|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 20, 2024 13:25:57 GMT
I agree that he permitted it. However that's very different from FS's accusation that he should be sacked for making it. Permitting something to happen isn't an endorsement either. Of course permitting it is an endorsement ffs. Is it? Every single person who genuinely believes in free speech is in favor of permitting people to say or express things they don't endorse. Governments permit opposition parties to broadcast party political broadcasts doesn't mean they endorse the message. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 20, 2024 14:38:49 GMT
Of course permitting it is an endorsement ffs. Is it? Every single person who genuinely believes in free speech is in favor of permitting people to say or express things they don't endorse. Governments permit opposition parties to broadcast party political broadcasts doesn't mean they endorse the message. Yes. What party political message did the balloon broadcast ? What party did the message support ? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 20, 2024 15:31:13 GMT
Khan has incompetently presided over a rise in knife crime exacerbated by a failure to stop and search. It is time for him to go. This is the issue - Khan has failed on every area of his responsibility in London. He is simply trying to move attention away from his domestic failures. I see his latest daft idea is rent controls - a policy that has failed everywhere else in the world it has been tried. But that will not stop him... 'Rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city — except for bombing'
Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck |
|
|
|
Post by wassock on Aug 20, 2024 15:37:55 GMT
Sadiq Khan says he worries about a surge in hate towards his family if Donald Trump returns as US president - and he tells Labour they 'shouldn't pretend' they're not supporting Kamala Harris
The little racist should have thought of that when he was making Giant baby balloons of Trump in a nappy, why he wasn't dismissed from the Labour party then, I'll never know.
Unfortunately, the idiots in London keep electing him. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 20, 2024 15:42:47 GMT
Sadiq Khan says he worries about a surge in hate towards his family if Donald Trump returns as US president - and he tells Labour they 'shouldn't pretend' they're not supporting Kamala Harris
The little racist should have thought of that when he was making Giant baby balloons of Trump in a nappy, why he wasn't dismissed from the Labour party then, I'll never know.
Unfortunately, the idiots in London keep electing him. Hmmm... No.
As with the current government, only about 1 in 6 of the electorate voted Khan.
The majority voted "None of the above".
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 20, 2024 15:44:06 GMT
Anyways, I am quite enjoying watching Labour shit in their own hands and clap. There's going to be a whole lot of chickens coming home to roost.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Aug 20, 2024 15:48:57 GMT
Unfortunately, the idiots in London keep electing him. Hmmm... No.
As with the current government, only about 1 in 6 of the electorate voted Khan.
The majority voted "None of the above".
Abolish the mayor's job. Abolish the London Assembly. Have the same laws for London as the rest of the country.
Oh and get rid of those bloody ULEZ cameras.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 20, 2024 15:50:19 GMT
Hmmm... No.
As with the current government, only about 1 in 6 of the electorate voted Khan.
The majority voted "None of the above".
Abolish the mayor's job. Abolish the London Assembly. Have the same laws for London as the rest of the country.
Oh and get rid of those bloody ULEZ cameras.
I completely agree, indeed Mrs Thatch pretty much did.
And then Twunty B'liar brought it back again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 20, 2024 15:59:54 GMT
It beggars belief that Labour have banged on and on and on about being the 'party of the poor', and if they got in to power they'd level it all up, having the audacity to say under the Tories the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
They get in to power and attack the most vulnerable in society the pensioners, how the fuck can they be the party for the poor, and how Starmer can dare show his face after attacking the Tories over austerity cuts it beyond words. The Tories are starting to look like the party for the poor FFS.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 20, 2024 17:03:50 GMT
I agree that he permitted it. However that's very different from FS's accusation that he should be sacked for making it. Permitting something to happen isn't an endorsement either. Of course permitting it is an endorsement ffs. Permitting something and endorsing it are not the same, though they are related concepts. - **Permitting** something means allowing it to happen or not taking action to prevent it. When you permit something, you acknowledge that it can occur, but you aren't necessarily expressing approval or support for it. It can simply mean you are tolerating or accepting it as permissible under certain rules or circumstances. - **Endorsing** something, on the other hand, means actively supporting, approving, or recommending it. Endorsement is a stronger statement that indicates agreement with or advocacy for the thing in question. In essence, permission is more passive, while endorsement is active. You can permit something without endorsing it, meaning you allow it to happen without necessarily agreeing with or supporting it. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 20, 2024 17:10:11 GMT
Of course permitting it is an endorsement ffs. Permitting something and endorsing it are not the same, though they are related concepts. - **Permitting** something means allowing it to happen or not taking action to prevent it. When you permit something, you acknowledge that it can occur, but you aren't necessarily expressing approval or support for it. It can simply mean you are tolerating or accepting it as permissible under certain rules or circumstances. - **Endorsing** something, on the other hand, means actively supporting, approving, or recommending it. Endorsement is a stronger statement that indicates agreement with or advocacy for the thing in question. In essence, permission is more passive, while endorsement is active. You can permit something without endorsing it, meaning you allow it to happen without necessarily agreeing with or supporting it. Bollocks. Allowing the POTUS to be insulted and subject to ridicule was not a passive act. Don’t insult your own intelligence by posting this shit. I thought little hornet posted utter crap by comparing it with allowing party political broadcasts but you have even supposed that . |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 20, 2024 17:12:36 GMT
I didn't write that. I retrieved it for your benefit to help you understand. Up to you whether you accept it or not. I'm not going to argue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 20, 2024 17:16:58 GMT
Of course permitting it is an endorsement ffs. Permitting something and endorsing it are not the same, though they are related concepts. - **Permitting** something means allowing it to happen or not taking action to prevent it. When you permit something, you acknowledge that it can occur, but you aren't necessarily expressing approval or support for it. It can simply mean you are tolerating or accepting it as permissible under certain rules or circumstances. - **Endorsing** something, on the other hand, means actively supporting, approving, or recommending it. Endorsement is a stronger statement that indicates agreement with or advocacy for the thing in question. In essence, permission is more passive, while endorsement is active. You can permit something without endorsing it, meaning you allow it to happen without necessarily agreeing with or supporting it. We aren't mincing words, Khan laughed thought it was amusing, he had the power to stop it, but chose not to, the fact he permitted it to go ahead.... so you don't like the word **Endorsing** so we'll use one you might like.
permitting permitted;
Synonyms of permit
transitive verb
1
: to consent to expressly or formally
permit access to records
2
: to give leave : authorize
3
: to make possible
Take your pick ^^^
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 20, 2024 17:27:30 GMT
I didn't write that. I retrieved it for your benefit to help you understand. Up to you whether you accept it or not. I'm not going to argue. That’s exactly what you wrote. Either you are so thick that you believe the mayor of London allowing the POTUS to be openly ridiculed is a ‘ passive ‘ or you think that we are thick enough to believe it . |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 20, 2024 18:19:24 GMT
I didn't write that. I retrieved it for your benefit to help you understand. Up to you whether you accept it or not. I'm not going to argue. That’s exactly what you wrote. Either you are so thick that you believe the mayor of London allowing the POTUS to be openly ridiculed is a ‘ passive ‘ or you think that we are thick enough to believe it . No, I'm saying I didn't write it, I retrieved it for you. I.E. the construct was not my own, but I relayed it "as is". Whether you "believe" it or not is entirely up to you. |
|
