|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:04:47 GMT
Now you are lying that I said Khan was plotting against Trump . And you seem to be too thick to differentiate between a balloon insulting the mayor and a balloon insulting a visiting POTUS . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:07:57 GMT
He was complicit in a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. Your dishonesty just merges into idiocy to pretend otherwise. Freedom of speech without the right to cause offence isn't freedom of speech. It was a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. You moron . It wasnt free speech . |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 22, 2024 12:12:42 GMT
Freedom of speech without the right to cause offence isn't freedom of speech. It was a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. You moron . It wasnt free speech . CORRECT - It was an insult to Donald Trump But in this country thats allowed, its called "protest" and thats allowed The fact that either Donald Trump, any of his supporters or any Americans or anyone else found it insulting is completely irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Aug 22, 2024 12:12:49 GMT
Yes it's clear Khan isn't a fan of Trump to say the least. He may well have privately endorsed the balloon, heck he may have been high fiving people over it behind closed doors. Then again maybe he didn't. I don't know because I've not heard any statements for or against the balloon made my Khan and permitting the balloon isn't in and of itself evidence of endorsement. He was complicit in a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. Your dishonesty just merges into idiocy to pretend otherwise. True, which is why there's no point continuing with it once it's established. They will worship and lie for Khan because he's one of theirs. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 22, 2024 12:13:08 GMT
Now you are lying that I said Khan was plotting against Trump . And you seem to be too thick to differentiate between a balloon insulting the mayor and a balloon insulting a visiting POTUS . Ok, so does the fact that Khan permitted the Khan balloon constitute irrefutable proof that he endorsed it? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 22, 2024 12:15:16 GMT
Freedom of speech without the right to cause offence isn't freedom of speech. It was a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. You moron . It wasnt free speech . So freedom of speech shouldn't include the right to insult? Trump hasn't exactly been a paragon of diplomatic virtue himself has he? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:16:22 GMT
It was a deliberate insult to a visiting POTUS. You moron . It wasnt free speech . CORRECT - It was an insult to Donald Trump But in this country thats allowed, its called "protest" and thats allowed The fact that either Donald Trump, any of his supporters or any Americans or anyone else found it insulting is completely irrelevant. Of course it was allowed. Khan allowed it . He isn’t that stupid to know that it would cause offence to the POTUS so we know that he endorsed it . iirc he had said some negative things about Trump before . Maybe you have bigger balls than the other two lefties and admit the obvious. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 22, 2024 12:26:49 GMT
CORRECT - It was an insult to Donald Trump But in this country thats allowed, its called "protest" and thats allowed The fact that either Donald Trump, any of his supporters or any Americans or anyone else found it insulting is completely irrelevant. Of course it was allowed. Khan allowed it . He isn’t that stupid to know that it would cause offence to the POTUS so we know that he endorsed it . iirc he had said some negative things about Trump before . Maybe you have bigger balls than the other two lefties and admit the obvious. No - He did not endorse it, a committee within the GLA authorised it, and authorising something is completely different to endorsing something. The protestors had no choice, the inflatable had to be approved by the City Operations Team Does the fact that The Metropolitan Police also granted permission mean that the Commissioner of The Metropolitan Police "endorsed" the inflatable for political reasons too. ? What about caricature's of Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher, Jeremy Corbyn, The King or the President of China which have often been used in protests. ? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:27:14 GMT
Now you are lying that I said Khan was plotting against Trump . And you seem to be too thick to differentiate between a balloon insulting the mayor and a balloon insulting a visiting POTUS . Ok, so does the fact that Khan permitted the Khan balloon constitute irrefutable proof that he endorsed it? Unless you are a moron there is a very strong possibility that he did . So you will be happy for me insist on ‘ irrefutable’ proof on anything you post in the future ? I’m quite happy to do that . |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 22, 2024 12:31:21 GMT
Of course it was allowed. Khan allowed it . He isn’t that stupid to know that it would cause offence to the POTUS so we know that he endorsed it . iirc he had said some negative things about Trump before . Maybe you have bigger balls than the other two lefties and admit the obvious. No - He did not endorse it, a committee within the GLA authorised it, and authorising something is completely different to endorsing something. The protestors had no choice, the inflatable had to be approved by the City Operations Team Does the fact that The Metropolitan Police also granted permission mean that the Commissioner of The Metropolitan Police "endorsed" the inflatable for political reasons too. ? What about caricature's of Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher, Jeremy Corbyn, The King or the President of China which have often been used in protests. ? Khan as Mayor of London had the authority to cancel the balloon on a number of grounds, health safety, offensive, had he given that instruction to not allow the balloon then the Met would have stopped the balloon and arrested those who did not comply with the order .... why can't you get it? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 22, 2024 12:33:59 GMT
Ok, so does the fact that Khan permitted the Khan balloon constitute irrefutable proof that he endorsed it? Unless you are a moron there is a very strong possibility that he did . So you will be happy for me insist on ‘ irrefutable’ proof on anything you post in the future ? I’m quite happy to do that . It's proof that he permitted it not endorsed it. We agree do we not that they aren't necessarily the same thing? Do you think Khan was wrong to permit the Khan balloon? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:38:11 GMT
Of course it was allowed. Khan allowed it . He isn’t that stupid to know that it would cause offence to the POTUS so we know that he endorsed it . iirc he had said some negative things about Trump before . Maybe you have bigger balls than the other two lefties and admit the obvious. No - He did not endorse it, a committee within the GLA authorised it, and authorising something is completely different to endorsing something. The protestors had no choice, the inflatable had to be approved by the City Operations Team Does the fact that The Metropolitan Police also granted permission mean that the Commissioner of The Metropolitan Police "endorsed" the inflatable for political reasons too. ? What about caricature's of Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher, Jeremy Corbyn, The King or the President of China which have often been used in protests. ? Oh dear. Another dishonest leftie too thick to recognise the difference between insulting UK politicians and insulting a visiting POTUS. The year before…( yes I know Khan wasn’t mayor) “Tiananmen Square survivor roughly tackled by police in London as he protested against the Chinese president has lodged a complaint with the Independent Police Complaints Commission over his treatment, which he suspects was part of an attempt to prevent legitimate protest. The complaint by Shao Jiang alleges police acted unlawfully by arresting him, detaining him, denying him a phone call, raiding his home and banning him from any further protest against Xi Jinping’s state visit on 21 October. It alleges there is evidence that the police operation surrounding Xi’s visit went beyond guaranteeing the safety of a head of state and included a crackdown on human rights protests, because of a fear they could harm diplomatic and business relations with China.” www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/08/xi-jinping-protester-files-complaint-police-watchdog-shao-jiang-unlawful-state-visit-chinese-president?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 22, 2024 12:39:55 GMT
Unless you are a moron there is a very strong possibility that he did . So you will be happy for me insist on ‘ irrefutable’ proof on anything you post in the future ? I’m quite happy to do that . It's proof that he permitted it not endorsed it. We agree do we not that they aren't necessarily the same thing? Do you think Khan was wrong to permit the Khan balloon? So you are happy for me to insist on irrefutable proof of anything you post in future ? Don’t run away ..😁 |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 22, 2024 12:41:47 GMT
It's proof that he permitted it not endorsed it. We agree do we not that they aren't necessarily the same thing? Do you think Khan was wrong to permit the Khan balloon? So you are happy for me to insist on irrefutable proof of anything you post in future ? Don’t run away ..😁 If I make a claim about an action by a third party then yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 22, 2024 12:42:08 GMT
Unless you are a moron there is a very strong possibility that he did . So you will be happy for me insist on ‘ irrefutable’ proof on anything you post in the future ? I’m quite happy to do that . It's proof that he permitted it not endorsed it. We agree do we not that they aren't necessarily the same thing? Do you think Khan was wrong to permit the Khan balloon? Tell you what, if Harris becomes the next US President we'll make a Harris Giant Baby balloon with a dummy in her mouth ..... Khan would have it instantly stopped on the grounds of racism and offensive to a US President, 100% guaranteed ... and that's the difference. |
|
