Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2020


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Im pretty sure there are no images out there of former labour leaders with Jimmy Saville though? Surely not. Or worse still details of dinner parties held by any former labour prime minister were Saville was on the guest list....

I guess whataboutery could go on and on.

Indeed. Not just politicians were happy to break bread though. 

image-11-for-the-real-jimmy-saville-gallery-86756199.jpg

savile%20and%20prince%20charles.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Angry Ram said:

That’s hardly a home for all those Brexit voting reds.

Starmer is a big brexit supporter then? 

Why are you still bashing on about brexit? You won, get over it! Besides, we've left. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, bigbadbob said:

 

Great, Well done. 

Do try to keep up bobby...this threads already moved on to Savile bribing Thatcher to get a knighthood (there’s even a picture of him passing her a cheque). Apparently Savile may also have bribed Stammer with a million quid to avoid prosecution. Somehow the pope is involved.

You couldn’t make it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

Very true, but if economists like David Blanchflower are to be believed, unemployment in the second quarter of 2020 will be at least 20%, which takes us back to 1932. The future will be very different indeed.

At least we have learned that it is the health and care workers and emergency services that are important, not the hedge fund managers and tax dodgers that our politicians have been so eager to serve in the past.

And if it is .. I think you might right by the way,

Then our flexible system will work to finding a solution. Ideologues and followers of mantras always fail because they are inflexible. .. we won’t be able to wave a magic wand. If the boat is leaking then things will get wet. But with decent leadership and a much healthier inclusive opposition the situation will improve. 
 

The extremes of Britain first and Momentum are so lost in their own self righteousness, ignorance and prejudice that they cannot see how stupid they are. (He says as he puts his tin hat on) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that’s it then .. let’s all get in our respective bunkers and fire told you so na na ..na na na at each other. Thatcher and Corbyn perfect garbage. 

I’m with the 70% of balanced folk who might disagree over detail and nuance but know that in the end you have to work with someone to arrive at a sensible strategy

as to the remaining 30 %  - equally dived on either end of the political spectrum ... AKA   “I AM RIGHT and will not budge you are the antichrist” .. I just laugh. The only value of an extreme is to counter act another extreme. Where we are now as a society and what it largely agrees on is not an extreme. So all the shouters, revolutionaries and bigots ... your losing. Reason, compromise and sense is winning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Starmer is a big brexit supporter then? 

Why are you still bashing on about brexit? You won, get over it! Besides, we've left. 

So point proved, he won’t unite the Labour Party. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BriggRam said:

Labours new leader 

In 2009, the paedophile Jimmy Savile was interviewed under caution by police in Surrey and Sussex. Subsequently, the police referred 4 cases to the CPS alleging that Jimmy Savile had abused 3 girls under the age of 16. 

The CPS, after receiving the files from the police, refused to prosecute Savile and dropped the case claiming ‘insufficient evidence’’. 

After Savile’s death, and despite multiple attempts of high level cover ups, we now know that he abused up to 500 victims over a four-decade period.

The man in charge of the CPS at the time, that decided there was 'insufficient evidence' to charge Savile, is the new Millionaire Leader of the Labour Party 

SIR KIER STARMER.

Desperate stuff. Did you do this incredible research yourself or are you on some vigilante facebook group and go round beating up paediatricians.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

Desperate stuff. Did you do this incredible research yourself or are you on some vigilante facebook group and go round beating up paediatricians.

 

Vigilante Facebook group....... Still true tho

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BriggRam said:

Labours new leader 

In 2009, the paedophile Jimmy Savile was interviewed under caution by police in Surrey and Sussex. Subsequently, the police referred 4 cases to the CPS alleging that Jimmy Savile had abused 3 girls under the age of 16. 

The CPS, after receiving the files from the police, refused to prosecute Savile and dropped the case claiming ‘insufficient evidence’’. 

After Savile’s death, and despite multiple attempts of high level cover ups, we now know that he abused up to 500 victims over a four-decade period.

The man in charge of the CPS at the time, that decided there was 'insufficient evidence' to charge Savile, is the new Millionaire Leader of the Labour Party 

SIR KIER STARMER.

As a point of factual accuracy,  Keir Starmer was the DPP and as such accountable to parliament for the performance of the whole CPS, which is a branch of the civil service not a political appointment. 

Decisions about whether to bring cases forward for prosecution or not are taken by regional Chief Prosecutors, not by the DPP. 

In the case to which you refer, it was widely reported at the time that none of the 4 victims were prepared to support a prosecution. So they would not act as witnesses. 

As the CPS first has to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction first and foremost, a reasonable person might conclude that proving guilt in a 30-40 year old offence, without the principal witnesses might be somewhat challenging. 

So the Surrey Chief Prosecutor decided not to prosecute. Keir Starmer reviewed all the evidence leading to this decision in 2011 and concluded it was legally correct. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

As a point of factual accuracy,  Keir Starmer was the DPP and as such accountable to parliament for the performance of the whole CPS, which is a branch of the civil service not a political appointment. 

Decisions about whether to bring cases forward for prosecution or not are taken by regional Chief Prosecutors, not by the DPP. 

In the case to which you refer, it was widely reported at the time that none of the 4 victims were prepared to support a prosecution. So they would not act as witnesses. 

As the CPS first has to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction first and foremost, a reasonable person might conclude that proving guilt in a 30-40 year old offence, without the principal witnesses might be somewhat challenging. 

So the Surrey Chief Prosecutor decided not to prosecute. Keir Starmer reviewed all the evidence leading to this decision in 2011 and concluded it was legally correct. 

@BriggRam 0 @Van der MoodHoover 6

Shame you had to waste your time replying to moronic posts like this, but good work.

Worth remembering though, the right wing papers will presumably try similar smears if Starmer suggests anything that might slightly dent the vast fortunes of corporate tax evaders or the mega rich. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BriggRam said:

Vigilante Facebook group....... Still true tho

My made up facts about the sort of places you copy your investigations from probably contained more truth than the garbage post you made on here.

Hilarious that you chose Savile to attack Starmer on too, what with his well documented friendship with top Tories and Royals, whom I presume you and your vigilante friends idolise.

Edited by ariotofmyown
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.