[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jet

That is nothing to do with what is being asked. I just want an answer to this question as do others:

So in future, the rules are that if a politician or party is being discussed in a critical way, using inflammatory language, it isn't allowed to bring another into it for comparison purposes as they have no relevance and the people should just suck up the inflammatory language, is that right?
Sounds like a blog to me with the comments section closed.

Your example doesn't reflect the reality of that thread.

People weren't making comparisons, they were basically saying that you can't have a negative opinion about Reese Moggs when 'Corbyn is a supporter and friend to terrorists who deliberately and indiscriminately murdered children and babies' that quote was directly from you, btw.

That thread was a thread about one politician's voting history but it was on the verge of descending into the typical mud slinging match that ruins many threads on this section, that is why those posts were deleted, they were mostly unrelated to the topic at hand. If you wanted to make a comparison about voting histories of both politicians to draw conclusions and parallels between the politicians then that wouldn't have been deleted. Those posts got deleted mostly because they were simply meant to derail the thread from the original discussion.

Plus if you want to go on about Corbyn murdering babies then you've already got this lovely nine page thread to do it in. Why turn every thread into the same argument that you've been having in this one for weeks? It's pointless for every topic to eventually turn into the same old argument.