Jump to content

The Tory lies and deceit thread

Suedehead2
in News and Politics

Featured Replies

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Views 150.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Yea, because the bad apples are going to flaunt their views to everyone :rolleyes:

 

Fair point - but sometimes unusual behaviour is itself a warning sign...

That is something I will not do - I have no problem with law-abiding members of any group, minority or majority. But IMO it is in the self-interests of any group to weed out the bad apples amongst them.

 

So what religion are you? Only asking so I can ask you to start rooting out the bad apples next time it crops up that someone from your religion commits an atrocity, and while I'm at it using your analogy you should be slagging off the NRA for not being more proactive and rooting out their gun-toting mass-murdering members cos it gives them a bad image.....

 

after all, most of the mass murders in the USA are full-on NRA lovers. They belong to an organisation. That also applies to far-right lovers, why arent they rooting anf being proactive, say, about the man who shot the MP 3 years ago. You can't be selective in your arguments against only one religion and one group with members. I mean the NRA actually have names and addresses and all to help them identify the potentials, and frequently the murderers have been flagged up as problem people.

So what religion are you? Only asking so I can ask you to start rooting out the bad apples next time it crops up that someone from your religion commits an atrocity, and while I'm at it using your analogy you should be slagging off the NRA for not being more proactive and rooting out their gun-toting mass-murdering members cos it gives them a bad image.....

 

I have no religion - I am an atheist.

 

after all, most of the mass murders in the USA are full-on NRA lovers. They belong to an organisation. That also applies to far-right lovers, why arent they rooting anf being proactive, say, about the man who shot the MP 3 years ago. You can't be selective in your arguments against only one religion and one group with members. I mean the NRA actually have names and addresses and all to help them identify the potentials, and frequently the murderers have been flagged up as problem people.

 

The answer to this is simple - lots of those NRA members hold powerful positions in government, so can prevent any serious investigation.

Is this OTT?

 

Taxman will have 'shocking' new powers to raid bank accounts with NO warning as critics condemn the move as a breach of privacy

 

The HRMC is being given new powers to trawl bank accounts without the owners being told

A policy document reveals HMRC wants to be able to keep secret investigations into whether someone is paying the right amount of tax

Under existing rules, banks and other financial institutions, have to tell their customers about investigations

 

http://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-595693...NO-warning.html

I have no religion - I am an atheist.

The answer to this is simple - lots of those NRA members hold powerful positions in government, so can prevent any serious investigation.

 

So why aren't you reporting all those atheists in the community that commit crimes, I mean it's your fault that you aren't doing more.....?

 

You totally deliberately miss the point that your argument 100% totally applies to the NRA. If you want the moral right to slag off peaceful Muslims who have nothing to do with criminals for not doing more, then you 100% MUST slag off the NRA for not doing more when they actually KNOW who the suspect members are. What you said is an excuse for them not doing that, and avoiding the point that: that you personally are on dodgy ground saying one thing about one community and then not insisting another is guilty of not doing enough.

 

Selective.

So why aren't you reporting all those atheists in the community that commit crimes, I mean it's your fault that you aren't doing more.....?

 

Strawman - people don't have 'atheist' stamped on their foreheads.

 

You totally deliberately miss the point that your argument 100% totally applies to the NRA. If you want the moral right to slag off peaceful Muslims who have nothing to do with criminals for not doing more, then you 100% MUST slag off the NRA for not doing more when they actually KNOW who the suspect members are. What you said is an excuse for them not doing that, and avoiding the point that: that you personally are on dodgy ground saying one thing about one community and then not insisting another is guilty of not doing enough.

 

You must be a lawyer - you seem to delight in extending my analogies to cover something I never intended.

 

However, you don't seen to realise that merely being a better debater doesn't automatically mean you are right. There are plenty of guilty people walking free, just because they can afford top lawyers.

 

Getting back on topic, as I know you get terribly distressed when I digress :heehee: - the NRA is American, so it has sod all to do with British politics, which is what I was discussing.

Edited by vidcapper

  • Author
Tory MP Nadine Dorries (who may have said something sensible once - if so, it was probably a mistake) has tweeted to suggest that Steghen Yaxley-Lennon (aka Tommy Robinson) might be a good choice for Prime Minister.
Strawman - people don't have 'atheist' stamped on their foreheads.

You must be a lawyer - you seem to delight in extending my analogies to cover something I never intended.

 

However, you don't seen to realise that merely being a better debater doesn't automatically mean you are right. There are plenty of guilty people walking free, just because they can afford top lawyers.

 

Getting back on topic, as I know you get terribly distressed when I digress :heehee: - the NRA is American, so it has sod all to do with British politics, which is what I was discussing.

 

I'm not a lwayer, I'm just logical because I can't stand hypocrisy. Trying to change the subject again I see. Guess point taken then.

 

Don't give a f*** about your excuses for your selectivity. You condemn Muslims and not the NRA for the same "behaviour". Worse, you constantly argue in favour of the Russian-supported Right-wing gun-toting rednecks, and criticise law-abiding peaceful people for not doing the work of the police and MI5 MI6 and other special forces. Speaks volumes, you don't need to say anything, which is why I say it for you.

Tory MP Nadine Dorries (who may have said something sensible once - if so, it was probably a mistake) has tweeted to suggest that Steghen Yaxley-Lennon (aka Tommy Robinson) might be a good choice for Prime Minister.

 

Yes, if anyone doubts how extreme she is, she is bigging up virtual Far Right groups. She should just leave the Tory Party and piss off and join the BNP or UKIP.

Tory MP Nadine Dorries (who may have said something sensible once - if so, it was probably a mistake) has tweeted to suggest that Steghen Yaxley-Lennon (aka Tommy Robinson) might be a good choice for Prime Minister.

 

She has since clarified her original Tweet to say that she was not endorsing that not-very-nice fellow who stole my mate's name, saying that "My point being that if people remain angry with the establishment, as happened in America, we could end up with a truly reprehensible and frightening prospect as a future PM." I would disagree with her assertion (there's laws against people incarcerated being MPs, let alone PM), but it seems incorrect to say she was endorsing him.

I'm not a lwayer, I'm just logical because I can't stand hypocrisy. Trying to change the subject again I see. Guess point taken then.

 

I hope that didn't distress you too much. :rolleyes:

 

Don't give a f*** about your excuses for your selectivity. You condemn Muslims and not the NRA for the same "behaviour". Worse, you constantly argue in favour of the Russian-supported Right-wing gun-toting rednecks
You do remember that the RKBA was enshrined in the US Constitution long before Putin was around...

 

and criticise law-abiding peaceful people for not doing the work of the police and MI5 MI6 and other special forces. Speaks volumes, you don't need to say anything, which is why I say it for you.

 

Be careful to distinguish between what I've *actually* said, and what you claim to read between the lines, though...

 

Yes, if anyone doubts how extreme she is, she is bigging up virtual Far Right groups. She should just leave the Tory Party and piss off and join the BNP or UKIP.

 

The UKIP is not a Far Right group - it is merely a Right-wing group with a small proportion of extremist members, otherwise you could call Labour a 'far-right' group, just because they have a few anti-semites...

I hope that didn't distress you too much. :rolleyes:

 

You do remember that the RKBA was enshrined in the US Constitution long before Putin was around...

Be careful to distinguish between what I've *actually* said, and what you claim to read between the lines, though...

The UKIP is not a Far Right group - it is merely a Right-wing group with a small proportion of extremist members, otherwise you could call Labour a 'far-right' group, just because they have a few anti-semites...

 

1. Not at all. I'm busy dealing with life and death issues in real life. Quite happy to spend a few seconds of my life calling you out.

 

2. Irrelevant. Making excuses again.

 

3. You said Muslims should do more to catch terrorists.

 

4. Farage IS UKIP, it's died without him. He supports the Far Right everywhere he can.

3. You said Muslims should do more to catch terrorists.

 

And law-abiding gun-owners should report any gun-nuts amongst them - how is that inconsistent?

And law-abiding gun-owners should report any gun-nuts amongst them - how is that inconsistent?

 

Where, exactly, have you said that before? Consistency is all I want, so well done, now I can refer back to that and we are in agreement...

Where, exactly, have you said that before? Consistency is all I want, so well done, now I can refer back to that and we are in agreement...

 

It's yet another occasion when I've had to specifically state a position to clear a misconception about me.

It seems that the Tories broke a pairing arrangement* in order to be sure of winning this vote, I won't say they cannot sink any lower because I'm sure they'd prove me wrong.

 

*Pairing arrangement - when an MP is unable to attend a vote (through illness, being away on parliamentary business or even campaigning in local election, for example) it is standard practice to come to an arrangement with an MP on the other side to stay away as well. It is not a binding agreement, but it is more or less unprecedented (I can't think of a precedent) for a government to break an agreement on such a massive scale.

 

They've done this again this evening according to Jo Swinson.

 

https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1019298949344219137

  • Author
The Tory whips office is now claiming that the MP concerned (Brandon Lewis) was asked to vote in error. There is no mention of whether Lewis gently reminded the whip that he was paired. I think we can draw our own conclusion from that.
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.