Jump to content

The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, bickster said:

Wouldn't that require the recognition of parties beyond it's current scope and therefore disadvantage independent candidates further than they already are.  It would also mean a fundamental change in election laws.This would appear to be opening Pandora's box tbh. I suspect if they ever miraculously get into power, this one will be quietly forgotten especially as any MP that may want to join Labour not leave would be similarly disadvantaged and probably wouldn't bother. This has more cons than pros

This is definitely more jerk than knee

Jeremy "Broad Church" Corbyn at it again.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile someone thought it was a good idea to let Derek Hatton back into the Labour party. It took someone about two seconds to find several antisemitic tweets he published over several years and you wonder why people think that Corbyn has let this issue slip. Previous leaders of the Labour party have not let him back in. Corbyn and his sort thought it was great timing to do it now.

I can't find the tweets as they were hurriedly taken down but the jist of them were the Jews need to take responsibility for what Israel does. 

Edit: too late

Edited by magnkarl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I'm not going to shed any tears over her being kept out, but I think he's right to object to British citizens being stripped of their citizenships and kept out of the country at the whim of the home secretary. Is this not something that ought to require judicial oversight? We typically require someone to be found guilty of a crime before such punishments, whereas this seems like a knee jerk reaction based on tabloid outrage.

Sometimes the right thing isn't the popular thing.

I'd have no objection of that if the reasons she left were not the ones she left for. She is not welcome here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I'd have no objection of that if the reasons she left were not the ones she left for. She is not welcome here. 

Dem, I understand your sentiments and I'd say the vast majority of people probably agree with you.*

But can you see any possible danger in politicians being able to ignore international law and decide who's British and who isn't?

 

 

* my nipper is in 6th form, 15 of them had a group discussion on this yesterday and decided 15 to zero that she can stay where she is. .

Edited by chrisp65
added awesome nugget
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I'd have no objection of that if the reasons she left were not the ones she left for. She is not welcome here. 

She has to be welcome here, you're missing the point, she's ours and no-one else's (I use the word welcome to mean be allowed back in, not with open arms). This is International Law.

That we may choose to incarcerate her for her crimes is a completely different matter (or any other course of action applicable), I'm also not sure we have to aid her return but should she turn up at our border we cannot refuse her entry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had non-British parents I would be concerned about the Begum case.

I would also be concerned at the precedent set where we end up saddled with a wrong'un who's dad happened to be British but had never had anything to do with the country.

And that's without even considering the fact that removing citizen is dodgy as ****.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Corbyn saying this IS traitor should be brought back and given support. 

What a great leader he will be 

A leader that wouldn't get involved in oil wars and regime changes in the first place.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bickster said:

She has to be welcome here, you're missing the point, she's ours and no-one else's (I use the word welcome to mean be allowed back in, not with open arms). This is International Law.

That we may choose to incarcerate her for her crimes is a completely different matter (or any other course of action applicable), I'm also not sure we have to aid her return but should she turn up at our border we cannot refuse her entry

But she married in Syria doesn’t that make her a Syrian citizen .? Who comes up with these stupid laws she has no rights in my view right do wring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â