By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I see Cruella is again ranting about how the police are against the Tories in their desire to create a "fair" society. This time it's because the police will not prevent a march in support of the Palestinians this weekend.
I'm sure the question of whether we as individuals support the Israeli or Palestinian sides in the present conflict will produce as many answers as there are people asked. In my conversations with people, they can see both sides of the story here - none of them good.
I think that ambivalence has its roots deep in our world view (and view of ourselves) but ultimately, most of us believe that we should be able to express ourselves without fear of being nicked by the Met. Cruella is trying to loan the dice here for her own political objectives and in my opinion at least, is the one at fault.
She has form here. Personally I think she's trying to provoke Rishi into sacking her so that she can run for leader before the next election. The prospect of such a right wing lunatic in charge of the Tories is really scary.
She is MP for Fareham. The good burgers of Fareham can do us all a favour here and get rid of her in the next election becasue who would want to be represented by such a vile person.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:56 - Nov 10 with 1871 views
I don't think it's helpful that the media, groups of people and whoever, keep talking about sackings. Our MP''s are elected and I would rather know what they really think, so that we can make an informed decision at the general election. This crusade to "force MP's to say or do things" is not good in my opinion.
The same thing happened when Starmer didn't back a ceasefire. Calls for him to be removed because he has a view is just ridiculous. Similarly, with Braverman, her constituents can decide what they think in the ballot box. The pressure to back down and say something else is not what I want, whether I agree or not. I want to know what his or her views are, not what they have been told to say or do by a group of people or the media.
Politics is a mess and we are as influenced by "what we are told" as much as the people are in Russia. We are becoming more and more influenced and probably only given half the story in most events, just to suit the UK agenda. Why can't we agree or disagree and make our decisions in the ballot box? Leaders being told what views they can or can't have is the most dangerous thing here. We are heading towards having to have the same view as everyone else, just like Russia or China.
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:56 - Nov 10 by Southamptonfan
I don't think it's helpful that the media, groups of people and whoever, keep talking about sackings. Our MP''s are elected and I would rather know what they really think, so that we can make an informed decision at the general election. This crusade to "force MP's to say or do things" is not good in my opinion.
The same thing happened when Starmer didn't back a ceasefire. Calls for him to be removed because he has a view is just ridiculous. Similarly, with Braverman, her constituents can decide what they think in the ballot box. The pressure to back down and say something else is not what I want, whether I agree or not. I want to know what his or her views are, not what they have been told to say or do by a group of people or the media.
Politics is a mess and we are as influenced by "what we are told" as much as the people are in Russia. We are becoming more and more influenced and probably only given half the story in most events, just to suit the UK agenda. Why can't we agree or disagree and make our decisions in the ballot box? Leaders being told what views they can or can't have is the most dangerous thing here. We are heading towards having to have the same view as everyone else, just like Russia or China.
That would be great if we could trust elections and the politicians to deliver on any promises that they make. Sadly we can't with a Party political system. And then, the current system is broken. Who voted for our current Prime Minister? Who decides who the candidate is? What relevance does our vote have when it gets lost in the way the boundaries for a constituency are decided? How can a decent candidate, an Independent for example, compete with the hugely funded juggernauts of Labour and Conservative? Who the TV and papers slavishly focus all their coverage on. And then there is election fraud. Does everyone know that since 1997, Postal voting has jumped from just 3% to over 20% now. Really? If so many people are supposedly no longer voting in person, that opens the door to huge levels of corruption, which has been evidenced to happen in the US. How do we know that isn't happening here? The whole political system is screwed and the institutions are part of that. Which is why the Govt just introduced a bill to label as extremist anyone who criticises the Govt and institutions, who they can lock away for 2 years. They don't want to fix the system. And are changing the law to stop the people from being able to influence changing it.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 13:48 - Nov 10 with 1835 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:06 - Nov 10 by StRipper
Sadly Bazz, you're never going to get an honest view from the TV. The TV is controlled by regulators, which means they will only show what is state approved, or they lose their licence. Look what happened to RT news the moment the Ukraine war started. They didn't want us to see the other perspective to give balance. Especially in the place we are at now. Even we don't have a democracy, or the appearance of one, and neither does Europe - who voted for Sunak and who wants Starmer as an alternative? So TV is always going to be heavily weighted to support what the State wants the public to get behind and go along with. Even, in this case, empathising with a fascist state killing women and kids indiscriminately, including their own - who we provide weapons to and hope to get the drilling contracts off of the coast of Gaza for. That's why we're allowed to see the TV news, because the ruling powers want us to. Even worse to trust official announcements - our Governments are corrupt and no longer represent the people. I guess if everyone saw that, pressure may grow for media independence. At least we should all watch TV with the view that we should question everything we are told and question if that gives us the full picture. As you said, strangely you have seen very little anecdotal evidence of the other side in this new war - with Palestinians or those questioning the "war"/genocide -just emotional stuff to manipulate us in relation to Israeli, uncorroborated, experiences. As things are now, the only chance you have to get an actual view is to look at multiple sources on the web - who provide actual sources - over stuff artificially created for a TV audience. Which much of it is. UKColumn.org is one of the few efforts I see to provide an honest daily news bulletin Though very few of us have the time or inclination to do actual research on events. And why should we? We'd all like to think that we aren't constantly being lied to and manipulated
[Post edited 10 Nov 2023 12:33]
Sadly the scenario that you can’t trust an elected government or any media means that you open all sorts a random fruitcakes being free to believe whatever they choose and eventually anarchy. Thanks for your views.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 14:26 - Nov 10 with 1820 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 13:48 - Nov 10 by Bazza
Sadly the scenario that you can’t trust an elected government or any media means that you open all sorts a random fruitcakes being free to believe whatever they choose and eventually anarchy. Thanks for your views.
You are just parroting the misguided propoganda. And where has the Anarchy that you envisage ever happened, anywhere? Thats exactly the point. People are fooled into thinking that everyone else is stupid and we should only trust the Government and its institutions for the truth. Look where that has got us. Meanwhile, it is the Govt involving our country in wars and taxing the hell out of everything that we earn and buy. And I have no control over what my tax is spent on
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 14:37 - Nov 10 with 1820 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:56 - Nov 10 by Southamptonfan
I don't think it's helpful that the media, groups of people and whoever, keep talking about sackings. Our MP''s are elected and I would rather know what they really think, so that we can make an informed decision at the general election. This crusade to "force MP's to say or do things" is not good in my opinion.
The same thing happened when Starmer didn't back a ceasefire. Calls for him to be removed because he has a view is just ridiculous. Similarly, with Braverman, her constituents can decide what they think in the ballot box. The pressure to back down and say something else is not what I want, whether I agree or not. I want to know what his or her views are, not what they have been told to say or do by a group of people or the media.
Politics is a mess and we are as influenced by "what we are told" as much as the people are in Russia. We are becoming more and more influenced and probably only given half the story in most events, just to suit the UK agenda. Why can't we agree or disagree and make our decisions in the ballot box? Leaders being told what views they can or can't have is the most dangerous thing here. We are heading towards having to have the same view as everyone else, just like Russia or China.
Can't compare our or other western democracies with autocratic states like Russia or China.
Our political system isn't perfect and much of the press is biased, but it's not difficult to identify which way the bias lies in each case, so we can listen and read accordingly.
Point is we can listen to and read whatever we like and, by and large (hate or discriminatory speech apart) we can say what we like too.
As for Braverman - sure let her constituents decide whether she should stay as an MP, but she should be nowhere near positions of power like Home Secretary. It was bad enough when she was an ambitious idiot with an overly inflated sense of her own abilities. Now she's decided to try to be a pound shop Trump too, creating division wherever she can. Like him, she's a grade A scumbag.
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 14:37 - Nov 10 by DorsetIan
Can't compare our or other western democracies with autocratic states like Russia or China.
Our political system isn't perfect and much of the press is biased, but it's not difficult to identify which way the bias lies in each case, so we can listen and read accordingly.
Point is we can listen to and read whatever we like and, by and large (hate or discriminatory speech apart) we can say what we like too.
As for Braverman - sure let her constituents decide whether she should stay as an MP, but she should be nowhere near positions of power like Home Secretary. It was bad enough when she was an ambitious idiot with an overly inflated sense of her own abilities. Now she's decided to try to be a pound shop Trump too, creating division wherever she can. Like him, she's a grade A scumbag.
I agree with your first 3 paragraphs but ......post shop Trump.......grade A scumbag...... Angry talk , think you need a glass of something. At least you're showing we still have freedom of speech unlike some on here.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 21:43 - Nov 10 with 1715 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 15:49 - Nov 10 by Bazza
I agree with your first 3 paragraphs but ......post shop Trump.......grade A scumbag...... Angry talk , think you need a glass of something. At least you're showing we still have freedom of speech unlike some on here.
Perfectly calm. I’ve had Braverman’s number for years. Since before she was AG. None of this is surprising or shocking to me.
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 14:37 - Nov 10 by DorsetIan
Can't compare our or other western democracies with autocratic states like Russia or China.
Our political system isn't perfect and much of the press is biased, but it's not difficult to identify which way the bias lies in each case, so we can listen and read accordingly.
Point is we can listen to and read whatever we like and, by and large (hate or discriminatory speech apart) we can say what we like too.
As for Braverman - sure let her constituents decide whether she should stay as an MP, but she should be nowhere near positions of power like Home Secretary. It was bad enough when she was an ambitious idiot with an overly inflated sense of her own abilities. Now she's decided to try to be a pound shop Trump too, creating division wherever she can. Like him, she's a grade A scumbag.
I think we can compare our western "democracies" to autocratic states. Look at this woman getting arrested for praying in her head!
Our democracy is a sham - I thought we all realised that during 2020/21, when they mandated lockdowns, masks and gene therapy jabs.
An example of police abusing their powers here. There is no law against standing wherever you want. I tend to agree that we have become a state where we have very little freedom.
Here is another example, although the guy reminds the police of his freedoms.
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 11:40 - Nov 11 by Southamptonfan
An example of police abusing their powers here. There is no law against standing wherever you want. I tend to agree that we have become a state where we have very little freedom.
Here is another example, although the guy reminds the police of his freedoms.
[Post edited 11 Nov 2023 11:43]
Anyone filming or taking photographs of police or police vehicles outside a station will likely end up being arrested. It’s the same as if he tried it at an army barracks or naval base. The guys a complete moron.
“Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously'
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 11:56 - Nov 11 by Heisenberg
Anyone filming or taking photographs of police or police vehicles outside a station will likely end up being arrested. It’s the same as if he tried it at an army barracks or naval base. The guys a complete moron.
Heisenberg, perhaps you can enlighten us ail as to what section of the criminal law defines the taking of photos from a public place as constituting a criminal offence requiring a person to be arrested ?
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 11:56 - Nov 11 by Heisenberg
Anyone filming or taking photographs of police or police vehicles outside a station will likely end up being arrested. It’s the same as if he tried it at an army barracks or naval base. The guys a complete moron.
You get arrested when you break the law, otherwise we "should" be free to do whatever we like. If people start getting arrested without breaking the law, then we are no different to Russia. People are allowed to film in public and they are allowed to take photographs in public of public places. Maybe he likes the police cars, maybe he has an interest in the emergency services. So what law has he broken?
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:12 - Nov 11 by Southamptonfan
You get arrested when you break the law, otherwise we "should" be free to do whatever we like. If people start getting arrested without breaking the law, then we are no different to Russia. People are allowed to film in public and they are allowed to take photographs in public of public places. Maybe he likes the police cars, maybe he has an interest in the emergency services. So what law has he broken?
[Post edited 11 Nov 2023 12:30]
The guy is deliberately trying to provoke a reaction from the police. Although not against the law the police have every right to ask questions as there could be a potential threat to security. This guys a joke. You should focus on the use of undercover police infiltrating groups and the Stephen Lawrence cover up if you want to see how the police are instruments of the state.
“Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously'
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 19:35 - Nov 9 by Bazza
PS chanting from the river to the sea is referencing annihilation of Israel, so a terrorist chant. I don’t think you should interrupt while the adults are talking
No it isn’t. It doesn’t reference Israel and it is about the Palestinians controlling their own lives. Perhaps if you stopped watching GB News you might understand this more. The police have not been wishy washy about this march at all. They have liaised with the organisers throughout and suggested they moved the date. When the organisers said no they kept a close eye on the arrangements and at no time did it teach the proscribed threshold to be banned so they did what they needed to do to make sure it went off as peacefully as possible. Braverman made their job harder by stoking up hate and encouraging Tommy Robinson and his thugs to get involved. They have caused the police more trouble so far than the main march. As for the poppy sellers, the transport police said there were no problems for them. The bloke who said he was assaulted - it turns out a child stepped on his foot 😂. Apart from that, you seem to have a good handle on things!
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 18:50 - Nov 11 with 1469 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:59 - Nov 11 by saint22
We all know what to do come the next election to avoid giving these type of people any power whatsoever Let’s all try not to forget
The type of people Braverman encouraged to come to London today are walking around London shouting “there ain’t no black in the Union Jack” and making Nazi salutes.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 19:25 - Nov 11 with 1457 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 18:47 - Nov 11 by Sadoldgit
No it isn’t. It doesn’t reference Israel and it is about the Palestinians controlling their own lives. Perhaps if you stopped watching GB News you might understand this more. The police have not been wishy washy about this march at all. They have liaised with the organisers throughout and suggested they moved the date. When the organisers said no they kept a close eye on the arrangements and at no time did it teach the proscribed threshold to be banned so they did what they needed to do to make sure it went off as peacefully as possible. Braverman made their job harder by stoking up hate and encouraging Tommy Robinson and his thugs to get involved. They have caused the police more trouble so far than the main march. As for the poppy sellers, the transport police said there were no problems for them. The bloke who said he was assaulted - it turns out a child stepped on his foot 😂. Apart from that, you seem to have a good handle on things!
Well I do try to be honest. So honest that I was quoting AlJazeera. Odd also that your beloved Labour Party suspended Andy MacDonald for saying it this week. Of course Hamas don’t think it’s provocative perhaps you’re a Hamas member?
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 19:29 - Nov 11 with 1445 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 18:50 - Nov 11 by Sadoldgit
The type of people Braverman encouraged to come to London today are walking around London shouting “there ain’t no black in the Union Jack” and making Nazi salutes.
So Braverman who is not white is encouraging Nazi salutes, really. Think the Saints win celebrate has effected your brain. Hope it’s temporary.
0
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 19:57 - Nov 11 with 1437 views
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 12:42 - Nov 11 by Heisenberg
The guy is deliberately trying to provoke a reaction from the police. Although not against the law the police have every right to ask questions as there could be a potential threat to security. This guys a joke. You should focus on the use of undercover police infiltrating groups and the Stephen Lawrence cover up if you want to see how the police are instruments of the state.
So Heisenberg, at 11.56 today you appear to recommended and encourage an arrest as the correct and necessary course of police action but then just 46 minutes later you acknowledge that the behaviour in question was “ not against the law “.
Rather reminds me of the Rowan Atkinson comedy sketch where constable Savage had arrested one man in particular for amongst many other ridiculous offences, standing on the cracks in the pavement and being seen out at night with an ugly woman.
You do however speak wise words reference undercover police infiltrators and the Steven Lawrence fiasco.
Braverman - deliberately provocative or a genuine lunatic? on 13:42 - Nov 11 by Bazza
these type of people?
Yes the type of people who shouldn’t be in a position of power How anyone can look at any of the tories I consider them competent after the last 12 years beggars belief Just look at the state of the nation now
That’s the type of people pal No doubt you will still put a x by the Tory candidate come polling day hopefully you are one of the blue few
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.