Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
How do the Tories need to change?
Comments
-
By they, do you mean Gordon Brown raising it yet again at a speech?0
-
No I mean the media because that is what we were talking about, try to keep up.A-R-T-H-U-R said:By they, do you mean Gordon Brown raising it yet again at a speech?
0 -
The media reported Gordon's speech yesterday. You want them not to?0
-
No, I don't mind them reporting it - I just want them to report on all the important stuff that the Tories are doing to screw us all over on a daily basis too. That is the heart of what I am getting at Art.A-R-T-H-U-R said:The media reported Gordon's speech yesterday. You want them not to?
0 -
If it's not being reported, how do we all know about it?0
-
Was ever thus.Algarveaddick said:
So why are they not majoring on the Boris controversy, or the May's husband controversy or the Craig MacKinley expenses scandal (3 years and still no court case)?A-R-T-H-U-R said:It's a Corbyn controversy, not a media controversy, no matter how many times it is claimed otherwise.
A coalition of CL posters would have ousted the worst party for many many years. That is why analysis of the opposition is valid on this thread.
It's not affecting anyone - but them talking about that instead of the real problems, and people falling for it is the real controversy...
0 -
Try increasing your intake of media, it's all been reported.Algarveaddick said:
No, I don't mind them reporting it - I just want them to report on all the important stuff that the Tories are doing to screw us all over on a daily basis too. That is the heart of what I am getting at Art.A-R-T-H-U-R said:The media reported Gordon's speech yesterday. You want them not to?
1 -
It's not a different version of the same story on the front page of many of the papers every day for three or four days.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Try increasing your intake of media, it's all been reported.Algarveaddick said:
No, I don't mind them reporting it - I just want them to report on all the important stuff that the Tories are doing to screw us all over on a daily basis too. That is the heart of what I am getting at Art.A-R-T-H-U-R said:The media reported Gordon's speech yesterday. You want them not to?
0 -
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Even though it is in the Independent, that reads to me like a bollocks article.cafcfan said:
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.
Boris Johnson made the plight of Nazanin worse, he was the Foreign Secretary when he did it, Corbyn condemned him because of it.
I mean the article reads as if Boris Johnson is saying 'Yeah Corbyn, I have made matters worse, but what were you doing about it before huh? At least I did something!!!'.
0 -
Sure we all know Johnson's an arsewipe and about as useful as a chocolate dildo. That's a given. But I take it you haven't managed to find anything Corbyn's actually done about it either then? Do you not find that strange in the extreme?seth plum said:
Even though it is in the Independent, that reads to me like a bollocks article.cafcfan said:
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.
Boris Johnson made the plight of Nazanin worse, he was the Foreign Secretary when he did it, Corbyn condemned him because of it.
I mean the article reads as if Boris Johnson is saying 'Yeah Corbyn, I have made matters worse, but what were you doing about it before huh? At least I did something!!!'.0 -
Johnson's a complete douchenozzle but he's not wrong to say Corbyn hasn't actually done anything proactive. You can say the media keep on repeating and rehashing stories etc. but the controversy about anti-Semitism in Labour for example is not going anywhere when the party leader doesn't seem willing/able to actually do anything about it other than tit-for-tat mudslinging with the Tories.0
-
I think that it’s becoming clear to me that Corbyn is not a leader. He shows no leadership qualities. He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view. He does exactly what Jeremy Corbyn wants whether that’s in the best interest of the party or country. It matters not a jot.
I desperately want the Tories out whenever the general election comes but although always having voted Labour and have a good constituency MP in Clive Efford, I think my vote will be going elsewhere.3 -
Strange in the extreme?cafcfan said:
Sure we all know Johnson's an arsewipe and about as useful as a chocolate dildo. That's a given. But I take it you haven't managed to find anything Corbyn's actually done about it either then? Do you not find that strange in the extreme?seth plum said:
Even though it is in the Independent, that reads to me like a bollocks article.cafcfan said:
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.
Boris Johnson made the plight of Nazanin worse, he was the Foreign Secretary when he did it, Corbyn condemned him because of it.
I mean the article reads as if Boris Johnson is saying 'Yeah Corbyn, I have made matters worse, but what were you doing about it before huh? At least I did something!!!'.
In the extreme?
Not really. There is a good chance he was innocent enough to believe that even Boris Johnson wouldn't make matters worse, but would intervene for the better. Corbyn neither laid the groundwork for Boris Johnson, but nor did he twist Johnsons arm to intervene the way he did.
I think there are others things that might qualify for 'in the extreme' more than Corbyn on this issue.2 -
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?ShootersHillGuru said:He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
0 -
BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford1
-
My regard for Corbyn has been damaged far more by the Labour ludicrous position on the EU than this issue regarding wreath laying.
Anyway as this thread is about the Tories, one of their education people was on the wireless today, A Level results day, saying the student loans were no biggie. He didn't get asked why the interest rate was 6.8%, so even when paying it off according to the rules you end the year owing more than you did at the start.
It was a Tory being economical with the whole truth of the situation. Probably because he is a Tory more than him being a c**t to be fair.1 -
London is a lot more left leaning than the rest of the country. Corbyn is a privately educated north London mp, he’s the definition of a metropolitan elite.Leuth said:BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford
2 - Sponsored links:
-
Chippy wouldLeuth said:
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?ShootersHillGuru said:He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
1 -
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?ShootersHillGuru said:
Chippy wouldLeuth said:
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?ShootersHillGuru said:He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
0 -
Jesus Christ Seth. If you are now trotting out as an excuse for Corbyn's complete inactivity on anything meaningful, ever, on him being an "innocent", you've really lost the plot. He's a dyed in the wool politician who has been an MP for 35 years. If he's innocent, as in naive, he really needs to think about a career change, don't you think?seth plum said:
Strange in the extreme?cafcfan said:
Sure we all know Johnson's an arsewipe and about as useful as a chocolate dildo. That's a given. But I take it you haven't managed to find anything Corbyn's actually done about it either then? Do you not find that strange in the extreme?seth plum said:
Even though it is in the Independent, that reads to me like a bollocks article.cafcfan said:
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.
Boris Johnson made the plight of Nazanin worse, he was the Foreign Secretary when he did it, Corbyn condemned him because of it.
I mean the article reads as if Boris Johnson is saying 'Yeah Corbyn, I have made matters worse, but what were you doing about it before huh? At least I did something!!!'.
In the extreme?
Not really. There is a good chance he was innocent enough to believe that even Boris Johnson wouldn't make matters worse, but would intervene for the better. Corbyn neither laid the groundwork for Boris Johnson, but nor did he twist Johnsons arm to intervene the way he did.
I think there are others things that might qualify for 'in the extreme' more than Corbyn on this issue.1 -
That isn't what I said for goodness sake. I am not saying any inactivity is because of innocence, or that he is an innocent generally, I am saying that he might have been innocent enough to think the Foreign Secretary wouldn't make things worse, because he was the Foreign Secretary and had the access.cafcfan said:
Jesus Christ Seth. If you are now trotting out as an excuse for Corbyn's complete inactivity on anything meaningful, ever, on him being an "innocent", you've really lost the plot. He's a dyed in the wool politician who has been an MP for 35 years. If he's innocent, as in naive, he really needs to think about a career change, don't you think?seth plum said:
Strange in the extreme?cafcfan said:
Sure we all know Johnson's an arsewipe and about as useful as a chocolate dildo. That's a given. But I take it you haven't managed to find anything Corbyn's actually done about it either then? Do you not find that strange in the extreme?seth plum said:
Even though it is in the Independent, that reads to me like a bollocks article.cafcfan said:
https://independent.co.uk/voices/nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-boris-johnson-iran-jeremy-corbyn-a8291691.htmlseth plum said:I suppose a daily media focus on Jeremy Corbyn and his past behaviour is far more important than a daily media focus on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her current nightmare.
Nice one Boris, agenda manipulator supreme.
You see, that's the thing. Until Johnson's utter, breath-taking incompetence brought this matter to the fore, who knew? Corbyn saw that as a great opportunity to call for the then Foreign Secretary's resignation. But what has he actually done himself that puts him in a better place than the fuckwit Boris? Has he asked for talks with Iran, maybe by asking his Hamas chums for an introduction? Has he visited Iran? Has he even had a cup of tea with the Iranian Ambassador - the embassy is only about 1km from Westminster? I can not find a single pro-active thing that he's done. Nothing, nothing at all. Because that's what he does best.
Boris Johnson made the plight of Nazanin worse, he was the Foreign Secretary when he did it, Corbyn condemned him because of it.
I mean the article reads as if Boris Johnson is saying 'Yeah Corbyn, I have made matters worse, but what were you doing about it before huh? At least I did something!!!'.
In the extreme?
Not really. There is a good chance he was innocent enough to believe that even Boris Johnson wouldn't make matters worse, but would intervene for the better. Corbyn neither laid the groundwork for Boris Johnson, but nor did he twist Johnsons arm to intervene the way he did.
I think there are others things that might qualify for 'in the extreme' more than Corbyn on this issue.
I do admire your ability to try to develop what i say into something else entirely, and I am glad to have the chance to correct you.0 -
Has her sentence been increased?0
-
He chances of being released were diminished (according to the Iranian government) because Johnson said she was training journalists in Iran rather than visiting family with her very young child.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/13/boris-johnson-says-sorry-for-mistake-jailed-briton-iran-nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe0 -
You realize politicians are briefed by civil servants?
Quoting an out of date left wing media witch hunt © is a strange way to avoid answering my question.
Which is that no, her sentence hasn't increased.
Perhaps for the joy of some balance you might dig out the much loved and trusted (by you) Iranian reaction to his subsequent visit, after his monster gaffe?0 -
That would hold some relevance if it was beyond a minor prep school. Hardly Eton, Harrow and Oxbridge was it.kentaddick said:
London is a lot more left leaning than the rest of the country. Corbyn is a privately educated north London mp, he’s the definition of a metropolitan elite.Leuth said:BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford
0 -
Interesting read for those wondering if the Corbyn "scandal" means diddly squat http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/100191
-
He apologized for no reason?A-R-T-H-U-R said:You realize politicians are briefed by civil servants?
Quoting an out of date left wing media witch hunt © is a strange way to avoid answering my question.
Which is that no, her sentence hasn't increased.
Perhaps for the joy of some balance you might dig out the much loved and trusted (by you) Iranian reaction to his subsequent visit, after his monster gaffe?0
This discussion has been closed.
