[Ammi]

...its like pantomime....boooooo/cheer/hissssss/type thing...their egos are enjoying themselves and camping it up, while disregarding the potential dangerous impact of the words and terminology being used...

[arista]

[2015
I would knife Jeremy Corbyn in the front, not the back']

Labour's Jess Phillips
clip shown on BBC1 AM
as she has a book out.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...phillips-video

[arista]

Originally Posted by MTVN

So much for there being no threat of violence from the left

Yes Typical of the Violent Left Wing Protestors

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by arista

[2015
I would knife Jeremy Corbyn in the front, not the back']

Labour's Jess Phillips
clip shown on BBC1 AM
as she has a book out.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...phillips-video

The hypocrisy of those crying over what the PM said.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by arista

[2015
I would knife Jeremy Corbyn in the front, not the back']

Labour's Jess Phillips
clip shown on BBC1 AM
as she has a book out.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...phillips-video

Jess Phillips on the BBC, playing the victim, again.

Does she have a book to sell or something?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by MTVN

So much for there being no threat of violence from the left

I don't think any or many or saying there isn't or hasn't been.
I certainly haven't.

It would be nice to see your side condemning the threats from the right.
The same way they do whenever an instance is evident from the left.

As I always do.
No reservations.

Usually when those on the left are raising their fears of threats, and personalised death threats too.
It's derision they get.
With veiled defending of those fuelling divisions further rather than understanding what it means to have desth threats..

I even fear in part canvassing now.
I raised that the other day and it was either bypassed or derided.

I condemn any death threats or inflammatory language used to divide dangerously from whichever party or person it comes.
Always have, always will.

Many on the right, from what I've read, cannot claim doing so however.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

The hypocrisy of those crying over what the PM said.

And... Here's the best for example of only condemning someone on the left while defending some politician on the right.
Unbelievable.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Alf

Jess Phillips on the BBC, playing the victim, again.

Does she have a book to sell or something?

Yes they did not show the Cover of it.
Its Yellow in Color

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

And... Here's the best for example of only condemning someone on the left while defending some politician on the right.
Unbelievable.

People say all sorts of things Joey but surely its hypocrital to condemn someone for inciting violent behaviour when they are doing the same, its her that's been one of the most verbal about the PM, Of course its wrong for anyone to incite violence it depends on whether you believe they were, of course its wrong we just dont always agree on the wording or shout about it.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I don't think any or many or saying there isn't or hasn't been.
I certainly haven't.

It would be nice to see your side condemning the threats from the right.
The same way they do whenever an instance is evident from the left.

As I always do.
No reservations.

Usually when those on the left are raising their fears of threats, and personalised death threats too.
It's derision they get.
With veiled defending of those fuelling divisions further rather than understanding what it means to have desth threats..

I even fear in part canvassing now.
I raised that the other day and it was either bypassed or derided.

I condemn any death threats or inflammatory language used to divide dangerously from whichever party or person it comes.
Always have, always will.

Many on the right, from what I've read, cannot claim doing so however.

It has been said several times in this thread that it is not a 'both sides' issue as only one side is fuelling violence

I think there is a lot of dangerous language from the right particularly from extreme Brexiteers in orgs like Leave means Leave. I don't however think the PM has been guilty of that and I don't think there is an issue with a term like 'surrender' which is and has been used countless times in numerous different contexts

[Alf]

Originally Posted by MTVN

It has been said several times in this thread that it is not a 'both sides' issue as only one side is fuelling violence

I think there is a lot of dangerous language from the right particularly from extreme Brexiteers in orgs like Leave means Leave. I don't however think the PM has been guilty of that and I don't think there is an issue with a term like 'surrender' which is and has been used countless times in numerous different contexts

The language is far far less dangerous than trying to overturn the vote of the people of the United Kingdom. Now that's dangerous.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by MTVN

It has been said several times in this thread that it is not a 'both sides' issue as only one side is fuelling violence

I think there is a lot of dangerous language from the right particularly from extreme Brexiteers in orgs like Leave means Leave. I don't however think the PM has been guilty of that and I don't think there is an issue with a term like 'surrender' which is and has been used countless times in numerous different contexts

Well I disagree.

The word surrender means giving up or giving in.

When you apply that to a document and call it a surrender document/ bill.
You accuse all who supported is as cowards.

Johnson using the word surrender in that way is to fuel his presentation of dangerous division.
In that, ' more pro EU MPs against the people'.

When the vast majority DO wish to leave but ensure a deal.

All those MPs could make life easier for themselves in even their careers, by accepting even a no deal scenario.

They know the probable horrors and black uncertainty of a no deal.
So really have risked their political careers.

Far from surrending or being cowardly, they are the ones fighting for better.
Than just settling for the worst.

Johnson knows calling it a surrender bill, knows some extreme voters will look on all but him and his supporters, as cowards and betraying the people.

Which can have dangerously explosive results against those NOT supporting his stance.
Especially in the toxic political climate we are now in.

If you can't really see that, then really MTVN you absolutely surprise me.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Alf

The language is far far less dangerous than trying to overturn the vote of the people of the United Kingdom. Now that's dangerous.

don't get me wrong but maybe, just maybe in 2016 referendum vote, people didn't think it would actually get into this chaotic mess

brexit has only brought britain into chaos, so why should it be any better after a no deal on october 31st

this chaos itself is proof enough people made a wrong choice back in 2016


i'm still sticking with what i said months ago, brexit can never work when there is a too big divide of remainers and leavers, you'll Always get chaos

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Well I disagree.

The word surrender means giving up or giving in.

When you apply that to a document and call it a surrender document/ bill.
You accuse all who supported is as cowards.

Johnson using the word surrender in that way is to fuel his presentation of dangerous division.
In that, ' more pro EU MPs against the people'.

When the vast majority DO wish to leave but ensure a deal.

All those MPs could make life easier for themselves in even their careers, by accepting even a no deal scenario.

They know the probable horrors and black uncertainty of a no deal.
So really have risked their political careers.

Far from surrending or being cowardly, they are the ones fighting for better.
Than just settling for the worst.

Johnson knows calling it a surrender bill, knows some extreme voters will look on all but him and his supporters, as cowards and betraying the people.

Which can have dangerously explosive results against those NOT supporting his stance.
Especially in the toxic political climate we are now in.

If you can't really see that, then really MTVN you absolutely surprise me.

The bill requires us to agree to whatever length of extension the EU imposes on us thereby 'surrendering' control of the process to the EU - I think the terminology is appropriate

I could go through Hansard now and I'm sure I could find dozens of examples of MPs from all sides using the word about all kinds of legislation

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by MTVN

The bill requires us to agree to whatever length of extension the EU imposes on us thereby 'surrendering' control of the process to the EU - I think the terminology is appropriate

I could go through Hansard now and I'm sure I could find dozens of examples of MPs from all sides using the word about all kinds of legislation

That's not surrendering at all.

You can't even say the EU would insist on longer.
In any event it's not surrendering anyway.
Any deal struck at any time even 3 to 4 weeks into an extension, would bring thst extension to an end anyway when passed by Parliament.

One of the main problems with the EU is people like Farage saying we have surrendered powers to the EU for decades.

To now accuse MPs of all Parties, even throwing his own MPs out the party calling their votes to be for a surrender bill.
I repeat. If you can't see the ongoing division and danger from that word.
I'm surprised 100%.

I'd dare bet was a Corbyn Labour govt. planning a no deal exit and a Con led opposition was battling to ensure a deal.
It would still then be Labour surrendering in that scenario.

Anyway, Johnson knows full what he's saying and the divisions it can cause too.
I'd ssy any PM of any party using the terms he does, would know full well the same too.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

don't get me wrong but maybe, just maybe in 2016 referendum vote, people didn't think it would actually get into this chaotic mess

brexit has only brought britain into chaos, so why should it be any better after a no deal on october 31st

this chaos itself is proof enough people made a wrong choice back in 2016


i'm still sticking with what i said months ago, brexit can never work when there is a too big divide of remainers and leavers, you'll Always get chaos

It's only in chaos Nicky as MPs have made it that way .

[Alf]

Anybody seen the video doing the rounds on Twitter today of some Antifa thugs blocking an old couple from crossing the road and shouting "Nazi scum" in their face?

The old woman was on a walking frame, and when I say old, I mean old.

Not sure where or when the video is from, but whatever it is, it's disgusting.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

It's only in chaos Nicky as MPs have made it that way .

well i cannot disagree here, there hasn't been clarity at all in what all MPs want

they are against a no deal brexit

they had been against all of the deals first with May, now Boris

they are against revoking brexit and remaining in EU

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

don't get me wrong but maybe, just maybe in 2016 referendum vote, people didn't think it would actually get into this chaotic mess

brexit has only brought britain into chaos, so why should it be any better after a no deal on october 31st

this chaos itself is proof enough people made a wrong choice back in 2016


i'm still sticking with what i said months ago, brexit can never work when there is a too big divide of remainers and leavers, you'll Always get chaos

Which is why, the smoothest, easiest and least damaging way of leaving should be done.

Yes, on the referendum the vote was to leave.
Never with a serious no deal scenario.
Even via UKIP.

So those who only care that they'll be alright and to pot with everyone else.
Those seeing leaving at any cost to people and Nation, that is NOT the mandate of the referendum.
Yet just get it done their mantra, never mind the consequences.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Alf

Anybody seen the video doing the rounds on Twitter today of some Antifa thugs blocking an old couple from crossing the road and shouting "Nazi scum" in there face?

The old woman was on a walking frame, and when I say old, I mean old.

Not sure where or when the video is from, but whatever it is, it's disgusting.

Is this it Alf https://www.facebook.com/leaveeuoffi...0175409728666/

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Is this it Alf https://www.facebook.com/leaveeuoffi...0175409728666/

I ain't on Facebook, so I can't tell.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Alf

I ain't on Facebook, so I can't tell.

Its doing the rounds on FB,I don't know how to post a FB video on here Alf,but I'm sure its the one.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Its doing the rounds on FB,I don't know how to post a FB video on here Alf,but I'm sure its the one.

I think it's in Canada. Because in the video you can hear somebody say "this is Canada baby"

Old woman in a sky Blue coat?

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Alf

I think it's in Canada. Because in the video you can hear somebody say "this is Canada baby"

Old woman in a sky Blue coat?

Yes it's the one,digusting people ,masked aswell, cowards

[The Slim Reaper]

Yeah, that was appalling. Nothing gets people on your side like shouting at defenceless old folks. Just doesn't make any sense why they'd act like that in any situation.