Theresa May's Conservatives
Jeremy Corbyn's Labour
Tim Farron's Liberal Democrats
Paul Nuttall's UKIP
2 people's Greens
Nicholas Durgeon's Scottish Nationalists
Satan's Sinn Fein
Dr Ian Paisley's DUP
Some other bunch of nonces
I'm foreign, but I wish I were an Englishman
It shows what a mad world we live in where Diane Abbott can't be accused of being useless without accusations of racism being thrown around - She's crap and weak so she's bound to be called out as such.
In fact I can't remember a time when front line politicians were this shit. It's an atrocious state of affairs, across all parties.
Lol.
The thing about Abbott (who I have little knowledge of beyond This Week) is that she just comes across in a terribly condescending way, without any discernible reason as to why. Emily Thornberry is similar (although I presume she has an education of some sort), so perhaps there's a running theme.
The wife's postal vote never arrived (or more likely has been cast several times for Our Emily) which is quite amusing although it's a waste of time constituency and she'd have voted for her anyway.
Hard-left Labour leader Mr Corbyn issued a fiery anti-Israel diatribe at the pro-Palestine rally.Originally Posted by Yevrah
He said: “When the US and Britain give lectures to Iraq and others about UN resolutions, Israel is in breach of more than all the other states put together.”
Police said at least 8,000 people attended the protest on May 18, 2002. An account in the Weekly Worker read: “Al-Muhajiroun chanted, ‘Skud, Skud Israel’ and ‘Gas, gas Tel Aviv’, along with their support for Bin Laden.
“Two would-be suicide posers were dressed in combat fatigues with a ‘bomb’ strapped to their waists.
This section accounted for no more than 200-300, but they made a noise far out of proportion to their numbers.”
The flag of Lebanese militants Hezbollah — who Mr Corbyn once welcomed to Parliament as “friends” — was also waved.
Founded by Omar Bakri Muhammad in the 1980s and later led by Anjem Choudary, al-Muhajiroun was outlawed in 2005 for glorifying terrorism.
You get the impression he's just a bit thick, really.
So some dodgy people showed up at a rally where Corbyn said nothing unreasonable. Big deal.
Decent people don't read The Sun anyway.
This is what happens when a generation of budding politicians bin it off for a consultancy role in some Arab state.
Were but that the threshold for voting.
Yeah, those Sun and Mail front pages really aren't on.
The Mail one is.
They're both fair game. None of this is a secret, it's just a case of whether you're prepared to vote for them despite it. The IRA alone justifies the Mail one.
The Sun one is a crap story, the Mail one is more of a non-specific character assassination.
It's only a character assassination in the sense that the three of them loaded all six barrels of the gun, gave it to the newspapers and dared them to pull the trigger. None of the "apologists for terror" line that has been pushed for the past number of weeks / months / years is remotely unfair, despite attempts to rewrite history.
Are you implying there that Thornberry is educated but Abbott isn't?
Those front pages are a disgrace.
They could digitally edit Corbyn into a graphic image of him sodomising a cabbage, and GS would probably find a way to call it "fair game"
The lib Dems might be coming up the rail here.
I don't think the Mail one is. Bit close to the bone for the more ardent JC cultists, perhaps.
I'm saying I know Thornberry was a lawyer of some sort (possible source of acute smugness) whereas I have no idea why Abbott is so patronising.
He'll also simultaneously maintain that the right wing media have no responsibility for attitudes towards Labour and Corbyn.They could digitally edit Corbyn into a graphic image of him sodomising a cabbage, and GS would probably find a way to call it "fair game"
Watch us lot vote SNP again.
I've got SNP as broadly -10% of the vote from last time out. More would be quality scenes.
Robertson's seat is by no means safe and I'm not even certain Alex Salmond's is 100% nailed down.
Curious to see how many seats they'll lose. Wishart, Nicolson and Robertson getting the boot would be wonderful and pretty realistic. Salmond will be highly unlikely, unfortunately.
Abbotts been replaced due to 'ill health' by someone else I haven't heard of called Lyn Brown.
This could win the election.
Brilliant news.
The Sun is on it's content alone, but they both are combined as it's yet another blatant shameless attack simply designed to suit vested interests. Free press, my arse.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's anxiety or depression or something like that, specifically brought on by not being able to handle the campaign and subsequent coverage thereof.
If she is actually ill, I'd wager that's exactly what it is.
The Mail is entirely fair game based on what they actually said and think. Again, their statements (actual words, not inferences by people who don't like them) on the IRA mean they can't complain.They could digitally edit Corbyn into a graphic image of him sodomising a cabbage, and GS would probably find a way to call it "fair game"
I would also say that many people may be less tolerant of their cuntery if they'd grown up with the IRA bombing campaign.
What, like when the right wing media broadly supported New Labour? Your apparent belief that what Jez said and thought prior to 2015 has no relevance is absurd.
By citing things they've actually said and things they've actually done over many years. Shameless.
That Mail article goes on for 13 (thirteen!) pages by the way.
Exactly like that.
GS is unable to comprehend politics when you don't think of it like supporting a football team.
Henry would have been loving it at the time if the papers were full of anti-Tory sentiment. Use the phrase 'Tory scum' in his presence and you'll make a friend for life.
Both sides attack the other through the press. Having a long history of being pally with various dodgy people is a very fair attack line on a lineup of people who want to be PM, Chancellor and Home Secretary. These aren't the people their supporters want them to be.
Free press is literally what that is.
It's also funny (as I think Danny Finkelstein pointed out the other day) when JC supporters cite people sharing text and videos of him speaking and doing things as a smear, or indeed a 'blatant shameless attack'.
No, I think the press picking a side is fair game. You don't have to buy the newspaper if you don't like the editorial line.
For political balance, there's a video of Andrew 'Thrasher' Mitchell doing the rounds not knowing what the minimum wage is. He must be up there with the biggest bellends in parliament.
Must we go through yet again the distorting effect that concentrated corporate ownership has on the "free press"? It's all very well saying that people don't have to buy it, but the business model (based on advertising, not sales) is set up so that a paper that isn't peddling a pro-corporate line (to one extent or another) cannot survive.
Fortunately, there is at least some sign of people getting wise to this. It is astonishing that Corbyn's Labour is where they are given the vitriol that they are attracting from the establishment. They're terrified.
Whenever a name comes up here that I don't recognise I immediately do a Google Image search to see if that jogs the memory. Most of the time it doesn't but 95% of the time my reaction is 'What a smug cunt'
What a smug cunt.
The mistake you're making is thinking that this stuff has any effect at all. It has none, much like most of the noise that has been discussed in this thread. It's a convenient excuse for when lefties lose (again) to blame the Great Satan of the press. It also betrays the fact that you don't think voters are capable of thinking for themselves.
Murdoch backs winners, not the other way round.
If you think the constant messages of Murdoch and Dacre has no effect then you give the populace more credit than it deserves.
That's why we have such an issue with issues that are minimal like benefit fraud and uncontrolled migration.
I do love the idea that 'Newspapers have no influence' if they had no influence, I doubt billionaires would be so willing to lose money hand over fist running them.
It's the same as Facebooks 'We have no influence' when their entire business model is based on the very idea that it does have influence.
"Voters" are a diverse bunch. There is an effect on at least some of them. Do you think that people form their political views (however undeveloped those may be) ex nihilo? How do you think they even know who Teresa May and Jeremy Corbyn are in the first place?
All other things being equal (where you have two Tory parties, hi Tony!) that may be the case. But it's obviously not the only consideration.
You clearly give them no credit at all.
There are plenty of other outlets (not least the Mirror and Guardian, and pretty much all social media) which put across the opposite viewpoint.
Definitely. I only need to listen to my mum and step dad to know the influence of the papers they read.
When was the last political assassination (prior to Jo Cox) in the UK? My Dad (hates Jezza, used to live in his borough back in the 70s or 80s) said that if he wins there's going to be a Stalinesque purge where they actually murder each other. Sounds brilliant.
Abbott stepping down due to to mental health issue.
Back onboard.
Ian Gow, 1990. Done in by the Provisional IRA, phonics. Take the Irish out of the equation and you're left with Spencer Perceaval.
Yes, the IRA killed four MPs in different attacks and nearly took out the entire British cabinet in the Brighton bombing.
Boring. Even Japan has better assassinations than us and they only murder about 3 people a decade.
I'm going to make it canon that the bloke who died wanking himself off with the orange in his mouth was set-up by MI5. Much better.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
