Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)
Comments
-
Anyway we can't chuck stones, we have Wallace and co.......
How about something far more recent.
Fitzgerald and O'Sullivan said that Ireland is more than prepared for any terrorist attack. Cut to an interview on RTE yesterday with leading members of the AGSI and other Garda groups who have said that Gardaí are wholly unprepared and have not got the necessary equipment and training to deal with it.
The interview also went on to say that no meetings/briefings had occurred since the London attacks back in 2007. The exact words from the AGSI is "we're working in an information vacuum".Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Relax will ya Cass, charlie Flanagan says nothing like london or Manchester will happen here. It'll be grand.0
-
Well in that case, phew, what was i fretting over.
I mean it's not like we allow convicted criminals with terrorist links who came into the country on fake documents to stay here, just "keep an eye" on known terrorists.
I mean that has never been a problem.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Rich boy Barrett want to open the borders and let them all in, that way they will love us and not commit atrocities. I wonder what the healy-raes have to say on the matter, God help us.0
-
So, about Abbot, firstly she's just resigned because of serious illness (no details yet, this is just on the wires now); secondly, read this:
https://twitter.com/MxJackMonroe/status/872419798017245184
She's had some bad moments in the last few weeks, but honestly she's had a solid career and the other side have had nothing but worse performances all day long and twice everything there's a TV debate (who the **** as a sitting PM doesn't go to a leader's debate but sends a representative whose father died three days earlier?). We're laughing at her grasp of the figures, but the Tories haven't provided any figures at all.
I kinda lean towards the impression myself that the BBC has shafted her completely because (a) female, (b) black and (c) Labour. And I'm not even sure which of those three raised the most BBC ire. I don't know if the BBC even know the answer to that one.
Yeah, I wouldn't agree with her on, well, a shed-load of things, but I can't think of a single politician I would agree with on many things. And most of them are incompetent ****-heels I wouldn't trust with the TV remote. Or just straight-up dog-whistling racists. A competent politician who will listen to data and arguments against something (as opposed to just letting you talk without bothering to listen to the words because they have no intention of changing their mind) - that's the acme, you won't ever get better than it. And you very rarely find even that.
And the BBC is a long way from clean-handed here; they just had a terrorist attack in London, and one of the ****s who did it was a follower of a fairly well-known extremist imam in the UK. Well-known if you actually watch the BBC that is. You wouldn't know the guy if you were muslim because he's been banned from mosques up and down the country for years and has been actively chased out of them if he tried to show up (seriously, it's been caught on youtube a few times, it's like watching what would happen if Gerry Adams had tried to speak during mass in Christchurch during the mid-80s). But stuff like that never makes the media because it's not simple and if it's not simple, you can't sell ad space near it. So they've had some extremist gobdaw on the Beeb for years and now one of the people they let him broadcast to has murdered eight people. And it's hardly the first time you could say that about the beeb.
As to Labour, well, they're not fantastic, but they're nowhere near as bad as the Tories, who are hell-bent on economic suicide and stand a good chance of taking us down with them. They get in and we're going to go from the UK and Ireland to Wangland, Scotland, NI and Ireland, there'll be pressure to reexamine the border up North (there already is some now) and that's economic suicide for us to try a taste of (anyone remember East and West Germany reunifying? Now imagine that if West Germany's economy had been on life support, because that'll be us). We're already in enough fun and games with that with the prospect of the return of a hard border up north, the GDPR meaning we'll have some serious work to do just to keep the internet pipes on (and that's a large chunk of our working economy right now) because they go via the UK, and the logistics of imports driving everything up the price on everything that doesn't come via Europe directly right now (meaning everything from oil to wood to paper) and that has knock-on effects across the board (want a new house? the wood has to be imported because we don't grow enough, and it currently comes from the UK because we're too small to go to the continent so we buy it off importers in the UK - they don't grown enough themselves either - and that goes to the wall with brexit so the lumber price spikes along with all the other materials, so the house price spikes, so the rent prices spike to keep track... it's all one interconnected mess).
For us, selfishly speaking, the best possible course would be for an SNP-Labour government that reran the brexit vote over there, and for that to see the whole idea scrapped. It wouldn't necessarily be something we'd enjoy, but the choice appears for us at the moment to be between being shot in the foot or shot in the stomach.0 -
Advertisement
-
Cut to an interview on RTE yesterday with leading members of the AGSI and other Garda groups who have said that Garda? are wholly unprepared and have not got the necessary equipment and training to deal with it.0
-
-
Abbott has had a solid career ? True, including the job the BBC gave her on the programme with Andrew Neil and Michael Portillo, so how biased towards her can they be ? She is no stranger to racist statements herself, including the critisism of white nurses being hired for a hospital in Hackney, and saying that black mothers are much better than white ones, but of course only white people can be racist.
If you want to see what the UK was like during the 70's, then Abbott, Corbyn, and openly Marxist John Mc donnell will soon show us.0 -
So, about Abbot, firstly she's just resigned because of serious illness (no details yet, this is just on the wires now); secondly, read this:
https://twitter.com/MxJackMonroe/status/872419798017245184She's had some bad moments in the last few weeks, but honestly she's had a solid career
If she is having a bad time of it then she should have stepped away. She must have a staff. Could none of them say "Hey Diane, you're going a little off script, perhaps take some time, clear your head and come back at it again"?
Politics is all about soundbites, remember Finian McGrath, but her career thus far is for nothing if she continues to cause calamity after calamity now.and the other side have had nothing but worse performances all day long and twice everythingWe're laughing at her grasp of the figures, but the Tories haven't provided any figures at all.
Seriously she said she had given 6 interviews before that. Would that not have driven home the figure. If it was a simple slip of the tongue then fair enough, but it was a Labour major policy announcement. not something you'd want to get wrong. Also she didn't correct herself, she went on to give two or three more figures that were also wrong.I kinda lean towards the impression myself that the BBC has shafted her completely because (a) female, (b) black and (c) Labour.
Emily Thornberry tried the same thing with Dermot Murnhagan when she couldn't answer his question. She said "it's because i'm a woman". So now it's not only the BBC, but SKY that are sexist?And the BBC is a long way from clean-handed here;
It's also still no excuse for coming onto an interview completely unprepared.As to Labour, well, they're not fantastic, but they're nowhere near as bad as the Tories,
Polls, exit polls and all other such stats are meaningless. Why? People will not tell the truth because they are afraid of being labelled. You said it above that if they are not X, Y, or Z, then they are flat out racists.
If people have views on certain things that others don't agree with then so be it, but why force that view on others and label them as racist, facist, etc, etc. for not accepting it. So because of this the minority view seems to be the majority until the results come in. Brexit, Trump elected, LePen coming close all show that polls are obsolete and people are not truly free to speak their mind. Look to the Antifa riots int he US. Kathy Griffin blaming Trump for her f**k up.For us, selfishly speaking, the best possible course would be for an SNP-Labour government that reran the brexit vote over there, and for that to see the whole idea scrapped.
Not why run it again, why should anyone get a second bite of the apple? Scottish independent vote went for 55-45 to remain within the UK. Now less than 2 years later they are demanding their vote again cause they don't like the result.
Brexit won by a slim margin, but won none the less. If the majority didn't like it then why did it pass/win?
To keep voting until you get the result you want is not a free election and stinks of the same crap the EU pulled on us with the Lisbon treaty. It also is an insult to the people that cast their vote with the implication they didn't know what they were voting for. IOW they are/were stupid.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
If you want to see what the UK was like during the 70's
And what I *want* to see is the UK not try to relive the 50s by getting out of the EU. Because that'll do us some significant economic harm. The rest, I'm academically interested in. I've no real skin in the game (apart from some in-laws who are over there).0 -
Advertisement
-
Both of them appear to have gotten where they are either by weight [Ms Abbott] or by guile [the other one].
Neither of them appear to have clue. Both are world-class hypocrites.
As for the openly-supportive of the IRA person, Corbyn, a good buddy of Mr Adams and well-known in republican circles here in UK for his support for the likes of the late Bobby Sands, who thinks that hamas is hard done-by, and that terrorists in action should not be shot where they stand, but reasoned with, I really can't think of anything more to say.
tac0 -
It has been reported on SKY and pretty much every newspaper that she was "stood down". That to me is not her resigning but being told to go away for a bit.Coming up to an election is not the time for "bad moments".
Still though. Have you seen the people she's running against? If the choice was only her or them, I wouldn't need to think about it for longer than it took to confirm I couldn't emigrate.If she is having a bad time of it then she should have stepped away.Politics is all about soundbites, remember Finian McGrath, but her career thus far is for nothing if she continues to cause calamity after calamity now.I won't pretend to understand the ins and outs of the English political machine, but deflecting blame by saying the other side are no better is not an excuse for the actions of her. IOW saying yeah i'm bad, but they're as bad or worse is not a proper response.Also hard to feck up numbers if you simply don't give them.Emily Thornberry tried the same thing with Dermot Murnhagan when she couldn't answer his question. She said "it's because i'm a woman". So now it's not only the BBC, but SKY that are sexist?
I'm half surprised their female presenters aren't required to appear in lingerie, given that under-bridge trolls' proclivities.
It's the BBC that surprise me, not Sky.But in the last few elections the Tories have won, and even in the last one in 2015 when they called the vote "too close to call" between the Tories and Labour, the Tories won by a majority.Polls, exit polls and all other such stats are meaningless. Why? People will not tell the truth because they are afraid of being labelled. You said it above that if they are not X, Y, or Z, then they are flat out racists.If people have views on certain things that others don't agree with then so be it, but why force that view on others and label them as racist, facist, etc, etc. for not accepting it.So because of this the minority view seems to be the majority until the results come in. Brexit, Trump elected, LePen coming close all show that polls are obsolete and people are not truly free to speak their mind.
And the result in Macron/LePen was within 0.1% of the polls' predictions.Kathy Griffin blaming Trump for her f**k up.
I didn't think the joke was funny (I thought it didn't go far enough and the special effects weren't up to snuff), but chucking your constitution into the plastic shredder because you have a thin skin, that's the sort of thing that should bar you from public office...Not why run it again, why should anyone get a second bite of the apple?
- the UK doesn't have a referendum commission that puts out independent unbiased information about the vote, it's all partisan. So when you drive a bus round the country saying you'll give 320 million to the health service if you vote to leave and do a dozen other things equally blatantly false, you haven't actually run a campaign, you've just been lying to people.
- since the vote, far more information and analysis has hit the public domain so that people understand today far better the two options they had to vote on.
- since the vote, the natural process of aging and death means that even if absolutely nobody changes their vote and you just recount all the valid votes today, Remain wins.
- Remain had 16 million votes. Leave had 17.4 million. Did not vote had 13 million. Was not registered to vote (and thus couldn't) had 18 million. If you're just going to have one vote and say you captured the will of the people in that vote, you at least need to have more people voting than not voting.Scottish independent vote went for 55-45 to remain within the UK. Now less than 2 years later they are demanding their vote again cause they don't like the result.Brexit won by a slim margin, but won none the less. If the majority didn't like it then why did it pass/win?It also is an insult to the people that cast their vote with the implication they didn't know what they were voting for. IOW they are/were stupid.0 -
Coming up to an election is not the time for "bad moments". In more than one interview, and not all the Beeb, she has been accused of booking her own interviews against the party request/demand she run it through the party leaders first.
If she is having a bad time of it then she should have stepped away. She must have a staff. Could none of them say "Hey Diane, you're going a little off script, perhaps take some time, clear your head and come back at it again"?
Politics is all about soundbites, remember Finian McGrath, but her career thus far is for nothing if she continues to cause calamity after calamity now.
That depends if you are a leader,or an autocrat and you actually listen to people you have as advisors,or you have a circle of Yes men and women and sycopantic monkeys and ass kissers.Who are at each others throats in efforts to curry your favour.Or are you man enough to accept that you are fu%king things up and need to change course?Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"
0 -
As for the openly-supportive of the IRA person, Corbyn, a good buddy of Mr Adams and well-known in republican circles here in UK for his support for the likes of the late Bobby Sands, who thinks that hamas is hard done-by, and that terrorists in action should not be shot where they stand, but reasoned with, I really can't think of anything more to say.
That photo you've swallowed is from 1995, by which time your government was in full-blown talks that led to the good friday agreement, so McGuinness wasn't just talking in the same room as Corbyn on one occasion, he was actively negotiating with number ten at the time.
I'll grant you I'm more likely to poke out my eyes with the pencil in the booth than vote sinn fein, but if it was a choice between them and johnson, at least I'd know I was being asked to choose between two peas in a pod.
On top of which, "terrorists should be shot where they stand" is not what the Shoot-to-kill policy means; "suspects should be shot where they stand" is what it means, and while the Met got it right this time, they've gotten it incredibly, tragically wrong in past instances, whether it's unloading ten shots into an innocent man's head on the underground or shooting a grandfather carrying a chair leg in the suburbs.
On top of which is the point that Corbyn and Johnson voted the same way on anti-terror laws in the last few years. An interviewer pointed out the written houses of parliment voting record on this to Johnson the other day. So you're not getting any different policy no matter which of them you choose anyway.0 -
I'll split this response as it's nauseatingly long.The tabloids are full of that, but they're usually full of something. She announced she was stepping down temporarily because she was ill and Labour appointed someone to fill in for her.If the choice was only her or them............I thought that was exactly what just happened.It's just that if the same level of criticism had been levelled against May as has been against Abbot, they would just have shot May live on air as an act of humane dispatch.
What's that old saying about better to look the fool than open your mouth and confirm.It's not a defence - I'm just pointing out that it's not a level playing field. By quite a margin.
I'm not claiming the media is not biased, but if i were a Labour member/MP with this knowledge i'd have a tribunals worth of solicitors examining every word i spoke and studying like when i was in school for any debate or interview.Well, what else do you call UKIP?Because the people I'm talking about go around saying that the problem is all these foreign types... while talking about people who've been in the country as long as they have?
Does being in a country a given amount of years preclude someone from such accusations? If so how many?Trump was going to lose right up until the last day or two and then Comey virtually broke the Hatch Act with his press release .........that sank Clinton (who still went on to win the second largest popular vote in US history).I'd lay that one on the russians rather then the pollsters.She didn't blame him for the sketch, she owned that mistake and apologised in public completely.That's a sitting US president targeting a US citizen and hounding her out of a job because of something she said that he found distasteful... in a country where the first amendment says that's a protected act.
People seem to disregard the respect for the office that Trump holds simply because of him. If someone held up a severed Barry obama would it have been funny or would there have been Holy hell? Hell even Chelsea Clinton said it was tasteless and showed no respect for the Office of the President.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
I didn't think the joke was funny (I thought it didn't go far enough and the special effects weren't up to snuff),but chucking your constitution into the plastic shredder because you have a thin skin, that's the sort of thing that should bar you from public office...
Yeah, she was a real winner. Hadn't even the manners to come out to thank her supporters after she lost.you've just been lying to people.- since the vote, far more information and analysis has hit the public domain so that people understand today far better the two options they had to vote on.- since the vote, the natural process of aging and death means that even if absolutely nobody changes their vote and you just recount all the valid votes today, Remain wins.
Ignoring sections of society because their vote does not go with the desired outcome has another word. Rigged.- Remain had 16 million votes. Leave had 17.4 million. Did not vote had 13 million. Was not registered to vote (and thus couldn't) had 18 million. If you're just going to have one vote and say you captured the will of the people in that vote, you at least need to have more people voting than not voting.I think they're more arguing that they voted to remain within the UK on the basis of assurances given .............
The majority voted to stay and while they have devolved government, that meant they (whether knowingly or not) gave London the power to make decisions which would include them.
Alex Salmon left after loosing the vote and the "cranky" took over. She almost immediately started into a call fro a new vote for independence so it was in the works before the Brexit vote.Same reason a lie gets first class flights to the antipodes while the truth is digging through the back of the airing cupboard swearing under its breath about missing socks and broken laces.
Regardless of it's basis the leave won. There is no allowance for "we didn't know", or "nobody explained it to us well enough".
If we allow voting to be redone because we don't like the outcome then what is the point. You're never going to please both sides and each side will have a reason for it to remain as it is, and the other for it to be changed.
It's not best two out of three and should never be.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Grizzly45 wrote:That depends if you are a leader,or an autocrat and you actually listen to people you have as advisors,or you have a circle of Yes men and women and sycopantic monkeys and ass kissers.Who are at each others throats in efforts to curry your favour.Or are you man enough to accept that you are fu%king things up and need to change course?
If you surround yourself by yes men then you're a moron and possibly an insecure one at that. If she cannot tell when she has gone too far then at least she had her party to wind her in. But they done that, on more than one occasion, and she kept going.
Again, this is not a recent thing but she has outdone herself in the last two months.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Beats the thatcher years...
And what I *want* to see is the UK not try to relive the 50s by getting out of the EU. Because that'll do us some significant economic harm. The rest, I'm academically interested in. I've no real skin in the game (apart from some in-laws who are over there).
Are you having a laugh ? Three day weeks, power cuts, uncollected rubbish everywhere, out and out communists wanting to take control, no foreign companies investing in the place, the government spending billions propping up hopeless loss making industries churning out rubbish like british Leyland, the shipbuilders and the coal mines.0 -
-
Someone elses fault?
If you surround yourself by yes men then you're a moron and possibly an insecure one at that. If she cannot tell when she has gone too far then at least she had her party to wind her in. But they done that, on more than one occasion, and she kept going.
Again, this is not a recent thing but she has outdone herself in the last two months.
Talk to Hillary Clinton about that one.:)Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"
0 -
Advertisement
-
So everyone else is wrong, not her?That, to me, is a dangerously scary attitude. Vote for anyone bar the one you hate. It's how we got a FG government in 2011, and while not on the same majority, the same thing last year.
Look, we get a choice to bring in the swiss system where we all get to vote on policy, I'm fully onboard for that. But until that point, you have to pick a representative. And for the last few years, "anyone bar the one you hate" tended to leave you with a choice of absolutely nobody anyway. You wound up picking the one you hated the least rather than pick someone you thought you could agree with.
I'm not for that, or happy with it, but I don't know how to fix it. And I have zero interest in not voting because that just makes it easier on the sods.You know what i meant. Was it her decision or was it made for her? And this is not a recent thing, it's been happening for years.Without indulging the "pay not attention to the man behind the curtain" thing May had her staff who most likely informed her to stay clear. Like the debate. A poor decision, but better to be roasted for not turning up than for making flip flop decisions, or outlandish claims.
But not showing up to a debate and not risking being roasted just says you think you're not able to hack an adversarial environment.
Right before you go to negotiate a few hundred new treaties and trade deals and the actual terms of the UK leaving the EU.
Which, compared to the leaders debates, is going to be a bit more of a slog and a wee bit more difficult. So if you can't hack the former...It never is. Look to the US. Trump misspells a word and it's a ten day media cycle. Clinton is/was under investigation for four separate offences, and her staff for actually doing illegal things yet nothing.
Trump's Covefefe thing was in the media for two main reasons: one, it was funny and there's been precious little to laugh at over there (apart from the high-pitched Oh-god-we're-all-going-to-die kind of laughter, naturally). But secondly, it seemed obvious that he'd just been overwhelmed by the trip abroad and passed out asleep mid-tweet. This from a guy who promised (in between the moon and the stars) on the campaign trail that he was in great health and had fantastic endurance for the work ahead.
Meanwhile the investigation into Clinton did turn up something - no evidence of any wrongdoing. That's as close to "innocent" as they are legally allowed to determine (investigations not being courtrooms). That bit doesn't get reported so much. Instead someone just says "oh, they didn't find evidence because she's so good at hiding it". FFS. If she was that good at hiding evidence, she'd have drycleaned Lewinski's dress.I'm not claiming the media is not biased, but if i were a Labour member/MP with this knowledge i'd have a tribunals worth of solicitors examining every word i spoke and studying like when i was in school for any debate or interview.
And for some reason the Beeb really does point a magnifying lens at the labour cracks and not so much for the tory cracks (with some *magnificent* exceptions, in fairness).
(The LDs and the SNP seem to be mostly ignored completely and the other smaller parties never even get mentioned except for the Monster Raving Loony Party who are always good for a 3-second laugh on election day during the announcements)A flash in the pan, but one that achieved their goal of getting the UK out of the EU.Have some of "these types" said that all Muslims should be deported, even those born in the country?Does being in a country a given amount of years preclude someone from such accusations? If so how many?And isn't that just a scathing indictment of the gullibility and stupidity of certain people that a woman with her record was still seen as a better choice. The DNP, best PR machine in the world.
There are no trophies in politics for participating.
And that's before we even mention the russians and level playing fields.
There is simply no way that anyone the DNC had as a candidate (including Sanders) could have done better. She beat them all flat out in the primaries, and her per-state voting record beat the historical records of every candidate that the DNC fielded for the primaries.
She's been absolutely hounded in the US media for so long that people just don't seem to be able to remember the actual numbers - the one bit of data there is. She won the majority of the electorate, by an enormous margin, in every demographic apart from "white" and "rich" (no, really, the only demographics where she didn't trounce trump were the caucasian section of the ethnic breakdown and those who were earning twice the national median household income and above or who owned more than a square mile of land. That's just the recorded facts taken on election day).
Now would I agree with her on half her policies? Actually, no, I'd be arguing with her till the cows came home (probably over more than half at that). But here's the point - she'd be competent enough to hold the argument. The buffoon the electoral college put into office can't even finish a thought in a prepared speech, let along hold up his end of an argument. That's not something you want in a person with control over the military and the executive branch. She'd be someone you'd have disagreed with; he's someone who won't tolerate disagreement. I know which I like less.Call bullsh*t on that. "She owned it". She got caught on the wrong end of a poorly crafted/tasteless sketch and when she didn't get the big pat on the back she was expecting, it went from the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard level of apology to going on the attack.I've highlighted the important part.
People seem to disregard the respect for the office that Trump holds simply because of him. If someone held up a severed Barry obama would it have been funny or would there have been Holy hell?
We're not talking about a bad comedy joke here either, we're talking about straight up out and out hatred and bile and it was pretty much continous for eight years.Hell even Chelsea Clinton said it was tasteless and showed no respect for the Office of the President.0 -
That was no one else's fault and while she did surround herself with like minded people (yes people if you will) they were there by design and not from incompetence.
Look at Debbie Wasserman. Fraudulently tipping things in favour of Clinton, resigns then immediately gets hired by Clinton.
How about Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee wearing a "Hilary" badge during an oversight hearing into the "lost" e-mails.
Or Donna Brazile giving questions to Hilary ahead of the debates?
Not enough? What about the media:- The brother of the President of CBS is an Obama staffer.
- The Sister of the ABC network is an Obama staffer.
- The husband of the Deputy Chief of CNN is a Hilary staffer
- An ABC executive is married to NSA advisor Susan Rice
- ABC reporter and correspondent are married, respectively, to former white house press secretary and deputy pres secretary.
Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Your taste of comedy and mine differ, by quiet a margin.
Hell, if I could ban anything I didn't find funny, we'd never have seen Steptoe and Son and Ben Stiller would be somewhere in a shallow grave wondering what just happened to him.As opposed, and to take a leaf out your book on looking at the other side, to leaving men to die, lying about the reasons for it, "loosing tens of thousands of e-mails, having staff that did actually commit offences, keeping secure and secret info at home, loosing your blackberry, taking donations from groups associated to terrorists groups, having staffers that are related to groups raising money for terrorist groups, having your foundation under investigation for missing millions, etc, etc.Yeah, she was a real winner. Hadn't even the manners to come out to thank her supporters after she lost.Yes they were. It's the first time and not the last, and we had the same thing done to us, but still the result stood. Even the Tories said it would be honoured.So as i said above they were either lied to or uninformed. IOW too stupid to understand?So just let the oldies die off, and we'll get our way.
Put it another way; the people who voted to leave and then died don't have to pay the cost of their decision so why should others have to? How's that fair or just?Ignoring sections of society because their vote does not go with the desired outcome has another word. Rigged.If 13 million people couldn't be bothered, or my personal favorite, didn't vote to make a point, then they are morons.
I just don't think that that bans you ever having a second vote on something.
And I wouldn't want it to.And i'm sure those assurances included the fact the UK was in the EU, but unfortunately things change and you cannot throw the dummy from the pram because you don't like the changes.The majority voted to stay and while they have devolved government, that meant they (whether knowingly or not) gave London the power to make decisions which would include them.
And now you have the entirety of Scotland voting to stay in the EU, and the SNP being voted into almost every seat of government they have; and it's kindof following from that that they'd want another vote.
And honestly, I kinda think that since we're Irish, we can't really begrudge them that, what with the whole war of independence and allAlex Salmon left after loosing the vote and the "cranky" took over.Regardless of it's basis the leave won. There is no allowance for "we didn't know", or "nobody explained it to us well enough".If we allow voting to be redone because we don't like the outcome then what is the point. You're never going to please both sides and each side will have a reason for it to remain as it is, and the other for it to be changed.
It's not best two out of three and should never be.
This is one of those cases where I wouldn't mind seeing them go "Jaysus, what were we thinking? Let's not do that.".0 -
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/02/labour-accuses-tories-of-fake-news-over-video-of-corbyn-ira-comments0 -
And from the other side of the spectrum that the torygraph occupies:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/02/labour-accuses-tories-of-fake-news-over-video-of-corbyn-ira-comments
Nope. Sorry, no, not going to waste my life arguing about whatever it is the Daily fecking Mail kills trees for. Might as well go argue with the drunk guy masturbating in the bus station for all that would be worth.
The guardian LOL, is that available outside Islington ? Ok so apart from the Ira, he has voiced support for general galtieri, hammas, not surprised seeing as the labour party has a serious problem with anti-semitism and criticise Israel at every opportunity, strange seeing as it's the only democracy in the region. Don't forget his best buddies red Ken Livingstone and George Galloway, the latter seemed to spend his life in Arabia brown nosing hideous despots like Saddam Hussein and gaddafi, gaddafi being a friend of our own Marxist republican party.0 -
I don't know, but it sure looks like piling-on to me, not reporting.I'm not for that, or happy with it, but I don't know how to fix it. And I have zero interest in not voting because that just makes it easier on the sods.There's a third option here: namely that she's genuinely ill
Look at Corbyn. Seen him at a rally on TV today and he looks ill, frail, and one thing caught my eye. He shook hands with the MC of the event, gave a finger tip shake, which is a pet hate, and then pulled (quiet hard) out of the handshake. The only thing missing was for him to wipe his hand on his trouser leg.
Optics will kill you in politics.Er, no.
Trump's Covefefe thing was in the media for two main reasons: one, it was funny and there's been precious little to laugh at over there (apart from the high-pitched Oh-god-we're-all-going-to-die kind of laughter, naturally).This from a guy who promised (in between the moon and the stars) on the campaign trail that he was in great health and had fantastic endurance for the work ahead.Meanwhile the investigation into Clinton did turn up something - no evidence of any wrongdoing. That's as close to "innocent" as they are legally allowed to determine
They say they could not prvoe intent which is afar cry from innocent.
And that only related to the e-mails.Instead someone just says "oh, they didn't find evidence because she's so good at hiding it". FFS. If she was that good at hiding evidence, she'd have drycleaned Lewinski's dress.Yup. But there's only so many of them you can do that for before you burn out, it's only human.Actually, yes. The UKIPers at any rate. And their nastier MP-shooting cousins.In this case, all of the years. Meaning they were born there and were older than the UKIP eejits calling for them to "go back where they came from" (which was Birmingham in the bit I remember laughing at at the time).
What i'm asking is does nationality forgive view points. If someone is British/English, born there or lived for 40 years, but holds extremist views are they outside of the purview of accusation or scrutiny?She *was* the better choice.
She hired the woman that was fired for manipulating votes away from Sanders.
Look at the investigations (multiple) into her, her dealings and her foundation. Look at the links i posted above in response to Grizzly. Look at the ties she has to middle eastern oil and businesses. Businesses that have direct and indirect links to terrorist groups or groups that raise money for terrorist groups.
She has built an empire, flip flopped on multiple political stand points and lied. The only difference between her and Trump is she had 40 years to learn the craft.The only person who ever did better than her in the entire DNP was Obama, and even then he only managed it the first time round.And that's before we even mention the russians and level playing fields.
No one has pointed at something and said "Here, here is the proof he done this".There is simply no way that anyone the DNC had as a candidate (including Sanders) could have done better. She beat them all flat out in the primaries, and her per-state voting record beat the historical records of every candidate that the DNC fielded for the primaries.She's been absolutely hounded in the US media for so long .......
Considering all she has done, been accused of, and lied about. You think it's unfair?The buffoon the electoral college put into office can't even finish a thought in a prepared speech, let along hold up his end of an argument. That's not something you want in a person with control over the military and the executive branch.
As for buffon, while i won't argue he won't win a nobel, what did he promise that Bill Clinton, Obama and others did not? The Wall, they all called for it, control on immigration, that too. How about the "muslim ban". Yup, they called for that too. How come all the snowflakes are not so upset that 16 muslim countries have bans on any Jews entering their country?
Oh while i'm on Nobel, why did Obama win it? No President has spent so many of their years in office at war as Obama. The prize was a mistake and an insult.
In his terms he incited/increased race tensions, made the police the enemy, invited terrorist styled movements to the white house, started or continued in multiple wars, failed miserably in foreign affairs (Syria), and ObamacareShe'd be someone you'd have disagreed with; he's someone who won't tolerate disagreement.That's daft. She stood up and said it was a mistake and apologised. That's owning it.
I think not.
No loss anyway. I' just surprised someone had the balls to sack her given the prevailing anti trump sentiment.But there was, and worse.The Klan were not particularly happy with the idea of a black president
Frankly she is of little concern to me as i find her unfunny and repugnant.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
That is the public appetite. To see someone being made look foolish. It doesn't help when the "target" is pouring fuel on the fire.That could very well be the case, but then it's a party wide failure to recognise that one of their leading figures (cause lets face it if it were some back bencher representing johnny bog land no one would care).Look at Corbyn. Seen him at a rally on TV today and he looks ill, frail, and one thing caught my eye. He shook hands with the MC of the event, gave a finger tip shake, which is a pet hate, and then pulled (quiet hard) out of the handshake. The only thing missing was for him to wipe his hand on his trouser leg.
Optics will kill you in politics.Hate doing it, but as opposed to this picture of health (after which she disappeared for days):Erm, nope.
They say they could not prvoe intent which is afar cry from innocent.
And that only related to the e-mails.
Now the congressional hearings, they could have said someone was guilty or innocent; and they did, they cleared her of all wrongdoing.Which MPs? Would like to read/watch that.What i'm asking is does nationality forgive view points. If someone is British/English, born there or lived for 40 years, but holds extremist views are they outside of the purview of accusation or scrutiny?She hired the woman that was fired for manipulating votes away from Sanders.
Look at the investigations (multiple) into her, her dealings and her foundation. Look at the links i posted above in response to Grizzly. Look at the ties she has to middle eastern oil and businesses. Businesses that have direct and indirect links to terrorist groups or groups that raise money for terrorist groups.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/hildabeast.asp
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements
Secondly, how can there have been both links and investigations into those links that say she did nothing wrong?The only difference between her and Trump is she had 40 years to learn the craft.
Politifact has it pretty well summarised in their summaries for each:
She's not perfect (find me one who is) but she's a damn sight better than Trump (but then so is most of congress and probably half the people in the US). Seriously, they've caught her telling fibs about 25% of the time. They've caught him telling the truth about 25% of the time. One of these things is not like the other.Again, where is the proof. I hear about the Russians doing this, the Russians doing that. Where is the proof. Everyone is talking like it's a done deal and all that is left is the impeachment.
This stuff grinds slow, but even so, it took years for watergate to get this far, Trump's gotten there so fast it's surreal.No one has pointed at something and said "Here, here is the proof he done this".
It's just that this time they're seeing in days what took months the last time around.
And by the way, that's just the russian thing. It's not like that's the only scandal attached to this guy, you actually need a cheatsheet to keep up with these things. Sexual assault (over the last forty years), scandals tied to the beauty pagents, lawsuits settled for $100 million over racist discrimination, mafia ties, the entire Trump University scandal, intimidation, bankruptcies, illegal immigrant workers being forced to work in substandard conditions, operating casinos illegally, antitrust violations, his staff assaulting people, SLAPP cases, refusing to pay workers all over the place, using political donations from the presidential campaign to buy his own book to push it up the bestseller lists, hiring models who had no visa to work in the US, and a half-dozen scandals surrounding the Trump Foundation ranging from "the IRS wants a word" to the most recent one of siphoning off cash donated to help kids with cancer.
And that's just the stuff they've turned up documents on, testimony on, or court cases on.Debbie Wasserman.You think thats unfounded or unfair?Considering all she has done, been accused of, and lied about. You think it's unfair?People call him a racist, facist, etc. Show when he done this or displayed those features.
Facist? Pick a feature, it'll be on his twitter account (honestly, it'd be the funniest thing on that site if they hadn't actually given him the launch codes).
A general asshat personally? How about the latest one, where he's diverting money from a charity event to raise funds for children with terminal cancer into his own bank account, according to his own son. I mean, we could keep going but I need sleep at some time tonightThe man is a dumpster fire.
As for buffon, while i won't argue he won't win a nobel, what did he promise that Bill Clinton, Obama and others did not? The Wall, they all called for it, control on immigration, that too.
Mind you, they all changed their mind and rolled back those measures, and they didn't present them by calling all Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers...How about the "muslim ban". Yup, they called for that too.How come all the snowflakes are not so upset that 16 muslim countries have bans on any Jews entering their country?Oh while i'm on Nobel, why did Obama win it? No President has spent so many of their years in office at war as Obama. The prize was a mistake and an insult.
And lots of people did say that at the time (about Obama not having earned the Nobel that is).In his terms he incited/increased race tensions,made the police the enemy
And they've been on that road since forever. They don't have clean hands here.invited terrorist styled movements to the white house
...though I'm not sure that'll work so well with that lunatic from the Philippines., started or continued in multiple wars, failed miserably in foreign affairs (Syria), and Obamacare
If it wasn't, the republicans wouldn't be hiding from their own constituents who are terrified of losing healthcare.
And this replacement they were talking about in the house was finally costed - it dropped nearly 30 million americans on the floor for healthcare access in the first few years and had nowhere near enough money set aside to pay for it.
I mean, if FG tried to bring in obamacare here, I'd be one of the first protestors on the streets because that **** is horrific by our standards, but we're used to the idea that if you fall and break a wrist, you get treated and you don't have the use of the wrist for a few weeks while you heal; in the US, that's between forty and sixty thousand dollars in debts and you get the bill in the first week unless your HMO agrees to cover it. It's like something from a Dickens novel, it's toxic.Yeah, her secret service men can attest to that.
They can't say she fired them purely for saying something they're explicitly allowed to say under US law. It's a massive difference.If more people had of laughed than complained would she have apologised.?
I think not.So someone stood up with a decapitated head of Obama? If not then it's not worse.
And he wasn't alone, this was 2008:
And that was happening all over the place. He was getting an average of 30 death threats a day for eight years, a rate 400% higher than his predecessors. For pete's sake someone was trying to build a dirty bomb to assassinate him with in '08.
But Nugent didn't earn the personal ire of the sitting US president, no matter how hard he tried. That's the difference.Frankly she is of little concern to me as i find her unfunny and repugnant.0 -
Well COCK.
Had a big reply written out and lost connection, then DNS issues, and lastly power. Was having them all day, hence the slow replies, and was saving every couple of minutes, but lost it.
I'll shorten my reply to this.
Abbott is in a situation of her own making. Past acts don't make up for present mistakes and if it were one or two over the last week you can cite it as exhaustion, but numerous acts over years is too much to ignore.
In my opinion Hilary Clinton is a danger. She is untrustworthy and has manipulated and schemed her way to where she is. She has argued against "white privilege" while getting her daughter a $900,000 per year job, has changed her political stance on all issues such as gay marriage, building a "wall", and then repeatedly lied about things like landing under fire in Bosnia, to Benghazi, to the e-mails.
She has manipulated the American political system to her own benefit and nothing you or anyone will say will change my mind on this.
Is Trump the answer. Who knows. If one of the other candidates (republican) were stronger or better perhaps they would do better, but the people voted and as i said before you must honor the result whether you agree with it or not. What i do know is no other President has had to put up with the sh*t storm he has simply because the snowflakes were not happy their candidate lost. The fact they are still rioting proves this. He (President Trump) has not helped his cause and well and truly put his foot in it at times, but i have to wonder what could he do if left to the business of being President.
The list of offenses you say Trump has done or been accused of are very similar to the Clintons from the sexual harassment, to money fraud, to calling for the same measures Trump did. You can split hairs on who done more, or whose were more severe but they all have a sense of familiarity to them.
As for Obama he should never have won the Nobel and if he were not black he wouldn't have. You say he has done as other Presidents have by inviting terrorist type groups into the White house, but how was this meant to diffuse tensions?
His Obamacare failed on many levels such as insurers loosing money, fines for no coverage being far less than the coverage itself, raising premiums for those with care, etc.
I can't open the links you shared bu will try tomorrow. I might add to the above then, but for now, and given the hour i'll leave it at that.Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads
If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.
Your Shooting Forum Moderator - Cass
0 -
Clinton....gun ownership.....Great choice...Not.
Obama gun ownership...Google operation Fast&furious...A genuine conspircy theory that leads right to his door along with Eric Holder...More subopenas and warrents have been issued for that just today.Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"
0 -
Advertisement
-
More subopenas and warrents have been issued for that just today.0