|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 1, 2023 15:15:24 GMT
Nope. You just made that up, thicko.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jun 1, 2023 15:18:54 GMT
I believe in his head he actually believes both are the same thing. I've pointed this out before. Your beloved starme was head of the CPS when both the Saville and Rotherham grooming gangs come to light. Is that truthfull and factual enough for you Sun Shine? Starmer was there to deal with the cases presented to him. There was no Saville case put forward because the police could not put one together. So get back into your little 'know nothing' box. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jun 2, 2023 0:09:27 GMT
It must be really annoying to you righty's when the Labour party act quickly and suspend those that are 'suspected' of wrongdoing. Tory example. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: They have my full confidence: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: lets have an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Tory MP: We can't talk about it there's an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Inquiry: He did it. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Ethics advisor: Sack him. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM to ethics advisor: your sacked. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: Lets change the rules. Suspect: I resign. PM: it's right and proper he resigned. 🤣 You are wrong here buddy. They turned a blind eye to his outrageous behaviour for years until Politico broke the story. It is all over the media... "He was well known for getting too close to women" "It was widely known that he took prostitutes into the Common bar and would brag about it". So no, Labour didn't suspend him at the first opportunity... they suspending him when his crimes were splattered all over the press. Should be an interesting interview when Starmer is asked when he was first aware of the allegations lol. The problem with Starmer's Labour is that they claim to be morally better than the Tories, then it turns out they are not... just like you have tried to take the moral high ground and have been totally wrong lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 2, 2023 0:16:38 GMT
Labour has suspended MP Geraint Davies pending an investigation into reports of “incredibly serious allegations of completely unacceptable behaviour”...
....It reported that two female MPs had claimed Mr Davies, who has served in Parliament for 21 years over two spells, touched them inappropriately.
Oh dear.
That happens on both side of the political divide. For instance, Jimmy Savile was a tireless campaigner for the Tory Party. Labour faced embarrassment over its calls for a wide-ranging inquiry into Jimmy Savile as senior party figures previously called for the relaxation of child sex laws. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9614516/Jimmy-Savile-Labour-faces-embarrassment-over-former-child-sex-claims.html |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 2, 2023 0:22:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 2, 2023 0:25:50 GMT
What more can you expect mate this IS labour we are debating. Why isn't harman and her rabid husband not behind bars? And this is the bitch who was head of the boris drinkypoos so called party. You only have to mention PIE and most of lefty arseholes run for cover including their rotten to the core supporters. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 2, 2023 0:29:31 GMT
'Paedogate' Gets Worse For Harriet Harman As PIE Leader Tom O'Carroll Reveals New Details
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 2, 2023 0:41:35 GMT
What more can you expect mate this IS labour we are debating. Why isn't harman and her rabid husband not behind bars? And this is the bitch who was head of the boris drinkypoos so called party. You only have to mention PIE and most of lefty arseholes run for cover including their rotten to the core supporters. It's mad, some people have very short memories, when it suits. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 2, 2023 1:33:05 GMT
LOL, hold the front page just found this. In 2009 the left wing Labour supporting Guardian described Sir Jimmy Saville as, no not a predatory paedophile, but a...
...prodigious philanthropist who was honoured for his charity work.
That's the Guardian for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 2, 2023 4:49:33 GMT
Nope. You just made that up, thicko. Is that the stench of a lefty that has entered the room. Tep smelt itall the way down here in Devon. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2023 5:48:33 GMT
It must be really annoying to you righty's when the Labour party act quickly and suspend those that are 'suspected' of wrongdoing. Tory example. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: They have my full confidence: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: lets have an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Tory MP: We can't talk about it there's an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Inquiry: He did it. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Ethics advisor: Sack him. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM to ethics advisor: your sacked. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: Lets change the rules. Suspect: I resign. PM: it's right and proper he resigned. 🤣 You are wrong here buddy. They turned a blind eye to his outrageous behaviour for years until Politico broke the story. It is all over the media... "He was well known for getting too close to women" "It was widely known that he took prostitutes into the Common bar and would brag about it". So no, Labour didn't suspend him at the first opportunity... they suspending him when his crimes were splattered all over the press. Should be an interesting interview when Starmer is asked when he was first aware of the allegations lol. The problem with Starmer's Labour is that they claim to be morally better than the Tories, then it turns out they are not... just like you have tried to take the moral high ground and have been totally wrong lol. It is not 'illegal' to take prostitutes into a commons bar just 'bad form' and you are right there is a question to be asked of Starmer about his previous behaviour. My point is that Labour acted and suspended him instead of the Tory way of: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: They have my full confidence: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: lets have an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Tory MP: We can't talk about it there's an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Inquiry: He did it. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Ethics advisor: Sack him. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM to ethics advisor: your sacked. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: Lets change the rules. Suspect: I resign. PM: it's right and proper he resigned. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jun 2, 2023 9:54:09 GMT
You are wrong here buddy. They turned a blind eye to his outrageous behaviour for years until Politico broke the story. It is all over the media... "He was well known for getting too close to women" "It was widely known that he took prostitutes into the Common bar and would brag about it". So no, Labour didn't suspend him at the first opportunity... they suspending him when his crimes were splattered all over the press. Should be an interesting interview when Starmer is asked when he was first aware of the allegations lol. The problem with Starmer's Labour is that they claim to be morally better than the Tories, then it turns out they are not... just like you have tried to take the moral high ground and have been totally wrong lol. It is not 'illegal' to take prostitutes into a commons bar just 'bad form' and you are right there is a question to be asked of Starmer about his previous behaviour. My point is that Labour acted and suspended him instead of the Tory way of: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: They have my full confidence: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: lets have an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Tory MP: We can't talk about it there's an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Inquiry: He did it. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Ethics advisor: Sack him. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM to ethics advisor: your sacked. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: Lets change the rules. Suspect: I resign. PM: it's right and proper he resigned. Prostitution is not illegal... I must have missed that. Parading them around parliament in front of female MPs that spend their time speaking out against sexual exploitation is not ok. The fact you have starting talking about morals and then failed to condemn this is top level hypocrisy. Anyway. you are claiming they have acted swiftly, and I am calling bullshit. They acted when the media forced them into action. I'm not defending the Tories, they way they try to cling on after wrongdoing is appalling. What I am pointing out is the stupidity of trying to claim Labour are morally superior. They have stood back and watched his bad behaviour and done nothing, and this is not the first time. Every time one of these MPs gets exposed it is the same old story... "oh yes he / she was widely known for it". These are the people we elect to represent us, why are they not calling this behaviour out straight away, instead of waiting for the media to expose it years down the line? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 2, 2023 10:19:11 GMT
I've no idea what your point is. Jimmy Savile was an active campaigner for the Tory party. There may have been active campaigners for the Labour party who were just as bad that we simply don't know about. The point is, these people are to be found in all political parties and in all walks of life. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jun 2, 2023 10:29:45 GMT
It must be really annoying to you righty's when the Labour party act quickly and suspend those that are 'suspected' of wrongdoing. Tory example. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: They have my full confidence: Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: lets have an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Tory MP: We can't talk about it there's an inquiry. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Inquiry: He did it. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. Ethics advisor: Sack him. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM to ethics advisor: your sacked. Suspect: It wasn't me gov. PM: Lets change the rules. Suspect: I resign. PM: it's right and proper he resigned. 🤣 You are wrong here buddy. They turned a blind eye to his outrageous behaviour for years until Politico broke the story. It is all over the media... "He was well known for getting too close to women" "It was widely known that he took prostitutes into the Common bar and would brag about it". So no, Labour didn't suspend him at the first opportunity... they suspending him when his crimes were splattered all over the press. Should be an interesting interview when Starmer is asked when he was first aware of the allegations lol. The problem with Starmer's Labour is that they claim to be morally better than the Tories, then it turns out they are not... just like you have tried to take the moral high ground and have been totally wrong lol. If you have ALL THE DETAILS about when and why he could / should have been suspended, and the date he was suspended, please post, because I do not trust your anti Labour / Starmer posts. That way we will know whether your posts are mostly based upon opinion or not. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jun 2, 2023 10:44:06 GMT
LOL, hold the front page just found this. In 2009 the left wing Labour supporting Guardian described Sir Jimmy Saville as, no not a predatory paedophile, but a... ... prodigious philanthropist who was honoured for his charity work.
That's the Guardian for you. No, that was the accepted view at the time. JIMMY Savile was once a national treasure until his horrific crimes came to light after his death. He was originally admired for his extensive charity work and was even knighted - before calls for the honour to be taken away after his vile sex attacks were later exposed after his death. Saville was knighted in 1990. |
|
