BREXITers when they start saying sensible, reasonable and rational things, until then I'll call them for what they are, a bunch of Bloody Rightwing Extremist Idiotic Twits who've sold their country, their people and their economy down the drain for a load a meaningless slogans and jingoistic flag waving.
It's becoming clearer and clearer, day by day, to ordinary people that that is exactly what BREXITers have done. Burying your heads in the sand won't change the results of your actions nor lessen the harmful effects they will have on the this country and its people.
If BREXITers seriously cared about this country or the people who lived in it they would engage fully in discussion, listen to all the points made and consider what really is best for the people and the economy and then come back with sensible well thought out arguments to back up what they supported but, with one or two notable exceptions, they don't.
Why would anyone want to discuss anything with someone who wont listen and just calls them names. Time to give up for me you can rant at other people but I will ignore you post in future shame really you do have some valid points but wont accept other peoples views.
Have a nice day. "Typical BREXITer. Always looking for a reason to ignore anything that doesn't go along with their view of the world. I don't think I'll notice much difference now you're officially ignoring the facts being put to you than I did before. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
