|
|
Starmer
Feb 22, 2024 23:50:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by Totheleft on Feb 22, 2024 23:50:01 GMT
They dont have anything on Starmer, absolutely nothing Starmer listened to the concerns of MPs who had been on the recieving end of bullying and threats from the public and constituents, and he lobbied The Speaker based upon those concerns. These were totaly valid reasons for asking The Speaker to consider the TONED DOWN motion as put together by the Labour Party. Unless anyone can prove anything otherwise, this is the version we have to accept, and it’s as simple as that, no conspiracy theories, no crystal balls, no suppositions. We don’t have to accept anything . Yea we all know that you don't accept the truth. |
|
|
|
Starmer
Feb 22, 2024 23:56:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by Totheleft on Feb 22, 2024 23:56:47 GMT
There is no evidence what so ever that Starmer bullied anyone, its all in your mind The Speaker has made it clear his reasons for choosing the Labour motion, and they are legitimate and valid reasons, so no more conspiracy theories unless there is proof / evidence. the reasons about `safety ` dont really stack up though do they witch finder.? All labour had to do was either back the snp motion , or abstain. Surely the only risk from islamic extremism if that's whats being hinted at would have been if they had backed the governments motion of being against a ceasefire? What Islamic extremists he Could of been far -left pro Palestinian supporters Who March's corbyn went to . You lot don't half make false Accusation. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 23, 2024 0:00:56 GMT
We don’t have to accept anything . Yea we all know that you don't accept the truth. “We “ being you and your imaginary friend. |
|
|
|
Starmer
Feb 23, 2024 0:04:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by Totheleft on Feb 23, 2024 0:04:13 GMT
When it comes to bullying ( the accusation leveled at Starmer ) the only bullying taking place is the bullying of Lindsay Hoyle. The Speaker listened carefuly to the legitimate concerns of MPs, many of whom have been targeted by protesters, some threatned, some the targets of vandalism, and in one instance firebombed. I fail to understand why the reasons given are not accepted, other than for political posturing, and I am afraid that for the lame duck Prime Minister to claim that "we must not be intimidated" is astonishing, bearing in mind that MP's have actually lost their lives because of their political positions. Are you seriously suggesting that violent threats against individual MP's are a valid reason to ignore convention and pressure the Commons to vote a certain way? Of course they are when national security at risk .surly you see that. |
|
|
|
Starmer
Feb 23, 2024 0:06:37 GMT
via mobile
Post by Totheleft on Feb 23, 2024 0:06:37 GMT
Yea we all know that you don't accept the truth. “We “ being you and your imaginary friend. Yea he makes more sense then you I'm sure B4 be around soon pointing out you broken the Forum rules. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 23, 2024 2:50:43 GMT
Are you seriously suggesting that violent threats against individual MP's are a valid reason to ignore convention and pressure the Commons to vote a certain way? Yes I am, and why not, the SNP motion was so worded as to divide the Labour Party ( purposely done ), if anyone was playing political games, it was the SNP. This is a moral issue, and leading MPs from all parties could have met to try and work out a united front from the British Parliament. Instead the Tories and SNP made it a political game  |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Feb 23, 2024 3:18:21 GMT
Starmer was facing a triple digit rebellion and the loss of several of his shadow cabinet, and he has a word with the (LABOUR) speaker and it all disappears. Funny how certain people can pick and choose when the rules should apply...
The speaker's argument makes no sense, he is basically saying that MPs are being coerced by the mob... if that is the case then he should have suspended parliament and we should have police and soliders on the streets to restore order.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 23, 2024 7:34:36 GMT
When it comes to bullying ( the accusation leveled at Starmer ) the only bullying taking place is the bullying of Lindsay Hoyle. what utter guff. Hoyle broke precedence , under dodgy circumstances , and many of the mps across the house , and including the public , smell a starmer rat. Bleating about bullying and how the shrinking labour violets couldnt possible have been forced to vote on the snp motion is nonsense. If i were you witchfinder , I think in your position I would keep quiet and hope the whole thing blows over. You and your beloved party are making yourselves look even more foolish as the time passes. I dont often agree with penny Mordaunt , but she certainly gave labour and that repulsive manc Lucy Powell both barrels yesterday . She contrasted starmer with Corbyn , and said even if you disagreed with what Corbyn said , at least he believed what he was saying unlike starmer. The speakers job is to act as referree , and to stand up and maintain order in that house. If he can't handle a few words questioning his breaking with convention , then he shouldn't have done it in the first place , and possibly shouldn't be in the job at all. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 23, 2024 7:41:03 GMT
Thats all we are going to get for the next wee while is labour supporters running around forums trying to deflect from labours hoylegate. It certainly looks at the minute though starmer may have overplayed his hand. There seems to be quite a backlash. There are no votes in foreign affairs and Sir Stodge is probably waiting for the fuss to blow over.
ah but there is borkie. Labour and their voters have supported the Palestinians since at least going back to the eighties , certainly in the Glasgow area. They now have a leader that is opposed to the very foundations the Labour Party have been built on ( among much else) all my life , so couple the many disaffected lefties , with the muslim vote , and labours traditional core vote could be ripped away over the Gaza issue. Couple this issue which has been dear to the hearts of the labour luvvies ,with starmers complete lack of socialism , the old argument of voting labour to get the tories out is looking more and more laughable as the days go by. You dont get change by replacing like for like . |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 23, 2024 7:42:15 GMT
Are you seriously suggesting that violent threats against individual MP's are a valid reason to ignore convention and pressure the Commons to vote a certain way? Yes I am, and why not, the SNP motion was so worded as to divide the Labour Party ( purposely done ), if anyone was playing political games, it was the SNP. This is a moral issue, and leading MPs from all parties could have met to try and work out a united front from the British Parliament. Instead the Tories and SNP made it a political game It is not the purpose of the SNP to help the Labour Party. It was a Labour Party decision to ban their MP's from supporting the SNP motion - Starmer could have allowed a free vote and allowed his MP's to vote on their conscience. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 23, 2024 7:44:07 GMT
Are you seriously suggesting that violent threats against individual MP's are a valid reason to ignore convention and pressure the Commons to vote a certain way? Of course they are when national security at risk .surly you see that. So threats of violence against politicians will be fine to get a Labour Government to enact certain Laws.. ..yes that will work out well..  |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 23, 2024 7:47:27 GMT
the reasons about `safety ` dont really stack up though do they witch finder.? All labour had to do was either back the snp motion , or abstain. Surely the only risk from islamic extremism if that's whats being hinted at would have been if they had backed the governments motion of being against a ceasefire? What Islamic extremists he Could of been far -left pro Palestinian supporters Who March's corbyn went to . You lot don't half make false Accusation. Any mp who voted against the wishes of the pro Palestinian / or so called muslim extremists could potentially be subject to `safety issues`. The point is , the government motion was against ceasefire , so surely the tories are more open to abuse than labour mps? If labour politicians aren't up to the job of debating big issues as they are in fear and terror , then perhaps its time they were ejected from the house, and people with a bit more fucking backbone put in place to represent constituents. Imagine starmers lot running the government during the Second World War? They would have been running the white flag up the pole and welcoming ze germuns across the channel in the interests of safety as fast as they could. Its a pathetic risible excuse. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 23, 2024 7:52:46 GMT
Yes I am, and why not, the SNP motion was so worded as to divide the Labour Party ( purposely done ), if anyone was playing political games, it was the SNP. This is a moral issue, and leading MPs from all parties could have met to try and work out a united front from the British Parliament. Instead the Tories and SNP made it a political game It is not the purpose of the SNP to help the Labour Party. It was a Labour Party decision to ban their MP's from supporting the SNP motion - Starmer could have allowed a free vote and allowed his MP's to vote on their conscience. Lets be honest though pacifico , for commissar witch finder and his beloved Labour Party , democracy is just one big inconvenience. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 23, 2024 8:21:36 GMT
It is not the purpose of the SNP to help the Labour Party. It was a Labour Party decision to ban their MP's from supporting the SNP motion - Starmer could have allowed a free vote and allowed his MP's to vote on their conscience. Lets be honest though pacifico , for commissar witch finder and his beloved Labour Party , democracy is just one big inconvenience. There do seem to be several Labour Party supporters who find democracy inconvenient - even to the extent of defending intimidation by violent extremists. it's as though nothing should stand in the way of Starmer becoming PM - let alone democratic principles. |
|
|
|
Starmer
Feb 23, 2024 8:25:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Totheleft on Feb 23, 2024 8:25:52 GMT
It is not the purpose of the SNP to help the Labour Party. It was a Labour Party decision to ban their MP's from supporting the SNP motion - Starmer could have allowed a free vote and allowed his MP's to vote on their conscience. Lets be honest though pacifico , for commissar witch finder and his beloved Labour Party , democracy is just one big inconvenience. It's not the purpose of Scottish mats to help England it seems Talk about WW2 Renegade Scottish nationalists proposed an alliance with Germany in the second world war so as to set up a Scottish republic while England was under attack, documents released yesterday by the public record office reveal.9 May 2001 www.theguardian.com › may Scottish nationalists tried to forge Nazi alliance - The Guardian |
|
