Has Conservative Party or its members broken any laws?

My post attacked a party that deliberately lied to facilitate the mass murder of, and theft from, a group of people that just happen to be a bit different from us. You have a problem with my phrasing?

Yes I do:

Replace Labour Party with Nazi Party and "Muslim people" (whom happen to be brown in the vast majority of cases) with Jewish people (whom happen to be white) and see if you would accuse me of libel and tell me I am being unfair.

Quad erat demonstrandum - you are being unfair because you are inferring that Blair approved war in Iraq on the grounds of an undemocratic decision to commit genocide. The Nazis were not a democratic party and their goal was to exterminate Jews. Even the insinuation that Blair's goal was to exterminate Muslims is absurd and only designed to provoke incendiary responses.

Your people know only to well the horrors of invasion and religious based murder. If you are too young to remember, ask your parents. I am shocked you would attack the phrasing of a poster who is pointing out religious mass murder by a main stream political party. As if phrasing is even an issue when we are discussing mass murder.

You are shocked because you are ignorant. I know of invasion and religious based murder and it is happening as much under the current government as it is under the previous governments. Britain supported military intervention against Khadaffi, thousands of people have been murdered in Lybia since because they are the wrong type of Islam. Britain supported intervention in Syria against IS, ignoring the fact that all the other parties are equally guilty of raising their particular flag in anger and kill hundreds of thousands of people because they didn't cheer along.

War is stupid, it always has been and always will be. Blair's decision was incredibly stupid, always is and always has been. But to state that Labour went to war with the goal of genocide is absolute and utter nonsense.

Yes I do:

 

 

 

Quad erat demonstrandum - you are being unfair because you are inferring that Blair approved war in Iraq on the grounds of an undemocratic decision to commit genocide. The Nazis were not a democratic party and their goal was to exterminate Jews. Even the insinuation that Blair's goal was to exterminate Muslims is absurd and only designed to provoke incendiary responses.

 

 

 

You are shocked because you are ignorant. I know of invasion and religious based murder and it is happening as much under the current government as it is under the previous governments. Britain supported military intervention against Khadaffi, thousands of people have been murdered in Lybia since because they are the wrong type of Islam. Britain supported intervention in Syria against IS, ignoring the fact that all the other parties are equally guilty of raising their particular flag in anger and kill hundreds of thousands of people because they didn't cheer along.

 

War is stupid, it always has been and always will be. Blair's decision was incredibly stupid, always is and always has been. But to state that Labour went to war with the goal of genocide is absolute and utter nonsense.

Is war always stupid? Is there no situation in which it might be the lesser evil?

Yes I do:

 

 

 

Quad erat demonstrandum - you are being unfair because you are inferring that Blair approved war in Iraq on the grounds of an undemocratic decision to commit genocide. The Nazis were not a democratic party and their goal was to exterminate Jews. Even the insinuation that Blair's goal was to exterminate Muslims is absurd and only designed to provoke incendiary responses.

 

 

 

You are shocked because you are ignorant. I know of invasion and religious based murder and it is happening as much under the current government as it is under the previous governments. Britain supported military intervention against Khadaffi, thousands of people have been murdered in Lybia since because they are the wrong type of Islam. Britain supported intervention in Syria against IS, ignoring the fact that all the other parties are equally guilty of raising their particular flag in anger and kill hundreds of thousands of people because they didn't cheer along.

 

War is stupid, it always has been and always will be. Blair's decision was incredibly stupid, always is and always has been. But to state that Labour went to war with the goal of genocide is absolute and utter nonsense.

I haven't said that. I am comparing actions not intent.

The Nazis were a democratic party

---------- Post added 13-04-2016 at 13:59 ----------

Yes I do:

 

 

 

Quad erat demonstrandum - you are being unfair because you are inferring that Blair approved war in Iraq on the grounds of an undemocratic decision to commit genocide. The Nazis were not a democratic party and their goal was to exterminate Jews. Even the insinuation that Blair's goal was to exterminate Muslims is absurd and only designed to provoke incendiary responses.

 

 

 

You are shocked because you are ignorant. I know of invasion and religious based murder and it is happening as much under the current government as it is under the previous governments. Britain supported military intervention against Khadaffi, thousands of people have been murdered in Lybia since because they are the wrong type of Islam. Britain supported intervention in Syria against IS, ignoring the fact that all the other parties are equally guilty of raising their particular flag in anger and kill hundreds of thousands of people because they didn't cheer along.

 

War is stupid, it always has been and always will be. Blair's decision was incredibly stupid, always is and always has been. But to state that Labour went to war with the goal of genocide is absolute and utter nonsense.

I haven't said that. I am comparing actions not intent.

The Nazis were a democratic party

The Nazis goal was to attack a weaker people and dispossessed them of their wealth. What do you think Blair's intentions were for lying?

I suspect, getting back to the original title of the thread, there are a number of Conservative Party Members who have committed crimes as anyone can become a member for as little as £20.

---------- Post added 13-04-2016 at 14:13 ----------

Yup. No idea why supposedly intelligent people fail to grasp that.

 

I'd go as far as to say that the Tories are now much more the party of the working person than Labour. And that's not an endorsement of the Tories.

Do you not wonder why people who share your opinion generally are the same kinds of people who already have similar opinions about many parts of our world? Where as those of us who you say, fail to grasp your understand of the truth, are a miriad of peoples from all walks of life with varied opinions?

Could it not be that a certain way of thinking will make you see something that may or may not be there while those of us who do not think like you, see a more varied horizon?

Just a thought.

The Nazis were a democratic party

Well, that is the argument done and over with. Have a bit of a read on how democratic the Nazis were.

No wonder your argument is so unbalanced and naive.

Silly man, in the first paragraph it talks about how hitler got to 0wer through a series of democratic elections. Did you not read the link?

You are defending a party that murdered millions of Muslims for no other reason than they are different and too weak to stop us stealing their wealth.

Let's just agree to disagree.

Silly man, in the first paragraph it talks about how hitler got to 0wer through a series of democratic elections. Did you not read the link?

 

You are defending a party that murdered millions of Muslims for no other reason than they are different and too weak to stop us stealing their wealth.

 

Let's just agree to disagree.

There was nothing democratic about how the Nazis operated once elected, and very little about how they (he) got to power in the first place. you are comparing apples and pears and concluding that they are both fruits.

The point is, it isn't a trifle inflammatory, it is entirely intended to be inflammatory. I will never support the Labour party, but to accuse the entire party of genocide because of the actions of Blair is wholly ignorant.

I see your point, but remember people like Robyn Cooke and others who resigned high office in protest against their governments actions told their colleagues of the paucity of Blairs statements. They decided to back Blair, they are, in my opinion culpable.

Well said.

The Labour party, as I keep trying to tell the middle class socialists on this forum, have long ceased setting policy for the benefit of the "working class". It's now all about the states' client class: those on benefits or employed in the public sector.

If only the well-intentioned middle-class supporters understood that their support for Labour actually hurts the people they desire to help...

To be fair they might be looking at the alternative and voting for what they think hurts people less.

Your point is perfectly valid though. You aren't the only one wondering what the point of Labour is these days. IMO they sold their soul down the river 20 years ago and it's taken a lot of people a lot of time to realise what has happened

---------- Post added 13-04-2016 at 19:00 ----------

I agree whole heartedly, and I am also surprised others can't see it.

 

However I'm not sure if the Establishment hasn't been superseeded by the major Corporations, some of which are wealthier, and therefore more powerful than some countries.

It's funny because the other day I read an article which called out Owen Jones for criticising the establishment when he himself is part of the establishment. Didnt ponder it too deeply just thought to myself yes he is because it's basically true.

Only when I read the post above did it really hit home that I now think of the Tories, LibDems and Labour as essentially the same thing. I haven't got more radical, more lefty, as I got older. If anything I've mellowed and become much less militant. It's just the space that the main parties occupy has shifted so far right I can't identify with any of it.

I see your point, but remember people like Robyn Cooke and others who resigned high office in protest against their governments actions told their colleagues of the paucity of Blairs statements. They decided to back Blair, they are, in my opinion culpable.

The Labour party is not the sum of their MPs.

Blair's lies were very convincing. I for one was taken in. Shame on me.

I won't believe another labour leader for a long time.

I too was taken in by his lies but not with the WMD. I just knew it was fiction as did every member of my family and friends.

---------- Post added 14-04-2016 at 10:25 ----------

Yup. No idea why supposedly intelligent people fail to grasp that.

 

I'd go as far as to say that the Tories are now much more the party of the working person than Labour. And that's not an endorsement of the Tories.

I would also second that.