hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 169 of 230 FirstFirst ... 69119159166167168169170171172179219 ... LastLast
Results 3,361 to 3,380 of 4589

Thread: (UK EURO THREAD) UK POLITICS MK2

  1. #3361

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,925
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP8ee0_bIuw

    abso fucking top Galloway scenes earlier, if you fancy an early afternoon giggle
    You mean the Galloway who is not a member of the Labour party?

  2. #3362

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    6,555
    So three tory MP's have also legged it and joined the labour rebel group.

  3. #3363

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,925
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Forcefully resisting any attempts at dialogue or change for years on end makes it very, very hard to do anything to fix the problems that come about.

    I don't know, it seems to work for the Tories and their Islamophobia problem.

  4. #3364
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    1,316
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    So three tory MP's have also legged it and joined the labour rebel group.
    Those ex Labour MPs better get some fucking by elections up and running then. Standing with fucking tories is haram after the last decade of tory rule.

  5. #3365
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,880
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodj Blake View Post
    What deeds would satisfy you?
    Step 1: Get in a time machine and go back to mid-2016
    Step 2: Change the byline of that article to Jeremy Corbyn
    Step 3: Publish it then.

    The ship has sailed, Rodj, and you know that because you're not stupid. Forcefully resisting any attempts at dialogue or change for years on end makes it very, very hard to do anything to fix the problems that come about.

    A good start would be to start burning down the ridiculous backlog of disciplinary cases with full transparency on the outcomes, with a particular emphasis on the backlog facing the NCC. The reality is it will take years to repair the reputational damage already done. Fundamentally people have to start accepting that:
    1) It's really not OK to assume someone is a zionist just because they're Jewish, or once stood near some Jewish people
    2) Criticising Corbyn does not make one a class traitor
    3) The default position of drawing the wagons around the Dear Leader and letting the attack dogs off the leash is not a sensible one for a party that wants to be taken seriously as a party of government.

    Fixing cultural problems takes time, sustained effort and most importantly it takes will. Corbyn doesn't have time, he is incapable of sustained effort and he almost certainly lacks the will because he really doesn't give a shit.
    regarding point two and three Elmicker, you must have been ignoring how politics work in practice in the age of social media, as the right wing so amply demonstrate, both in the UK and in the rest of the world, it's not only acceptable to simply refuse to engage with criticism of any kind, it's actually advantageous to simply go on the offensive, and remain there in terms of what the voters think.

    never apologize, never back down as a doctrine in public discourse works, and it works very well as so amply demonstrated by assorted right wing demagogues. with a media landscape as hostile as the one in the UK adopting such an approach along with pointing out the heavily biased nature of the press is indeed sound messaging in the first place.

    you might not like it, i certainly don't like it, but it's how media management works in this post-factual age, the faster people adopt to that the easier its going to be to push back.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  6. #3366
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,338
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by El Capitano View Post
    Keep in mind that this is the very same government that makes a big deal about wanting to teach "British values" as part of the national curriculum in schools. Is rule of law no longer such a value to them? Making people stateless is a very dangerous path to start on.
    Quite. It's literally one of the pillars of the rule of law - i'd be very surprised if he consulted the AG about this, probably some GLS hack.

    Besides which, she's our responsibility: she should be tried/convicted/sentenced here and her child removed. Politicised abrogation of responsibility is fucking weak.
    He won't. It will have been done through internal civil service processes, and we all know how that ends at the HO. If the GLS have any sense they'll have required the home secretary to issue a ministerial direction (or the equivalent for non-spending decisions) detailing his reasoning and decision. Transport did the same when Grayling insisted they sign the Seaborne contract.

    Does the british nationality act make this a quasi-judicial decision or is that a concept that came about later?
    No idea (am transactional project finance lawyer).

    If I had to guess it will turn on the interpretation of dual national and whether being entitled to automatic citizenship actually confers material citizenship - which it obviously doesn’t, no matter which way you cut it.

    In my opinion he knows full well it’s illegal and has done it anyway for the optics. I imagine he was advised that on return the chance of a conviction wouldn’t be 100% due to child’s age and defence of duress; politically it was probably the right thing to do I guess.

  7. #3367
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    18,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    ...The youngsters are typically way less racist.
    Quite, except now they've been brought up in that world and have become addicted to the fact that sticking #FreePalestine on a tweet gets you those sweet Owen Jones reps so you get nonsense like the Young Labour ranting about how people with opposing political views are "traitors" and declaring a palestinian victory because a Jewish MP has left the party

    it's fucking nuts
    So you dont want to free palestine?
    I don't want the left constantly hamstringing itself while the tories ruin the country. If you give a shit about Palestine you get into power and start directing foreign policy to influence the international community.
    So, abandon all principals to gain power, then switch them back on when you're there? Like New Labnour did?
    Abandon principals which do you no favours while campaigning and focus in talking points which actually matter. Nobody wins an election in their foreign policy, you can lose on it though.

    The alternative is perpetual tory government, and I don't see the British as the revolutionary types. Instead we'll all continue to be boiling frogs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  8. #3368
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    1,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by El Capitano View Post
    Keep in mind that this is the very same government that makes a big deal about wanting to teach "British values" as part of the national curriculum in schools. Is rule of law no longer such a value to them? Making people stateless is a very dangerous path to start on.
    Quite. It's literally one of the pillars of the rule of law - i'd be very surprised if he consulted the AG about this, probably some GLS hack.

    Besides which, she's our responsibility: she should be tried/convicted/sentenced here and her child removed. Politicised abrogation of responsibility is fucking weak.
    He won't. It will have been done through internal civil service processes, and we all know how that ends at the HO. If the GLS have any sense they'll have required the home secretary to issue a ministerial direction (or the equivalent for non-spending decisions) detailing his reasoning and decision. Transport did the same when Grayling insisted they sign the Seaborne contract.

    Does the british nationality act make this a quasi-judicial decision or is that a concept that came about later?
    No idea (am transactional project finance lawyer).

    If I had to guess it will turn on the interpretation of dual national and whether being entitled to automatic citizenship actually confers material citizenship - which it obviously doesn’t, no matter which way you cut it.

    In my opinion he knows full well it’s illegal and has done it anyway for the optics. I imagine he was advised that on return the chance of a conviction wouldn’t be 100% due to child’s age and defence of duress; politically it was probably the right thing to do I guess.
    Almost like this whole issue was manufactured for the political gain of diverting the plebians from the brexit fiasco to a lightning rod of retardedness everyone can get involved in without thinking too hard. Almost...

  9. #3369
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,338
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    So we've got two scenarios. One is he's used this power:
    The Secretary of State may by order deprive a person of a citizenship status if the Secretary of State is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good.
    caveated by this section
    The Secretary of State may not make an order under subsection (2) if he is satisfied that the order would make a person stateless.
    So to justify it here she would have to be a current Bangladeshi citizen (rather than a potential) and he has to justify that revoking the citizenship of a child bride housewife with unfortunate political views is conducive to the public good. I'd imagine that's going to be challenging given hundreds of others have been allowed to return from Syria.

    OR, he's used this one:

    But that does not prevent the Secretary of State from making an order under subsection (2) to deprive a person of a citizenship status if
    ...
    (b)the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, any of the Islands, or any British overseas territory, and
    (c)the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such a country or territory.
    Condition c is almost certainly met - a basic reading of bangladeshi citizenship law seems to indicate she either is or could easily be a Bangladeshi citizen. The bit I've emphasised is where this falls flat. There is no way on earth that stands up in front of a judge.
    Having read this id also hazard a guess that being involved in terrorism would prevent someone from automatic citizenship under the Bangladeshi constitution - just a guess though.

  10. #3370
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    1,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    ...The youngsters are typically way less racist.
    Quite, except now they've been brought up in that world and have become addicted to the fact that sticking #FreePalestine on a tweet gets you those sweet Owen Jones reps so you get nonsense like the Young Labour ranting about how people with opposing political views are "traitors" and declaring a palestinian victory because a Jewish MP has left the party

    it's fucking nuts
    So you dont want to free palestine?
    I don't want the left constantly hamstringing itself while the tories ruin the country. If you give a shit about Palestine you get into power and start directing foreign policy to influence the international community.
    So, abandon all principals to gain power, then switch them back on when you're there? Like New Labnour did?
    Abandon principals which do you no favours while campaigning and focus in talking points which actually matter. Nobody wins an election in their foreign policy, you can lose on it though.

    The alternative is perpetual tory government, and I don't see the British as the revolutionary types. Instead we'll all continue to be boiling frogs.
    The South has a lot to answer for, the Tory voting twats

  11. #3371

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,925
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by El Capitano View Post
    Keep in mind that this is the very same government that makes a big deal about wanting to teach "British values" as part of the national curriculum in schools. Is rule of law no longer such a value to them? Making people stateless is a very dangerous path to start on.
    Quite. It's literally one of the pillars of the rule of law - i'd be very surprised if he consulted the AG about this, probably some GLS hack.

    Besides which, she's our responsibility: she should be tried/convicted/sentenced here and her child removed. Politicised abrogation of responsibility is fucking weak.
    He won't. It will have been done through internal civil service processes, and we all know how that ends at the HO. If the GLS have any sense they'll have required the home secretary to issue a ministerial direction (or the equivalent for non-spending decisions) detailing his reasoning and decision. Transport did the same when Grayling insisted they sign the Seaborne contract.

    Does the british nationality act make this a quasi-judicial decision or is that a concept that came about later?
    No idea (am transactional project finance lawyer).

    If I had to guess it will turn on the interpretation of dual national and whether being entitled to automatic citizenship actually confers material citizenship - which it obviously doesn’t, no matter which way you cut it.

    In my opinion he knows full well it’s illegal and has done it anyway for the optics. I imagine he was advised that on return the chance of a conviction wouldn’t be 100% due to child’s age and defence of duress; politically it was probably the right thing to do I guess.
    Sounds about right.

    Although I do wonder what his reaction would be if an immigrant committed a crime in the UK and then their home country stripped them of their citizenship, thus preventing deportation after they left prison.

  12. #3372

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodj Blake View Post
    You mean the Galloway who is not a member of the Labour party?
    Ah yes, sorry, I'll delete the bit where I mentioned he's a leading light of the labour left and clarify I was just posting the rantings of an unhinged lunatic for amusement purposes. I thought i'd made that clear.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodj Blake View Post
    I don't know, it seems to work for the Tories and their Islamophobia problem.
    And as I've said to you a hundred times in this thread, I would hope you'd have higher standards for your own tribe than "well if the tories can get away with it..."

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    regarding point two and three Elmicker, you must have been ignoring how politics work in practice in the age of social media, as the right wing so amply demonstrate, both in the UK and in the rest of the world, it's not only acceptable to simply refuse to engage with criticism of any kind, it's actually advantageous to simply go on the offensive, and remain there in terms of what the voters think.
    This is fucking nonsense. No one indefinitely defends the indefensible, and just attacking your critics doesn't work forever. This is particularly the case when "your critics" are your own party members who agree with you on almost every point.

  13. #3373

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,925
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    regarding point two and three Elmicker, you must have been ignoring how politics work in practice in the age of social media, as the right wing so amply demonstrate, both in the UK and in the rest of the world, it's not only acceptable to simply refuse to engage with criticism of any kind, it's actually advantageous to simply go on the offensive, and remain there in terms of what the voters think.
    This is fucking nonsense. No one indefinitely defends the indefensible, and just attacking your critics doesn't work forever. This is particularly the case when "your critics" are your own party members who agree with you on almost every point.
    Except those critics in the parliamentary party don't agree with Corbyn on almost every point.

  14. #3374

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,893
    Yes, they do. It's just that being a cheerleader for brexit and refusing to do anything about wingnut-driven antisemitism and letting your mates call everyone traitors in the press are pretty big points.

  15. #3375

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,925
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Yes, they do. It's just that being a cheerleader for brexit and refusing to do anything about wingnut-driven antisemitism and letting your mates call everyone traitors in the press are pretty big points.
    Oh, so that's why he only just scraped enough nominations together to stand for leader in the first place then, and why the plotting against him started almost immediately after his election.

    It had nothing to do with the differences on foreign wars, austerity, higher education, Brexit, or privatisation because those differences don't exist.
    Last edited by Rodj Blake; February 20 2019 at 12:35:37 PM.

  16. #3376
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,880
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    regarding point two and three Elmicker, you must have been ignoring how politics work in practice in the age of social media, as the right wing so amply demonstrate, both in the UK and in the rest of the world, it's not only acceptable to simply refuse to engage with criticism of any kind, it's actually advantageous to simply go on the offensive, and remain there in terms of what the voters think.
    This is fucking nonsense. No one indefinitely defends the indefensible, and just attacking your critics doesn't work forever. This is particularly the case when "your critics" are your own party members who agree with you on almost every point.
    as so amply demonstrated by Orban et. al, yes, yes you do.
    eventually, they're going to fuck off into their own no-name party and get obliterated come the next election or simply disappear entirely, that does suddenly look familiar to you ?

    and to be frank, i am thoroughly amused that you can't seem to see how anti-semitism is being used as a bludgeon here, there is literately nothing Corbyn or Labour can do to satisfy the critics because the goalposts are invariably going to get shuffled to suit the narrative, especially as discussions involving Israel and Zionism (understood as the pro-jewish movement to establish what is a jewish state in Palestine) invariably brings that screed in regardless of what's actually said unless it's explicitly in favour of Israel, to the extend that BDS is gradually becoming outlawed. (especially the french ban is amusing, since the implication is that international sanctions against russia is defacto illegal under the same laws)
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  17. #3377
    Sandzibar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    5,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post

    The South has a lot to answer for, the Tory voting twats
    Ah yes... the north and the midlands. Last bastion of the intelligent voter. LUL.

  18. #3378
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    18,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    The South has a lot to answer for, the Tory voting twats
    The biggest problem is rural voters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  19. #3379

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    as so amply demonstrated by Orban et. al, yes, yes you do.
    ar aye mate just compare a shithole barely functioning barely ex-communist autocracy to the inner workings of the labour party why dont you

    and to be frank, i am thoroughly amused that you can't seem to see how anti-semitism is being used as a bludgeon here
    and i'm entirely unsurprised you can't see how this actually has precisely fuck all to do with Israel or BDS as your intense need to bring up israel and the BDS movement at the merest hint of the Jewry being mentioned just overwhelms your entire self
    Last edited by elmicker; February 20 2019 at 01:08:33 PM.

  20. #3380
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,880
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    as so amply demonstrated by Orban et. al, yes, yes you do.
    ar aye mate just compare a shithole barely functioning barely ex-communist autocracy to the inner workings of the labour party why dont you
    it's a apt comparison considering how badly the UK has broken itself over Brexit. you've got a prime minister with no support in parliament, a national economy on the brink of taking what looks to be largest self-inflicted nosedive in living memory, less than two months to actually try to salvage anything out of this mess and now your parliamentary parties are falling apart.

    i mean honestly, there are Banana republics out there with a stronger,saner and more stable political system and outlook, and some of these consists largely of whatever the warlord in charge decides is his fancy this week.

    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    and i'm entirely unsurprised you can't see how this actually has precisely fuck all to do with Israel or BDS as your intense need to bring up israel and the BDS movement at the merest hint of the Jewry being mentioned just overwhelms your entire self
    ah yes, the inability to see context, a common centrist affliction i'm afraid.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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