Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

General Election 2015 official thread

1145146148150151164

Comments

  • Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?
  • that's why I never said labour, just left sided these are socialist style lefties I bet red ed was well pleased

    nla I'm a "socialist style leftie"


    No your far too centre left to be a socialist style leftie
  • They are extreme left wing to the greatest degree. Anarchists. As far removed from the Labour vote as the extreme right wing racist party EDL are from the conservative voter.

    Indeed the EDL were demonstrating near me in multi cultural Walthamstow yesterday . I don't associate that with the Tories or all people who have right of centre views.
  • Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Oh FFS. Talk about clutching at straws. You'll be telling us next that Maggie Thatcher is still secretly alive and kicking, orchestrating all this. Jesus wept!
  • I do believe that this is called bottom of the barrel
  • that's why I never said labour, just left sided these are socialist style lefties I bet red ed was well pleased

    nla I'm a "socialist style leftie"


    No your far too centre left to be a socialist style leftie
    Does that mean my "Power to the People" tee shirt and Wolfie beret are best left in my wardrobe ?
  • edited May 2015
    Great article by Nick Cohen in the Guardian. He nails some of the biggest issues that Labour face. Cohen's points about the 'educated left' are particularly well made.

    theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/labour-left-miliband-hating-english
  • Nah I reckon that's about as far left you woukd go
  • not a chance and it makes me very happy that the left sided folk never got in, if that is a snap shot of their demographic,

    I wish more of them protested when their left friends were wasting anD spending their way to oblivion, causing the need for such cuts


    Scum who done that yesterday filth in the bottom of shoe

    NLA don't be so quick to judge you're better than that. Yes they went about it all wrong and the few that went too far and defaced war memorials have been arrested and dealt with but a lot of them just felt desperate. Imagine how desperate they must have been to have taken these measures, how bad must their lives been. Cuts, although Cameron says they're fair, do not affect everyone. Not everyone has to use the services that have been cut, not everyone has their lives in tatter but a lot of them that do had a hope that things could change, a light at the end of the tunnel so to speak but now that hope has gone. Try being an unworking single dad who recently lost his wife to cancer, having 5 kids under 9 and have lost his mortgaged house due to not being able to afford the mortgage and having to live in a 3 bedroom private rented accomadation where the rent is £300 per week and after all bills he's left with £40 to feed 6 of them and that is about to be cut further. How desperate would you be?

    I'm not condoning their actions but some of them probably felt they had no choice.
    Sorry @sadiejane but there are no excuses for that type of action. And your example doesn't explain why life insurance (mortgage) was not taken out. I found myself in a similar position (although working) but I (we) had planned ahead.
  • Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Wow. Just fucking WOW.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Wow. Just fucking WOW.
    Yes, that's just what I thought. I mean, it's obviously nasty, petulant protesters. But, aren't we going to look stupid jumping to that conclusions if it turns out not to be?
  • Anybody here renting from a housing association looking forward to their hefty discount so they can buy their place? This was the promise that won the election, and if it wasn't why make it, and why make it when they did?
  • Sadie I am supposed the example you gave was not countered with the cry of 'well there's food banks for that fella, what's the problem'?
  • Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Wow. Just fucking WOW.
    Yes, that's just what I thought. I mean, it's obviously nasty, petulant protesters. But, aren't we going to look stupid jumping to that conclusions if it turns out not to be?

    No not really
  • edited May 2015
    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Wow. Just fucking WOW.
    Yes, that's just what I thought. I mean, it's obviously nasty, petulant protesters. But, aren't we going to look stupid jumping to that conclusions if it turns out not to be?
    Not as stupid as when we find out the moon landings were filmed in Hollywood, it was the queen that crashed Dianas car and it was actually 2Pac, Elvis and JFK that flew the planes into the twin towers.
  • Liam Byrne in the press apologising to his peers for the 'There is no money' jibe.
    If ever there was a nail in the Labour resurrection balloon, that was a huge one.
  • So lets be generous and accept that no Labour supporters were present at these demonstrations. To which political party would these socialist scumbags align?
    Here it would be Labour or the Greens. Is there an official Communist Party in the UK, or are we saying that the majority of them would just not vote?
    I can imagine Russell Brand as being just the type of person who would attend such a protest and we all know who he supported in the end!
  • edited May 2015

    not a chance and it makes me very happy that the left sided folk never got in, if that is a snap shot of their demographic,

    I wish more of them protested when their left friends were wasting anD spending their way to oblivion, causing the need for such cuts


    Scum who done that yesterday filth in the bottom of shoe

    NLA don't be so quick to judge you're better than that. Yes they went about it all wrong and the few that went too far and defaced war memorials have been arrested and dealt with but a lot of them just felt desperate. Imagine how desperate they must have been to have taken these measures, how bad must their lives been. Cuts, although Cameron says they're fair, do not affect everyone. Not everyone has to use the services that have been cut, not everyone has their lives in tatter but a lot of them that do had a hope that things could change, a light at the end of the tunnel so to speak but now that hope has gone. Try being an unworking single dad who recently lost his wife to cancer, having 5 kids under 9 and have lost his mortgaged house due to not being able to afford the mortgage and having to live in a 3 bedroom private rented accomadation where the rent is £300 per week and after all bills he's left with £40 to feed 6 of them and that is about to be cut further. How desperate would you be?

    I'm not condoning their actions but some of them probably felt they had no choice.
    I reckon if I had 5 kids I'd have about £40 left each week to feed them. And I've got a job!! :-(
  • Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    Just a few points that have occurred to me overnight.

    1. If you're going to protest about cuts and/or austerity and you're going to use graffiti to get your message across, wouldn't you use the words "cuts" or "austerity" in the graffiti?

    2. If you're going to have the shameful audacity to spray graffiti on a WWII War Memorial, would you stop there? Or would you spray further graffiti on other walls and buildings? Have there been any photos of other buildings sprayed with red graffiti in and around Westminster yesterday?

    3. The crass stupidity of such an act of wanton vandalism with thousands of cameraphone owners press photographers and TV cameras can surely only have been perpetrated by someone either immensely ignorant or utterly carefree about consequences. Yet we don't seem to have found any photos of the damage being caused, no-one's been arrested or questioned and no-one's claimed responsibility. We have seen the pictures splashed over the internet and TV since yesterday. Yet if you Google Charlie Gilmour you will see how hard it is to commit an act of vandalism in Westminster without being noticed.

    4. If a Government wanted to create a mood-swing among the public against public demonstrations, using an agent provocateur to spray grafitti in this way would be the perfect opportunity. And, if it were done at the Government behest, I think the following would happen:

    1. The graffiti would mention the "Tories", but not "cuts" - who in Government would want to see "cuts" splashed over the newspapers?
    2. An agent provocateur would only spray graffiti in one, significant place; so we wouldn't see the same graffiti, by the same perpetrator on several buildings. And...
    3. We wouldn't see pictures of it being done.

    It's an interesting thought that it serves David Cameron and Michael Gove's purpose perfectly to see a limited, but terrible piece of vandalism splashed over the news at a time when they would most like to see anti-demonstration measures brought in as soon as possible. Maybe we'll see tougher police measures, draconian, "assumptive" laws and water cannon on the streets of London soon..?

    Wow. Just fucking WOW.
    Yes, that's just what I thought. I mean, it's obviously nasty, petulant protesters. But, aren't we going to look stupid jumping to that conclusions if it turns out not to be?
    Not as stupid as when we find out the moon landings were filmed in Hollywood, it was the queen that crashed Dianas car and it was actually 2Pac, Elvis and JFK that flew the planes into the twin towers.
    I am pretty sure that none of those things happened. I am also pretty sure that the government *does* use agents provocateur. For example, in this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-under-fire-as-trial-collapses-over-agent-provocateur-claims-2181118.html) case.

    But, of course, as soon as the guilty party is named, shamed and properly punished, we can all put way the theory that the government might have done something like that to suit their own agenda. And we can rest assured that the Tory government, under the Chairmanship of Michael Green (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/21/grant-shapps-dean-archer-legal-action-michael-green) and the new Justice Secretary Mrs Blurt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove#Freedom_of_Information_and_email) are utterly trustworthy, honest and beyond reproach.
  • Sponsored links:


  • So lets be generous and accept that no Labour supporters were present at these demonstrations. To which political party would these socialist scumbags align?
    Here it would be Labour or the Greens. Is there an official Communist Party in the UK, or are we saying that the majority of them would just not vote?
    I can imagine Russell Brand as being just the type of person who would attend such a protest and we all know who he supported in the end!

    Do they belong to a party?
  • Socialist worker party by the looks of the pictures
  • Samantha Cameron in a see-through dress...

    image
  • Chizz said:

    Samantha Cameron in a see-through dress...

    image

    Wow she really coordinates her outfits.

  • BA I said the same round about thing 38 days plus ago, if labour had accepted their part explained the actual truths and tried to convince people like me who were indeed not against voting labour in the past, explained what they were actually going to do differently this time, announced the cuts to public services they also would do then maybe just maybe people would not vote tory

    They never they focused on the tax the toff tax the rich, tory makes rich richer and poor poorer,

    Aiming to divide neighborhoods,to divide social groups

    And they underestimated that the very people they were alienating were actually the very people that the term working class (hate that) are
  • So lets be generous and accept that no Labour supporters were present at these demonstrations. To which political party would these socialist scumbags align?
    Here it would be Labour or the Greens. Is there an official Communist Party in the UK, or are we saying that the majority of them would just not vote?
    I can imagine Russell Brand as being just the type of person who would attend such a protest and we all know who he supported in the end!

    "Let's be generous"

    That's a dreadful slur on the millions of hard working and retired labour voting people of this country. Don't you forget that it was the population of this country post war that swept Labour to victory and many of those if not all were heroes in their own right.

    The Labour movement is an honourable one. Don't you dare to imply that the anarchist protesters from yesterday are in a any way aligned with The Labour movement or party.

    Rant over.

    Taken from the article: -
    The protester appear to be a mixed group of Labour supporters, Scottish National Party (SNP) supporters and students. Opposing rallies by Britain’s far-right, controversial English Defense League and their rival Unite Against Fascism were held on Saturday in London, but it is unclear if elements of either rally have melded with the anti-Tory demonstrations.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/london-protests-violence-feared-anti-tory-demonstrations-meet-police-1915527

    Care to retract or offer an apology SHG?
    I won't hold my breath!

    BTW the Labour Party was a great Party 30-40 years ago when it was indeed the "workers" party.

  • The example I gave was a real one, he had house insurance but it only covered him in the event of his death, he tried to add his wife on after she got diagnosed as she was originally cured but they wouldn't allow it because of a pre-existing illness. The cancer returned and killed her in less than 2 months her youngest child was 11 month old. Eldest was 8. He had a very good well paid job and she worked earned money via Avon just as pocket money really he lost a lot of income whilst she was sick and when she was in remission they took out a small remortgage to get back on their feet and then bam it hits them again. This was one example of real people really struggling and I have many more, people I've seen using foodbanks and people we (the church) have delivered food hampers to at Christmas I'm not saying there are not people that are taking advantage of the benefit system but there are many that genuinely need it and shouldn't be demonised for that.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!