|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 22, 2024 15:50:55 GMT
If Keir Starmer browbeats the Speaker into breaching Parliamentary rules because he fears Muslim extremists will attack his MPs, what would he do in office to appease the same mob? Ban cartoons of Muhammad? Make disrespecting the Quran a hate crime? Repeal the Terrorism Act? Proof of browbeating please. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 22, 2024 16:24:30 GMT
I enjoy political debate based upon facts, but I am not keen on supposition or conspiracy theories, there is not a shred of evidence that the Speaker Of The House was "blackmailed", but of course it does fit in with your political perspective. It is perfectly normal and totaly acceptable for the leader of any party to discuss business with the Speaker, and the reasons as put forward by several MPs from both sides of the House make perfect sense. In actual fact the Labour motion was a "Bridge" the ONLY motion which could have been acceptable to MPs on all sides, it was the one motion which had the best chances of attracting most votes, UNLIKE THE SNP MOTION. facts are something we are not going to get from dyed in the wool Labour Party supporters. You aren't very good at spin , but however you try and spin , the speaker set aside established precedent last night and chaos ensued. The allegations at this stage of threats of blackmail from the labour leader and his minions are very serious indeed , and hopefully this will be thoroughly investigated and the truth rather than Labour Party spin comes out. and thats all they remain ..... allegations |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 22, 2024 16:29:53 GMT
facts are something we are not going to get from dyed in the wool Labour Party supporters. You aren't very good at spin , but however you try and spin , the speaker set aside established precedent last night and chaos ensued. The allegations at this stage of threats of blackmail from the labour leader and his minions are very serious indeed , and hopefully this will be thoroughly investigated and the truth rather than Labour Party spin comes out. and thats all they remain ..... allegations they are. Starmer has categorically denied threatening the speaker , but left it unsaid whether or not anyone in his party did. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 22, 2024 16:32:59 GMT
They THINK they smell a Rat, theres some smoke but no fire
With Labour pressing hard on the SNP in Scotland, and the polls there indicating losses for the Nats, and with Labour way ahead in the General Election polls, its a golden opportunity for the Tories and the SNP to make a meal of this, by playing on speculation, assumtion, theories, the old sum of 1 + 1 = 3.
Yet they have no evidence, nothing to substantiate their accusations, and after the SNP's carefuly concocted motion, specially designed to split Labour, these accusations are now all they have left.
The people of Scotland are not stupid, and I predict that this will do the SNP harm ... and they deserve it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 22, 2024 16:37:16 GMT
As I said , Hoyle has apologised, Starmer insists he ‘ urged’ Hoyle to do something that Hoyle later apologised for .
Lefties putting their fingers in their ears and going “la la la …prove it. “Isn’t cutting it .
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 22, 2024 16:42:15 GMT
As I said , Hoyle has apologised, Starmer insists he ‘ urged’ Hoyle to do something that Hoyle later apologised for . Lefties putting their fingers in their ears and going “la la la …prove it. “Isn’t cutting it . witch finder seems rather upset today dont you think ?  |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 22, 2024 17:29:23 GMT
As I said , Hoyle has apologised, Starmer insists he ‘ urged’ Hoyle to do something that Hoyle later apologised for . Lefties putting their fingers in their ears and going “la la la …prove it. “Isn’t cutting it . witch finder seems rather upset today dont you think ? Yes. “Nothing to see here “ is wishful thinking .🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Feb 22, 2024 20:58:48 GMT
Lmfao. Isnt it funny the least bit of scrutiny or someone doing what the Labour Party dont want , and the mask slips , and the snp , who earlier witch finder was calling part of the progressive three parties , are now `devious bastards`. The snp didnt blackmail the speaker witch finder. The only devious bastards as you put it were starmer and his party. I enjoy political debate based upon facts, but I am not keen on supposition or conspiracy theories, there is not a shred of evidence that the Speaker Of The House was "blackmailed", but of course it does fit in with your political perspective. It is perfectly normal and totaly acceptable for the leader of any party to discuss business with the Speaker, and the reasons as put forward by several MPs from both sides of the House make perfect sense. In actual fact the Labour motion was a "Bridge" the ONLY motion which could have been acceptable to MPs on all sides, it was the one motion which had the best chances of attracting most votes, UNLIKE THE SNP MOTION. Geoffrey Cox had this to say about Hoyle's actions: “There are two possible explanations for the speaker’s decision to abandon longstanding convention,” Cox said. “First, he did it to assist his former party leader [to] get out of a bind. Secondly, as he says, he did it in a misguided attempt to protect certain Labour MPs from the intimidation they said would otherwise have followed if they had voted against the SNP motion. “Either reason is unacceptable. If the former, it is an abuse of his office. If the latter, it is an abject surrender to intolerance and tyranny; it meekly offers up the House of Commons as able to be influenced by external threats.” And you are here defending that due to the words used in an SNP motion. Tragic stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Feb 22, 2024 21:00:55 GMT
I agree that Hoyle has to go - but my issue is how we have got to this situation. The Speaker allowed the Lab amendment because so many Lab MPs were terrified of potential violence if they could not vote for the Labour motion from their Muslim constituents.. We have ended up in a situation where the Speaker of the HoC believes that bypassing the rules of the house is acceptable rather than confronting the threats of violence from one of the minority groups in this country. What does that say to everyone else - threaten violence and we change the rules to accomodate you.. ..that is going to work out well. The dangerous subtext is that Islamists are coercing Members of Parliament over the Gazan situation. This must stop. Imagine what the subtext would be for a Labour run government. Labour's identity politics has always been the stuff of nightmares, and now its banging the doors of Parliament down. Frightening stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 22, 2024 21:41:12 GMT
The dangerous subtext is that Islamists are coercing Members of Parliament over the Gazan situation. This must stop. Imagine what the subtext would be for a Labour run government. Labour's identity politics has always been the stuff of nightmares, and now its banging the doors of Parliament down. Frightening stuff. Muslim constituents.. How do you know they were Muslims they Could' of been far left nutters who Corbyn supports at the pro-Palestine marches Your comment is nothing of a racial slur |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Feb 23, 2024 11:13:37 GMT
Imagine what the subtext would be for a Labour run government. Labour's identity politics has always been the stuff of nightmares, and now its banging the doors of Parliament down. Frightening stuff. Muslim constituents.. How do you know they were Muslims they Could' of been far left nutters who Corbyn supports at the pro-Palestine marches Your comment is nothing of a racial slur You said Muslim constituents not me. Do you have trouble with the written word? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 23, 2024 11:28:47 GMT
Muslim constituents.. How do you know they were Muslims they Could' of been far left nutters who Corbyn supports at the pro-Palestine marches Your comment is nothing of a racial slur You said Muslim constituents not me. Do you have trouble with the written word? You would never know it though 😁 |
|
