|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jul 27, 2023 20:50:20 GMT
Maybe Maitlis identifies as Monte. Maitlis is like watching the exorcist when you mention the names Farage or Johnson.........she goes demonic mode.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 27, 2023 21:00:55 GMT
Maybe Maitlis identifies as Monte. Maitlis is like watching the exorcist when you mention the names Farage or Johnson.........she goes demonic mode.
A bit like Monte & Darling then. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jul 27, 2023 21:07:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 27, 2023 21:29:23 GMT
Yes it is illegal - but only since 2010. So before then you were in favour of allowing banks to discriminate against gays - after all a private business should be allowed to decide for themselves who they do business with. Would you extend this idea to energy companies - should they be allowed to disconnect customers from the grid if their values do not align with the company? No because that's discrimination. Not liking an individuals views is not the same as group discrimination. Eh? - it's exactly the same. You are discriminating against a specific group of people. Sit yourself down and think for a minute - discriminating against gays is exactly the same as discriminating against those who disapprove of gay relationships. In both cases its individuals who are discriminated against. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 27, 2023 21:59:59 GMT
Maitlis is like watching the exorcist when you mention the names Farage or Johnson.........she goes demonic mode.
A bit like Monte & Darling then. Darling and Monte. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 27, 2023 22:32:08 GMT
A bit like Monte & Darling then. Darling and Monte. I don't think so. The billing isn't prioritised by alphabetic order it is done by rank. Therefore it is Monte and his sidekick Darling. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2023 5:44:10 GMT
No because that's discrimination. Not liking an individuals views is not the same as group discrimination. Eh? - it's exactly the same. You are discriminating against a specific group of people. Sit yourself down and think for a minute - discriminating against gays is exactly the same as discriminating against those who disapprove of gay relationships. In both cases its individuals who are discriminated against. This is the thing when one believes they're more righteous and superior to others, or at least relies on such a persona. They get to decide who is or isn't allowed to have opinions, to have bank accounts or to even breathe in some cases. Logical rational arguments will be dismissed, which is why they spend so much time trying to manipulate authority into destroying people, whilst promoting their shameless virtue signalling to try and hide the true ugliness of what is going on. I certainly do not believe it's by accident or that playing dumb is an excuse. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 28, 2023 6:01:33 GMT
Monte. I know what you are saying , but as ive tried to debate with my mate zany . This isnt about farage , and your personal dislike of him and his politics.
This is about freedom of speech and the ability to hold views , while going about your daily business in society without being "debanked/cancelled" for holding those views.
Its a helluva hill for anglo remainers and many on the left to die on. Predictably , despite all the sneering about farage , he has come out of it looking like the martyr , and stronger , while brexiters , many on the right , and i would argue society in general have got right behind him.
Meanwhile those who hate farage have ended up with egg on their faces. You only need to read zanys comments in this thread..........where he went from trying miserably to justify farages cancellation with all sorts of puerile ( and untrue) reasons , to being reduced to banal empty one liners in a game of last wordism.
I would let it go mate. Its unwinnable. Yet another episode of unjustifiable anti democracy in action , a bit like the events immediately post the brexit ref where similar puerile excuses were being made for the lack of implementation of the brexit ref result.
Farage could be the biggest racist xenophobe on the planet .It still doesnt justify his cancellation. This isnt supposed to be north korea mate.
Meh. Mr deregulation is reduced to screaming for more regulation of the banks and using EU legislation to support his case because suddenly he's the victim when the Queen's own bank thinks he's so toxic it damages their reputation to have him in their millionaire's club which it turns out he doesn't have enough cash in his account to belong to anyway. Plus the bonus of banks shares falling across the board because Brexit moved the centre of European banking from London to Frankfurt. What's not to like? More bank regulation, bring it on. Hobo Nige described as a racist, xenophobic, grifter. Fucking hilarious. It's the most fun I've had on here in months. Much more fun than the usual whiny ''victims'' bitching and moaning about the moderation because they've had a couple of posts deleted for calling fellow members supporters of paedophiles. Monte. The foundations that society is built upon such as freedom of speech , and democracy , is far more important than personal dislike of an individual , or puerile excuses over alleged hypocrisy.
This is wrong. We all know it. You and others on this thread such as darling and Zany are on the wrong side of societys moral standards once more , as i said about remainers post 2016. Public opinion is against you.
Let it go mate , and dont continue to die on that hill.
Heres the scottish indy blogger , former lib dem , pro european and critic of transgender issues Stuart campbell telliing talk tv of his personal "banking cancellation" similar to Farage. If you cant hold your nose about Farage , and see why this is wrong and we must all close ranks in society and get behind the banks being punished and reigned in over this , then i would have thought better of you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jul 28, 2023 6:41:20 GMT
Gina Miller also appears to have been de banked by Monzo.
I can't stand the woman, but she has rights and if those rights have been violated, that's an outrage.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 28, 2023 6:53:51 GMT
Gina Miller also appears to have been de banked by Monzo. I can't stand the woman, but she has rights and if those rights have been violated, that's an outrage. Fully agree. This is above personal dislike and about maintaining freedoms such as being free to articulate your beliefs , political or otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 28, 2023 6:57:26 GMT
And the episode has caused them way more reputational damage than having Nigel as a customer ever did. Indeed. I would suggest that the whole scenario blowing up in precisely the way it did was not 100% predictable, but it was 99% predictable for someone not living with a psychosis that puts them in an alternate reality. So this decision was made, either by people who felt their personal political opinions are far more important than the interest of the organisation that pays them, or it was made by people with psychiatric problems Either scenario has serious implications for the organisation because the size of influence wielded here suggests the whole thing is dysfunctional. This wasn't just a lone fruitcake - this is a whole management team leading from the mental hospital If you look on this thread you can see people implicitly comparing Nigel Farage to those who advocate the random slaughter of innocent people. People this damaged aren't going to let you have a democracy they aren't emotionally equipped to exist in. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 28, 2023 7:06:25 GMT
No because that's discrimination. Not liking an individuals views is not the same as group discrimination. Eh? - it's exactly the same. You are discriminating against a specific group of people. Sit yourself down and think for a minute - discriminating against gays is exactly the same as discriminating against those who disapprove of gay relationships. In both cases its individuals who are discriminated against. That's why you can't have a one size fits all rule. I am not arguing that either everyone gets an account or banks get to choose cart blanc That's what you are arguing. Should a bank be allowed to ban disabled people from having an account because they believe they are an aberration? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 28, 2023 7:08:27 GMT
Eh? - it's exactly the same. You are discriminating against a specific group of people. Sit yourself down and think for a minute - discriminating against gays is exactly the same as discriminating against those who disapprove of gay relationships. In both cases its individuals who are discriminated against. why? - we do for energy and water supplies |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 28, 2023 7:12:12 GMT
That's why you can't have a one size fits all rule. why? - we do for energy and water supplies But we don't for cars and the internet. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 28, 2023 7:15:27 GMT
Eh? - it's exactly the same. You are discriminating against a specific group of people. Sit yourself down and think for a minute - discriminating against gays is exactly the same as discriminating against those who disapprove of gay relationships. In both cases its individuals who are discriminated against. That's why you can't have a one size fits all rule. I am not arguing that either everyone gets an account or banks get to choose cart blanc That's what you are arguing. Should a bank be allowed to ban disabled people from having an account because they believe they are an aberration? Sure. You want a special rule that penalises things you disagree with with and allows things you agree with |
|
