Jump to content

UK Politics: Gray's Anatomy


Recommended Posts

Saw captain nonsense posts earlier claiming nothing ever is Johnson's fault andsnowflakes are just having a go yet again for no real reason. 

I just assume, that people bit and we had two pages of troll feeding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Saw captain nonsense posts earlier claiming nothing ever is Johnson's fault andsnowflakes are just having a go yet again for no real reason. 

I just assume, that people bit and we had two pages of troll feeding.

Lol. 

No seriously though, how is it me the one trolling on here? It's truly baffling. 

Not one person has given a straight answer except me for 2 whole pages. And it's me who is trolling? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll bite (just once tho).

 

Let's say, I'll claim you are running a pedo-ring from your basement, and a bunch of nutjobs show up at your doorstep and demand to see your basement, and the release of the caged children a few days later, then surely I'd bear a not so small amount of blame for that. 

Johnson did just that. He dug up that old lie of Starmer shielding Saville and a bunch of pissed up wackos showed up and accsued of protecting pedophiles. They didn't get that idea on their own, they went there because the bloody PM said it (parliament no less). 

To then come online and claim there's no correlation between causation and effect is trolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Ok, I'll bite (just once tho).

 

Let's say, I'll claim you are running a pedo-ring from your basement, and a bunch of nutjobs show up at your doorstep and demand to see your basement, and the release of the caged children a few days later, then surely I'd bear a not so small amount of blame for that. 

Johnson did just that. He dug up that old lie of Starmer shielding Saville and a bunch of pissed up wackos showed up and accsued of protecting pedophiles. They didn't get that idea on their own, they went there because the bloody PM said it (parliament no less). 

To then come online and claim there's no correlation between causation and effect is trolling.

But, but only 14% (*) of the comments referred to him protecting paedophiles! The others were about him being a traitor, part of the deep state, etc! So clearly Johnson had nothing to do with it!

(*) Percentage figure taken from that well known left wing rag, The Telegraph, so it might have been inflated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

 

Johnson did just that. He dug up that old lie of Starmer shielding Saville and a bunch of pissed up wackos showed up and accsued of protecting pedophiles. They didn't get that idea on their own, they went there because the bloody PM said it (parliament no less). 

The problem here is you're wrong. They didn't.

A bunch of wackjobs showed up and accused Starmer of being a traitor, because they were on a event clearly labelled as being a protest about Lockdown measures, and were protesting Starmers complicity and support for those measures.

One person in a group of about 20 people said something about Saville. 

So how is your framing correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to know more about these people are, there is plenty of info out there:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60297998

 

Quote

Who were the protesters?

The protest in Westminster was an attempt to replicate the "freedom convoy" in Canada's capital in recent days.

But unlike the protest in Ottawa, the UK rally was small. Familiar faces from anti-vaccine rallies that have been held during the pandemic were in attendance.

The small gathering outside the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police had been relatively quiet up until Sir Keir was surrounded.

Amid shouts of "traitor" and references to Jimmy Savile and paedophiles, the Labour leader was accused by one protester of "ignoring our Magna Carta".

This a familiar theme used by followers of the so-called "sovereign citizen" movement.

They believe they can opt out of laws - including Covid restrictions - by invoking a clause in Magna Carta - the royal charter of rights signed in 1215.

They have handed fake legal documents to health workers and teachers to try to stop Covid vaccinations and some have even tried to remove Covid patients from intensive care wards, citing non-existent "common law" empowering them to do so.



Anti-vax protests: ‘Sovereign citizens’ fight UK Covid vaccine rollout


Also worth noting that the event was set up by the group aligned to Piers Corbyn, that well known far right fascist

https://www.stopnewnormal.net/

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The quote acknowledges "shouts of "traitor" and references to Jimmy Savile and paedophiles" which specifically speaks to BoJo's culpability from his previous statement. Wrapping it all up in a bow that's defined by folks of questionable intent and character is pretty foolish.

From their Twitter page:

 

<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, seriously? This is what you got? A 7 hour old tweet?

What about the HUNDREDS of other tweets about Lockdown and Vaccines, the stated goal of the protest, the entire body of work of Jeremy Corbyns mad brother, video evidence of the event, previous attacks on other MPs

This is like banging your head against a brick wall with some people. Keep trying 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

I'm actually curious about Savile now. Why wasn't he prosecuted? Starmer's saying it wasn't me. Fine. Who was it?

Click

  • Prosecutor has retired a long while ago, but it boiled down to that the victims were not prepared to come forward. Starmer did apparently not review/supervise this particular case.
  • Prosecution could've been handled differently. By the CPS and by the police, who didn't get off too well in that report.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

If you want to know more about these people are, there is plenty of info out there:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60297998

I would say that BBC article is pretty fair and balanced. To sum it up:

It's impossible to say categorically that the protesters were driven by the Johnson's comments last week. But at the very least it is a very bad look. And Johnson's spokesmen are still doubling down, gaslighting us as to what Johnson said, claiming "it was a fair and reasonable point about Starmer taking responsibility for the organisation he led".

 

Edit: and I will repeat a comment that I made last week when Johnson originally made the smear. Remember that at the point he made it he had his back to the wall, attempting to justify his unjustifiable behaviour in the face of the Grey report that even its redacted state made it clear that Johnson had lied to Parliament and presided over an unacceptable No 10 culture. At this point Johnson came out with this smear. The result? We are now all arguing about this smear, with a side order of whether perhaps there might be a grain of truth it it. The Grey report is largely forgotten for now. Victory for Johnson, however much he gets criticised for it.

Edited by A wilding
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Click

  • Prosecutor has retired a long while ago, but it boiled down to that the victims were not prepared to come forward. Starmer did apparently not review/supervise this particular case.
  • Prosecution could've been handled differently. By the CPS and by the police, who didn't get off too well in that report.

Is that the official report? If so, don't think I'll bother. Have plenty of better fiction on my tbr pile. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

It is. But then make your mind, either you want to dive into it, or you don't. 

When I said I was curious, I meant about the truth. 

I think everyone with a brain knows there has been an establishment paedo coverup going on in this country for decades. Savile, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, Lord Jenner, etc, etc, etc. These are just the tip of the iceberg and I'm sure William Hague could tell some tales. 

And, yes, there will be a smattering of facts in the official account. But it will be mostly fiction. So who gives a shit. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, A wilding said:

I would say that BBC article is pretty fair and balanced. To sum it up:

It's impossible to say categorically that the protesters were driven by the Johnson's comments last week. But at the very least it is a very bad look. And Johnson's spokesmen are still doubling down, gaslighting us as to what Johnson said, claiming "it was a fair and reasonable point about Starmer taking responsibility for the organisation he led".

 

Edit: and I will repeat a comment that I made last week when Johnson originally made the smear. Remember that at the point he made it he had his back to the wall, attempting to justify his unjustifiable behaviour in the face of the Grey report that even its redacted state made it clear that Johnson had lied to Parliament and presided over an unacceptable No 10 culture. At this point Johnson came out with this smear. The result? We are now all arguing about this smear, with a side order of whether perhaps there might be a grain of truth it it. The Grey report is largely forgotten for now. Victory for Johnson, however much he gets criticised for it.

Don’t disagree with most of that, but the point is, if it was a trap set by Johnson, what does it say about the people who fell for it? It’s not a good look for them. 
 

There was a clear and obvious attempt by certain media outlets and Johnson’s enemies ( many of whom are in the Tory Party now) to draw a direct line between Starmers harassment and Johnson’s comments, and to over emphasise them.
 

But as you say, it’s a total distraction from the actual stuff Boris is responsible for. Instead of going for the jugular the media instead lies and tries to manipulate the truth.. in a very Johnson way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, A wilding said:

Edit: and I will repeat a comment that I made last week when Johnson originally made the smear. Remember that at the point he made it he had his back to the wall, attempting to justify his unjustifiable behaviour in the face of the Grey report that even its redacted state made it clear that Johnson had lied to Parliament and presided over an unacceptable No 10 culture. At this point Johnson came out with this smear. The result? We are now all arguing about this smear, with a side order of whether perhaps there might be a grain of truth it it. The Grey report is largely forgotten for now. Victory for Johnson, however much he gets criticised for it.

I agree he dropped the slur (against his advisors' advice) to try and distract from the parties.  And it has in part succeeded. But I don't see how this makes anything better for Johnson.  Everyone is calling him a liar - even the BBC, even Laura Kuenssberg.  Not only did he lie in Parliament (again - but the other lies are rarely newsworthy, for some reason) - but he spouted right wing conspiracy theories.  Our Prime Minister did this.  If this doesn't end him, I really worry for the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

When I said I was curious, I meant about the truth. 

I think everyone with a brain knows there has been an establishment paedo coverup going on in this country for decades. Savile, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, Lord Jenner, etc, etc, etc. These are just the tip of the iceberg and I'm sure William Hague could tell some tales. 

And, yes, there will be a smattering of facts in the official account. But it will be mostly fiction. So who gives a shit. 

 

eh, ok. You are suggesting there's this huge pedo cabal at work in the upper echolon of society, and the CPS was/is involved in a huge cover up? This is the part, where I back away slowly before adrenochrome comes into the discussion.

That post almost hoi levels of, do you actually read what you post levels of wtf in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

You are suggesting there's this huge pedo cabal at work in the upper echolon of society, and the CPS was/is involved in a huge cover up?

 

Are you suggesting there wasn't? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...