Jump to content

banjodeano

Members
  • Content Count

    5,299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by banjodeano

  1. Whatever happened to Starmer saying he will take full responsibility...http://news.sky.com/story/angela-rayner-sacked-as-labour-party-chair-by-sir-keir-starmer-sky-news-understands-12301037
  2. About ten years ago i saw a couple of boys about 10/12 years of age on bicycles, i was amazed when a hearse went passed and they all got off their bikes and stopped for a few seconds until it had passed, if i was their parents i would have been so proud of them, there is the odd idiot out there, but most people still have manners and show respect
  3. If indeed labour get in ....then very little will change, Starmer is now part of the club
  4. Politics.co.uk state The bill gives police the power to impose severe restrictions on protests if they suspect they “may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation” or could cause “serious unease, alarm or distress” to a passer-by. This applies to every single protest outside parliament and indeed to any protest anywhere. There has never been a protest which you could prove would not alarm someone. They make noise. That is what they do. The bill puts the power as to whether a protest can be held entirely in the hands of the police. And yet even this benchmark was considered too high. So the bill also gave the home secretary the power to change the legal meaning of the term “serious disruption” by statutory instrument – effectively sidestepping parliament. In future, if Priti Patel or one of her successors decides that a protest was legal but they still wanted rid of it, they could simply unilaterally change the law. https://www.politics.co.uk/comment/2021/03/16/anti-protest-bill-freedom-dies-in-silence/?cmpredirect well that looks like strikes could become illegal, its a good job Corbyn didnt get elected, we would have probably become another China or Russia
  5. correct me if i am wrong, and i may well be, but didnt i read a snippet somewhere that if any protest adversely effects the wealth of our country then it can be deemed illegal? so i assume that if there are peaceful demonstrations' week in week out, the government can declare it illegal because of the cost of policing
  6. Seriously what has Starmer done to unite the party? he has deliberately gone out of his way to antagonise the socialists within the party, withdrawing the whip from Corbyn against the NEC's wishes was a deliberate act of provocation, to say he has united the party is laughable
  7. lets start with uniting the party that was one of his slogans, has he united the party?
  8. I wish Pettytom was still here and not banned, he was a big supporter of Starmer, i would love to hear his views on how poor labour are doing with his man in charge , the Starmer pledges that he directed to are mostly broken, from what i see there is very little between Labour and Tories at the moment
  9. But the BBC is little more than a propaganda machine, see here..... https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/bbc-chiefs-deny-propaganda-role-as-papers-reveal-links-to-intelligence-services it states.... BBC bosses denied that the organisation was still involved in propaganda against governments in Latin America and the Middle East today after a report revealed its involvement in a secret anti-communist plot in the 1960s. Declassified government papers in the National Archives have revealed that the state broadcaster colluded with British intelligence to control international media during the 1960s and 1970s. In an elaborate scheme, the British government paid newswire service Reuters to set up a reporting service in the Middle East, funding it covertly via the BBC. It was devised in 1969 by the Information Research Department (IRD), a secretive Foreign Office department set-up in 1948. It produced anti-communist material to fight a propaganda war with the Soviet Union.
  10. But the UK government were warned about an underprepared NHS and the possibilities of a predicted pandemic in a report three years ago and chose do nothing about it.
  11. Starmer doesnt have a cat in hells chance of getting elected, he is still blaming Corbyn for his own poor showing in the polls, i also found it quite telling when he was asked whether Hancock should resign over breaking the law on contracts, the snivelling creep declared that it is not what the people want, yes it blooming well is, if Hancock is giving out contracts to his mates and breaking the law, he should be held accountable
  12. this is a great clip, Piers Morgan literally destroys Nadhim Zahawi over PPE and breaking the law over the contracts. https://www.lancs.live/whats-on/whats-on-news/piers-morgan-lays-vaccines-minister-19886167
  13. i wouldn't necessarily say so. this link is quite interesting, it states... "However, the judge also linked the decision to her finding that Corbyn already had enough to press on with in the substantive case at this point – and said his team can submit amendments later in the case regarding the agreement that was negotiated with Starmer’s office. And there was considerable bad news for Starmer’s case in the rest of the judgment, which: acknowledges in a judicial finding – in paragraph 9 – that the ‘Governance and Legal Unit’ (GLU) report presented to the National Executive Committee ‘Disputes Panel’ did not find that JC had engaged in prejudicial conduct finds in paragraph 10 that the Disputes Panel made no finding that Corbyn’s conduct was grossly detrimental finds that there is a clear arguable case of procedural unfairness that has been identified" https://skwawkbox.org/2021/01/28/exclusive-result-in-corbyn-pre-action-disclosure-is-not-what-mainstream-media-are-claiming/?fbclid=IwAR1nNpp6ylTPw7GsVocd5vsnyebEDSJwmNLGzFjBtZAdPjIqWGuGVZ-b-g8
  14. Whilst not wanting to drag this into a Corbyn thread, it does seem pretty obvious that the one person who tried to drag us away from the same old same old, the one that actually tried to change things for the better was vilified by everyone, including his own side. Great post Anna
  15. Whats really funny about it? Brilliant news..
  16. Tom, you cant cherry pic the best bits unfortunately,
  17. no not at all, where have i stated that? i have stated that the Blairites have never given Corbyn a chance, and if they wasnt prepared to give Corbyn a chance and continually undermine the party they should leave to form their own party (like a few of them tried) Talking about unity, it appears starmer has no intention of uniting the party, which was one of his pledges that he has now broken
  18. I think you will find that you are incorrect... This discrimination lawyer thinks the party may not have only broken the rules but may have actually broken the law, i think he may know a little more than you Tom... https://novaramedia.com/2020/11/26/im-a-discrimination-lawyer-the-labour-party-has-probably-broken-the-law-by-removing-the-whip-from-jeremy-corbyn/
  19. The Labour Party membership card states that it is a “Democratic Socialist Party” Which is very different to “a Socialist Party”. Please explain what the difference is.....? does Starmer not believe in Democracy? Corbyn was democratically elected, and Starmer was part of the coup, ?????..... yup, that is because Starmer went against the NEC and overruled them, which is against the parties own rules....he makes it up as he goes along
  20. i am still clinging to a better a fairer society for everyone, not just the 1%, call me old fashioned if you like....
  21. you asked what i would like him to do, i told you...
  22. Firstly i would like him to unite the party, you remember that was one of his pledges?? thats what got him elected, by promising to unite the party?? He turned out to be a liar....but hey, he wears a smart suit and it fools most people
  23. Capitalise? Starmer seems to back him up on everything, ok he whines every now and then, but doesnt seem to do a deal
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.