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.
Seemed a reasonable statement the 1st time this evening but by the time the 4th or 5th person queued up to use her name to try and force their way it made me feel very uneasy. I now see that her husband has said that he doesn't agree with using her name in that way.
The Jo Cox remarks on 08:45 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
No because I dont see the words surrender or traitor as being inflammatory. Other people do and are using jo coxs name to further gain political advantage.
Jo Cox.
Please note: prior to hitting the post button, I've double checked for anything that could be construed as "Anti Semitic" and to the best of my knowledge it isn't. Anything deemed to be of a Xenophobic nature is therefore purely accidental or down to your own misconstruing.
The Jo Cox remarks on 08:45 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
No because I dont see the words surrender or traitor as being inflammatory. Other people do and are using jo coxs name to further gain political advantage.
You're either dim, trolling, or brainwashed.
It's possible you're a combination of all of the above too.
Just to clarify are you saying that if you criticise the opposite benches or Boris detractors at any point then it means you now side with Boris? These are strange times and odd politics
I asked him if he was siding with Johnson, that's all.
It's possible you're a combination of all of the above too.
Lol, traitor and surrender are fine, but he obviously has a bit of a problem with "dim, trolling and brainwash".
No sensible person would think it's fine to go around calling people traitors and shouting surrender considering the actions that have often been associated with those words in the past.
A lot of it is brainwashing, for sure. You only have to see the exact repetition of key phrases and words from certain elements of the media and online lobbyists and 'commentators' to see where some people get their views from. Actually they're not their original views at all - they've just been drip fed bile. It's sad. My old fella's the same - whatever's been in the Express and Mail that day be parrot repeated at me whenever I speak to him.
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:07 - Sep 26 by Swansea_Blue
Lol, traitor and surrender are fine, but he obviously has a bit of a problem with "dim, trolling and brainwash".
No sensible person would think it's fine to go around calling people traitors and shouting surrender considering the actions that have often been associated with those words in the past.
A lot of it is brainwashing, for sure. You only have to see the exact repetition of key phrases and words from certain elements of the media and online lobbyists and 'commentators' to see where some people get their views from. Actually they're not their original views at all - they've just been drip fed bile. It's sad. My old fella's the same - whatever's been in the Express and Mail that day be parrot repeated at me whenever I speak to him.
[Post edited 26 Sep 2019 9:11]
These snowflakes, eh? Take offence at the slightest thing whilst excusing stuff that's genuinely unpleasant.
It's possible you're a combination of all of the above too.
Now it is if you put 'you f##king' in front of the two the words then it does become inflammatory. Theres absolutely no need for you to sink to name calling just because you dont agree with what I say. They are simply two words used for hundreds of years and will continue to be used for hundreds more. What ever spin you use to put on it to fit your entrenched attitude is entirely up to you. Members of parliament bringing her name up to argue against what constitutes inflammatory language is utterly disgusting.
0
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:27 - Sep 26 with 2498 views
I think that Jo Cox’s husband’s comment on both sides of the HoC is spot on. They are all a disgrace and should remember where they are and what they are there for.
I abhor the way debate has evolved where each side know they are right. They feel it perfectly right to hurl abuse - because they know they are right and get offended when they get it back- because they know they are right. They should all grow up.
[Post edited 26 Sep 2019 12:33]
0
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:30 - Sep 26 with 2486 views
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:25 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
Now it is if you put 'you f##king' in front of the two the words then it does become inflammatory. Theres absolutely no need for you to sink to name calling just because you dont agree with what I say. They are simply two words used for hundreds of years and will continue to be used for hundreds more. What ever spin you use to put on it to fit your entrenched attitude is entirely up to you. Members of parliament bringing her name up to argue against what constitutes inflammatory language is utterly disgusting.
I'm not calling you names. Dim, brainwashed and trolling are simply words that have been used for hundreds of years and will continue to be used for hundreds of years.
The point those MPs were making was that inflammatory language is deeply unhelpful. These MPs have received death threats using Boris' language against them. It was a legitimate point and totally relevs y to what happened to their colleague.
The only thing here that's utterly disgusting is you villifying decent MPs whilst defending Johnson.
I think that Jo Cox’s husband’s comment on both sides of the HoC is spot on. They are all a disgrace and should remember where they are and what they are there for.
I abhor the way debate has evolved where each side know they are right. They feel it perfectly right to hurl abuse - because they know they are right and get offended when they get it back- because they know they are right. They should all grow up.
[Post edited 26 Sep 2019 12:33]
How on earth can this be your take home from last night?
I'm not calling you names. Dim, brainwashed and trolling are simply words that have been used for hundreds of years and will continue to be used for hundreds of years.
The point those MPs were making was that inflammatory language is deeply unhelpful. These MPs have received death threats using Boris' language against them. It was a legitimate point and totally relevs y to what happened to their colleague.
The only thing here that's utterly disgusting is you villifying decent MPs whilst defending Johnson.
[Post edited 26 Sep 2019 9:30]
the best one yet......"decent mps"..........they dont exist!
-1
The Jo Cox remarks on 10:44 - Sep 26 with 2393 views
The Jo Cox remarks on 08:41 - Sep 26 by Radlett_blue
Anyone invoking Jo Cox's name and her brutal murder in order to make a political point is behaving inappropriately.
Wrong. Her murder was a political event with a political cause and political effects.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
The Jo Cox remarks on 08:45 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
No because I dont see the words surrender or traitor as being inflammatory. Other people do and are using jo coxs name to further gain political advantage.
Jo Cox's killer when in court, gave his name as "death to traitors, freedom for Britain", but sure it's probably not inflammatory language at all.
4
The Jo Cox remarks on 10:54 - Sep 26 with 2375 views
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:54 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
the best one yet......"decent mps"..........they dont exist!
I suggest you go and meet some MPs. Or at least try to find out what they do, rather than rely on Daily Express headlines and boring tropes of them all being useless, lything, thieving traitors.
The Jo Cox remarks on 10:56 - Sep 26 by Swansea_Blue
I suggest you go and meet some MPs. Or at least try to find out what they do, rather than rely on Daily Express headlines and boring tropes of them all being useless, lything, thieving traitors.
Thinking they are all morally bankrupt makes it easier for them to vote for the ones who are actually morally bankrupt.
What I find most bizarre is that during the debate Johnson claimed not to have used the words ascribed to him....traitor, surrender etc... having clearly used and then going on to use them again. I have not seen this blatant lie flagged up anywhere.
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
What I find most bizarre is that during the debate Johnson claimed not to have used the words ascribed to him....traitor, surrender etc... having clearly used and then going on to use them again. I have not seen this blatant lie flagged up anywhere.
To be fair, it's incredibly difficult to keep track of each time a pathological and shameless liar tells lies.
Absolutely spot on. Johnson is deliberately and repeatedly using words like "surrender bill" to rabble rouse and play to certain (unfortunately all too prevalent) views. The strategy has got Cummings written all over it.
I recently watched the following video, in which Cummings goes into some detail about the use of modern polling and data analysis techniques to influence key demographics via social media during the referendum campaign:
He explains how he inserted the word "back" into the now infamous "take back control" slogan in order to deliberately invoke anger in people. It's basically manipulation on a grand scale.
And that's sadly almost certainly what's happening now. He'll be telling Johnson to use the words "surrender bill" at every available opportunity to appeal to the Dunkirk-spirit-we-won-the-war-this-great-country-has--done-it-before-it-can-do-it-again mentality. All part of the master general election plan, and many people will be lapping it up.
What a bloody sad time we're living in.
People should watch this stuff. You can now target specific demographics and push direct buttons psychologically for manipulation. And people are really open about it.
But nobody seems to care, if anything upset with the insinuation that they can be affected by what is basically clever marketing.
Needs to be an adult conversation about all of this after Brexit is "done" because it's only going to get worse.
The Jo Cox remarks on 08:45 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
No because I dont see the words surrender or traitor as being inflammatory. Other people do and are using jo coxs name to further gain political advantage.
Yeah but you don't see a problem with Tommy Robinson either, so your judgment seems a little clouded...
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
The Jo Cox remarks on 09:54 - Sep 26 by crunchie1978
the best one yet......"decent mps"..........they dont exist!
I have dealt with a number of MP's in a professional capacity in the past. Some are at the opposite end of the political spectrum to me but as individuals they have all been decent people.
It's when you get down to councillors and wannabes that you find the obnoxious ones.
0
The Jo Cox remarks on 11:50 - Sep 26 with 2295 views
My personal take on yesterday evening was that the speaker allowed questions to go for two hours longer than necessary. The quality of questioning from the opposition benches was poor and the PM was never really put under pressure.
I longed for Kenneth Clarke to be called but sadly his seat was empty. Suspect he took advantage of prorogement and took a break before conference. I'm not comfortable with anyone invoking the memory of Jo Cox .
There are lots of MPs, especially on the Labour benches that are under pressure from their constituents over Brexit and it only needs one of them , given the opportunity, to see another MP physically attacked.
HoC is an angry and bitter place and will remain so until we have an election. The root cause of all this,in my opinion, was the way the last election panned out. Someone pointed out recently that 82% of the votes went to the two main parties. Why? because they both promised to honour the result of the referendum and leave the EU.
Conservative party on principle and Labour because they feared humiliation In. 60% of the seats Labour took there was majority in favour of leave. Labour wouldn't have gained Ipswich if they hadn't promised to respect the referendum result. The extra votes they gained wouldn't have gone to the Tories but to LibDems and possibly UKIP.
The conservative mà jority would have risen, not fallen.
We are stuck with a lousy government until we have an election. Brexit is going to have to be put on hold. If is three months and Labour gain control it will have to be extended again if Corbyn wins as he has promised to negotiate a good deal within 3 months then 3 months later hold another referendum
Meanwhile industry suffers from being in limbo. Had we left in March, which we should have, industry in the UK and in the EU would be in a better place than it is today.
The Jo Cox remarks on 11:50 - Sep 26 by Pinewoodblue
My personal take on yesterday evening was that the speaker allowed questions to go for two hours longer than necessary. The quality of questioning from the opposition benches was poor and the PM was never really put under pressure.
I longed for Kenneth Clarke to be called but sadly his seat was empty. Suspect he took advantage of prorogement and took a break before conference. I'm not comfortable with anyone invoking the memory of Jo Cox .
There are lots of MPs, especially on the Labour benches that are under pressure from their constituents over Brexit and it only needs one of them , given the opportunity, to see another MP physically attacked.
HoC is an angry and bitter place and will remain so until we have an election. The root cause of all this,in my opinion, was the way the last election panned out. Someone pointed out recently that 82% of the votes went to the two main parties. Why? because they both promised to honour the result of the referendum and leave the EU.
Conservative party on principle and Labour because they feared humiliation In. 60% of the seats Labour took there was majority in favour of leave. Labour wouldn't have gained Ipswich if they hadn't promised to respect the referendum result. The extra votes they gained wouldn't have gone to the Tories but to LibDems and possibly UKIP.
The conservative mà jority would have risen, not fallen.
We are stuck with a lousy government until we have an election. Brexit is going to have to be put on hold. If is three months and Labour gain control it will have to be extended again if Corbyn wins as he has promised to negotiate a good deal within 3 months then 3 months later hold another referendum
Meanwhile industry suffers from being in limbo. Had we left in March, which we should have, industry in the UK and in the EU would be in a better place than it is today.
So your take home is that it's Labour's fault. How predictable.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
