As usual the truth is a bit more complex than a slogan or a cheap headline. In any case, drawing a parallel between a failure to improve public health and the deliberate slaughter of millions is not worthy of you. There are enough effective arguments against austerity and Tory policy that you don't need to reach for hyperbole.
As usual the truth is a bit more complex than a slogan or a cheap headline. In any case, drawing a parallel between a failure to improve public health and the deliberate slaughter of millions is not worthy of you. There are enough effective arguments against austerity and Tory policy that you don't need to reach for hyperbole.
It’s not hyperbole. The Full Fact reference you link to was looking at one set of claims based on a particular report.
There have been multiple reports which have demonstrated deaths related to government policies - including reports from government departments.
It’s not hyperbole. The Full Fact reference you link to was looking at one set of claims based on a particular report.
There have been multiple reports which have demonstrated deaths related to government policies - including reports from government departments.
In keeping with Joan's appeal for a spirit of peace, you are surely both right? The Tories can be culpable for deaths due to their policies and expected to answer for it, but it is still not really the same as genocide. I would like to see Iain Duncan Smith locked up though, the colossal pervert.
Re: Bollocks to Brexit
Posted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 12:47 pm
by Regulator
Surely Boris hasn't been lying when he's been telling Parliament, the media, the DUP, the ERG, his financial backers and the public that he won't ask for another extension? Surely not...
(From the Government lawyer's submission to the Court of Session today)
Surely Boris hasn't been lying when he's been telling Parliament, the media, the DUP, the ERG, his financial backers and the public that he won't ask for another extension? Surely not...
BennAct submission.jpg
(From the Government lawyer's submission to the Court of Session today)
You presume too much about my memory, and the search function appears not to be able to do "search for all posts by User X in this thread".
My extremely rusty and unreliable memory of every conversation I've had about this is that all the "good reasons why belonging to the EU does harm to all sorts of liberal and progressive causes" boil down to "we can't have nationalised industry while we're in the EU", which is inaccurate. If I've oversimplified, please enlighten me.
(a) No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when you poke the supposed (leftwing) "valid reasons to leave" they fall over - because they are things that people claim you can't do within the EU which you actually can do, or could easily do if you tried. And you don't even need to poke the supposed rightwing "valid reasons to leave" to make them fall over because they're vacuous or simply obviously factually wrong ("Laws forced on us by Brussels", "Take back control", "£350m per week").
(b) And by claiming that I'm saying that "every single person who supports leave is completely deluded" you're putting words into my mouth I didn't, and would never, say. Please don't do that.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but when you say that every argument you've heard for leaving falls over when poked, that still sounds to me like saying that the people who want to leave for those reasons are deluded?
Me, I voted and support remain, I think leave under the present circumstances spells disaster, but I can hold those positions and still recognise that are valid arguments for leave, and leave, under other circumstances, could have been a reasonable choice.
I think one of the different approaches you and I have is that you are more inclined to take an organisation at face value for what it says about itself, whereas I am more inclined to judge by the proof of the pudding. This applies to both the EU and Cyclibg UK!
Surely Boris hasn't been lying when he's been telling Parliament, the media, the DUP, the ERG, his financial backers and the public that he won't ask for another extension? Surely not...
BennAct submission.jpg
(From the Government lawyer's submission to the Court of Session today)
What's the loophole that they're talking about?
Re: Bollocks to Brexit
Posted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:26 pm
by Sonic Budgie
As read elsewhere, submitted for the constitutional experts.
Johnson has Queens speech, speech is debated, voted down, Johnson resigns, doesn't have to write letter.
All the above with added intrigue of no GNU being formed due to insufficient support for any candidate, no PM to write letter, crash out.
Johnson doesn't write letter, we still leave at the end of the month.
Re: Bollocks to Brexit
Posted: Fri Oct 04, 2019 10:51 pm
by Mister Paul
According to Femi Boris has just met with Hungary, the concern being that he's trying to persuade a member to object to the extension.
According to Femi Boris has just met with Hungary, the concern being that he's trying to persuade a member to object to the extension.
Surely not. That sounds a bit too close to treason for comfort.
Re: Bollocks to Brexit
Posted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:30 am
by Rutabaga
Just when I needed cheering up, I stumbled across this :-)
Re: Bollocks to Brexit
Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:53 am
by JohnToo
Came across this in something I was reading:
"To practise such wrestling is to choose to hold on through the division that is polarising our society... But we do not wrestle simply to prove our rightness or our righteousness. We wrestle to a place of understanding that equips us for reconciliation with those we disagree with or are fearful of. We hold on until the blessings of welcome, security and reconciliation are known by all."
(written primarily in the context of migration but has relevance to Brexit I feel too)