|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2024 17:47:26 GMT
They said it represented “a threat to the universality of human rights”. You actually agree with their point here but you don't wish for asylum seekers to be entitled to human rights. P. S. Please can we have thread titles which give an inkling of the subject? Makes the forum more readable. I agree. A thread title should contain at least some reference to the topic of the OP. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Feb 2, 2024 18:07:29 GMT
Prepare yourselves for when Liebour get in. This nonsense will be gale force 10. The funny part of that is, this is somewhat gale force already and Labour aren't in. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 2, 2024 18:09:23 GMT
You actually agree with their point here but you don't wish for asylum seekers to be entitled to human rights. P. S. Please can we have thread titles which give an inkling of the subject? Makes the forum more readable. A thread title should contain at least some reference to the topic of the OP. Well of course you do monte...I think FFS is an apt description of £200 million beeging gives to some parasite charities whilst our own homelss are still languishing in shop doorways. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2024 18:13:21 GMT
Most 'charities' have now completed their journey from groups of well meaning volunteers wearing threadbare jumpers, to professional criminals wearing suits. I tend to agree, although I'd prefer "Political activists" rather than criminals. Although either way, it's why I no longer donate to charity. Charities were meant to be voluntary, but these lot are taking millions in tax payers money to support criminal activity. The country is clearly too corrupt to sustain itself, and if Russians invade it will probably be against the law to fight back.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 2, 2024 18:13:59 GMT
Where are these so called fucking charities when our own homeless only have a shop doorway whilst this filth thrust up on us by the EUSSR are given 4 star accomodation? Charity starts at home FFS.
Charities lobbying against Rwanda Bill given £209m of taxpayer money.
Members of the House of Lords expressed their concerns about Rwanda legislation but voted against a Liberal Democrat attempt to kill the Bill entirely
The Government has given £209 million to charities that have lobbied the House of Lords to vote against the Rwanda Bill and have described the policy as “deeply harmful” and setting a “dangerous precedent”.
On Monday, a group of 265 charities, focused largely on helping refugees and migrants, criticised the legislation, designed to stop the small boat Channel crossings. They said it represented “a threat to the universality of human rights”.
The way it is worded in the Torygraph article is misleading as it suggest all £209 million was used for that purpose when in fact it will only be a small fraction of the total. As a taxpayer I'd be more upset by the nearly half a billion spent on achieving zero deportations to Rwanda myself. Especially as it is just electioneering and will have next to no benefit in terms of reducing immigration. Maybe they have the same mamangement team as Major Toms charity. You can't have it both ways monte when we bitch about the french and the EUSSR taking the piss and our money you go on the effensive.. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Feb 2, 2024 18:24:46 GMT
I agree. A thread title should contain at least some reference to the topic of the OP. Well of course you do monte...I think FFS is an apt description of £200 million beeging gives to some parasite charities whilst our own homelss are still languishing in shop doorways. It isn't a description, it's a reaction. Hence why you can't tell what the actual topic is. 🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 2, 2024 18:27:45 GMT
Well of course you do monte...I think FFS is an apt description of £200 million beeging gives to some parasite charities whilst our own homelss are still languishing in shop doorways. It isn't a description, it's a reaction. Hence why you can't tell what the actual topic is. 🙄 Oh I think it's quite clear, Andy.
Perhaps get a grown-up to explain it to you?
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Feb 2, 2024 18:49:44 GMT
Yes please.
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2024 18:54:26 GMT
It isn't a description, it's a reaction. Hence why you can't tell what the actual topic is. 🙄 Oh I think it's quite clear, Andy.
Perhaps get a grown-up to explain it to you?
Not from the title it isn't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2024 18:59:34 GMT
It isn't a description, it's a reaction. Hence why you can't tell what the actual topic is. 🙄 Oh I think it's quite clear, Andy.
Perhaps get a grown-up to explain it to you?
I think the context is important and that it gets boring seeing the left ruin these threads because they have no sane way of addressing the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 2, 2024 19:08:17 GMT
Oh I think it's quite clear, Andy.
Perhaps get a grown-up to explain it to you?
Not from the title it isn't. OK, how about:
"Should charities get involved in politics?" or
"Are charities becoming quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should the government fund charities that get involved in politics?" or
"Should the government fund quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should there be more regulation of Charities?" or
"Should charities be required to publicly declare political affiliations?" or
"Should the government fund left-wing charities?"
Etc. etc.
Feel free to come up with your own. Oh, and maybe explain it to Andy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2024 19:12:16 GMT
Not from the title it isn't. OK, how about:
"Should charities get involved in politics?" or
"Are charities becoming quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should the government fund charities that get involved in politics?" or
"Should the government fund quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should there be more regulation of Charities?" or
"Should charities be required to publicly declare political affiliations?" or
"Should the government fund left-wing charities?"
Etc. etc.
Feel free to come up with your own. Oh, and maybe explain it to Andy?
Yes, any one of those would work as a title. FFS does not. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 2, 2024 19:28:31 GMT
OK, how about:
"Should charities get involved in politics?" or
"Are charities becoming quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should the government fund charities that get involved in politics?" or
"Should the government fund quasi-political bodies?" or
"Should there be more regulation of Charities?" or
"Should charities be required to publicly declare political affiliations?" or
"Should the government fund left-wing charities?"
Etc. etc.
Feel free to come up with your own. Oh, and maybe explain it to Andy?
Yes, any one of those would work as a title. FFS does not. Just another thread that the band of lefty aided trolls wnat to see locked...We know the score monte as it is a well known ploy and and occurence....I wonder if you would like to address the fact that this shower of shit we have as a government have no money when it comes to our own homeless but can find the odd £200 million to give to some lefty woke bunch of arseholes to piss up the wall? |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2024 19:31:06 GMT
Yes, any one of those would work as a title. FFS does not. Just another thread that the band of lefty aided trolls wnat to see locked...We know the score monte as it is a well known ploy and and occurence....I wonder if you would like to address the fact that this shower of shit we have as a government have no money when it comes to our own homeless but can find the odd £200 million to give to some lefty woke bunch of arseholes to piss up the wall? I've already addressed that. I'm now addressing your inappropriate thread title. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 2, 2024 19:35:21 GMT
Just another thread that the band of lefty aided trolls wnat to see locked...We know the score monte as it is a well known ploy and and occurence....I wonder if you would like to address the fact that this shower of shit we have as a government have no money when it comes to our own homeless but can find the odd £200 million to give to some lefty woke bunch of arseholes to piss up the wall? I've already addressed that. I'm now addressing your inappropriate thread title. The only thing as per usual you have adressed monte is in the support of the usal few protected lefty trolls. Akward or what monte? |
|
