UK general election

[brocktonblockbust]

Corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the UK election you f*** wit

Corbyn.

And so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what I said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then I have

[Dark Lord Al]

Corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the UK election you f*** wit

Corbyn.

And so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what I said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then I have

Corbyn is nothing more than a professional liberal mature student ponce.

[Beanz]

Corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the UK election you f*** wit

Corbyn.

And so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what I said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then I have

Corbyn is nothing more than a professional liberal mature student ponce.

Who are you going to vote for then Al?

[El Kabong]

Corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the UK election you f*** wit

Corbyn.

And so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what I said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then I have

Corbyn is nothing more than a professional liberal mature student ponce.

Who are you going to vote for then Al?

Ummm for who he damn well pleases would be my guess there Nosey Nancy

[Beanz]

Yes @El Kabong of course Al is keenly aware and seeing things realistically for what they are. It goes without saying, but good you mentioned Al so as to be 100% clear in that: AL IS A CREDIT AND A GREAT PATRIOTIC ASSET TO HIS COUNTRY AND A GREAT EXAMPLE TO HIS FELLOW COUNTRYMEN.

Contrary to what both you and Lyle keep telling us, there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being left wing. In fact in this country the majority of the press and media are owned by non tax paying foreign billionaires

1. Lord Rothermere, a billionaire living in France, owns the Mail, Mail on Sunday, and the Metro.
2. Rupert Murdoch, a billionaire living in Australia, owns the Sun, Sun on Sunday and is the man behind Fox News, BSkyB, News Corp, etc, etc.
3. Alexander and Evgeny (son) Lebedev, an Ex KGB Russian Billionaire, owns The Independent, Independent on Sunday, The Evening Standard.
4. Richard Desmond, a billionaire, owns the Daily Star, Sunday Star, Daily Express, Sunday Express.
5. David and Frederick Barclay, billionaire brothers living on a private island near Saark, own the Telegraph, The Spectator, and the Business.
   
   So actually subscribing to the crap that these rags publish is far from being patriotic. It's just as daft as believing that Teresa May the supposedly "Strong and Stable " Prime minister is more likely to crack down on extremists or keep us safe. She was the home secretary who cut thousands of front line Police and support teams from our streets. She is also the prime minister who just returned from visiting the Saudis just like Trump.
   
   
   
   Just because I do not subscribe to your ill informed outside view in which you think it is fine to share leaked photographs all over the forum and insist people conform to your ideas of what real is, (yeah think about that one) do not presume you can speak for anybody else on the forum.
   
   
   

[Master]

corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the uk election you f*** wit

corbyn.

and so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what i said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then i have

corbyn is nothing more than a professional liberal mature student ponce.

who are you going to vote for then al?

ukip

[El Kabong]

Yes @El Kabong of course Al is keenly aware and seeing things realistically for what they are. It goes without saying, but good you mentioned Al so as to be 100% clear in that: AL IS A CREDIT AND A GREAT PATRIOTIC ASSET TO HIS COUNTRY AND A GREAT EXAMPLE TO HIS FELLOW COUNTRYMEN.

Contrary to what both you and Lyle keep telling us, there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being left wing. In fact in this country the majority of the press and media are owned by non tax paying foreign billionaires

1. Lord Rothermere, a billionaire living in France, owns the Mail, Mail on Sunday, and the Metro.
2. Rupert Murdoch, a billionaire living in Australia, owns the Sun, Sun on Sunday and is the man behind Fox News, BSkyB, News Corp, etc, etc.
3. Alexander and Evgeny (son) Lebedev, an Ex KGB Russian Billionaire, owns The Independent, Independent on Sunday, The Evening Standard.
4. Richard Desmond, a billionaire, owns the Daily Star, Sunday Star, Daily Express, Sunday Express.
5. David and Frederick Barclay, billionaire brothers living on a private island near Saark, own the Telegraph, The Spectator, and the Business.
   
   So actually subscribing to the crap that these rags publish is far from being patriotic. It's just as daft as believing that Teresa May the supposedly "Strong and Stable " Prime minister is more likely to crack down on extremists or keep us safe. She was the home secretary who cut thousands of front line Police and support teams from our streets. She is also the prime minister who just returned from visiting the Saudis just like Trump.
   
   
   
   Just because I do not subscribe to your ill informed outside view in which you think it is fine to share leaked photographs all over the forum and insist people conform to your ideas of what real is, (yeah think about that one) do not presume you can speak for anybody else on the forum.
   
   
   

Soooo ok, "there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being left wing" so there are patriotic left wingers? & "In fact in this country the majority of the press and media are owned by non tax paying foreign billionaires" ....and those guys are all right wingers?


What do you say about guys like oooh I don't know George Soros? What do you think of him? He's left wing, and boy was he ever patriotic he's SO patriotic that he helped the Nazis kill his fellow Jews.....such a patriot that guy.....oh and on a lark he broke the Bank of England too!

[Beanz]

Yes @El Kabong of course Al is keenly aware and seeing things realistically for what they are. It goes without saying, but good you mentioned Al so as to be 100% clear in that: AL IS A CREDIT AND A GREAT PATRIOTIC ASSET TO HIS COUNTRY AND A GREAT EXAMPLE TO HIS FELLOW COUNTRYMEN.

Contrary to what both you and Lyle keep telling us, there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being left wing. In fact in this country the majority of the press and media are owned by non tax paying foreign billionaires

1. Lord Rothermere, a billionaire living in France, owns the Mail, Mail on Sunday, and the Metro.
2. Rupert Murdoch, a billionaire living in Australia, owns the Sun, Sun on Sunday and is the man behind Fox News, BSkyB, News Corp, etc, etc.
3. Alexander and Evgeny (son) Lebedev, an Ex KGB Russian Billionaire, owns The Independent, Independent on Sunday, The Evening Standard.
4. Richard Desmond, a billionaire, owns the Daily Star, Sunday Star, Daily Express, Sunday Express.
5. David and Frederick Barclay, billionaire brothers living on a private island near Saark, own the Telegraph, The Spectator, and the Business.So actually subscribing to the crap that these rags publish is far from being patriotic. It's just as daft as believing that Teresa May the supposedly "Strong and Stable " Prime minister is more likely to crack down on extremists or keep us safe. She was the home secretary who cut thousands of front line Police and support teams from our streets. She is also the prime minister who just returned from visiting the Saudis just like Trump.Just because I do not subscribe to your ill informed outside view in which you think it is fine to share leaked photographs all over the forum and insist people conform to your ideas of what real is, (yeah think about that one) do not presume you can speak for anybody else on the forum.

Soooo ok, "there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being left wing" so there are patriotic left wingers? & "In fact in this country the majority of the press and media are owned by non tax paying foreign billionaires" ....and those guys are all right wingers?What do you say about guys like oooh I don't know George Soros? What do you think of him? He's left wing, and boy was he ever patriotic he's SO patriotic that he helped the Nazis kill his fellow Jews.....such a patriot that guy.....oh and on a lark he broke the Bank of England too!

Yes they are ALL right wing newspapers, owners and media. I have said this before but you seem to refuse to believe it.

[brocktonblockbust]

Beanz why do you ~skirt~ all or most of Lyle's questions?

[Beanz]

Also I know Soros had a Jewish father and I have a Jewish Father but he is not British and has nothing to do with the UK election. Try reading something other than Brietbart and watching something other than Infowars Lyle. Start a thread on him if you like but please try and keep this thread about the UK election or just don't bother posting in it if you cannot. Plenty of other threads.

[Beanz]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a7752706.html"Tragic terror attacks like that in Manchester, inspiring fear and anger, often drive voters to back the incumbent. It is ironic then that one of the essential long-term solutions to the terror threat lies within the foreign policy agenda articulated by leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. In articulating his international vision at Chatham House, Corbyn went on the front foot, laying out a comprehensive vision for Britain’s place in an insecure world. Seeking to throw off the caricature-like branding of him as an ageing hippy, Corbyn’s approach evinced the rational thinking of a seasoned observer of global politics. Corbyn has been on the right side of history since he began his long political career, and his response to terrorism inspired by events in the Middle East is no different. Corbyn has been astute enough to realise the link between Western interventions in the Middle East and the terror threat emanating from the region. This is a link which is rarely discussed except in dismissive terms due to a form of right wing political correctness. As such, his approach targets some of the root factors driving terror ideology and facilitating the conditions under which terror spreads. It is also the most cost-effective method, important given the apparent lack of funds available for other policy areas like the NHS and the elderly.Corbyn opposed the ill-fated regime changes in Iraq and Libya. He questioned the justifications when it was unpopular to do so. He was right. He warned of the repercussions. He was right. There is no longer any debate that both of these helped provide the space, motivation and chaos for extremist groups to thrive. Isis of course would not even exist if not for the Iraq War, and Al Qaeda would have less recruits. With regard to Libya, a 2016 report by the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee stated that the intervention was based on “erroneous assumptions”, not on accurate intelligence."In holding these views, Corbyn is in tune with the ‘intervention-fatigue’ and anti-regime change sentiment that has grown alongside the anti-establishment wave sweeping the West. This has been harnessed by those from the far right like Le Pen and the alt right, libertarians like Rand Paul, and other maverick left-leaners like Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard and Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Donald Trump himself used it as a club to beat opponents like Jeb Bush and Clinton. Corbyn even went close to joining the dots between the refugee crisis and interventions in the Middle East, something successfully exploited by Nigel Farage. Even some of the staunchest supporters of expansive anti-terror laws domestically oppose continued interventionism overseas. When addressing Chatham House, Corbyn clarified that questioning interventionism does not make him a “pacifist”, the vague but guffaw-triggering label studiously pinned on him by the mainstream media. Challenging the amnesia that pervades public debates over war, Corbyn provided a historical perspective including WWII, the Cold War, Vietnam, and the post-Cold War promise. Stating that military action, as a last resort and under international law, is sometimes necessary, he aligned with what most members of the public would consider reasonable, and what most countries officially support. The Labour Leader seems to understand that a multipronged approach is necessary to combat extremism, from military actions, to policing, to mental health services.Corbyn has also drawn attention to the double standards which undermine the West’s image around the world. His speech noted the inconsistency of Tory intervention enthusiasts given the party’s unwillingness to impose sanctions on apartheid South Africa, a cause which Corbyn himself was arrested while fighting for. He has also identified situations of mass carnage, such as Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, where intervention could have been justified but which were ignored due to vested interests. Throughout his speech, Corbyn included anecdotes of his travel to some of the world’s worst conflict-zones, a subtle message that he’s not a social justice warrior snowflake but a man whose view is informed by seeing the real effects of war.The Labour leader has promised an ethical foreign policy committing not only to consistently applying human rights (which already receive much attention), but also to addressing massive levels of inequality which should garner more focus. Targeted and working alongside other measures, this would enhance the West’s image and further weaken the drivers that enable terror groups to garner new recruits.Corbyn has offered a sober, carefully considered approach to international security, free of the jingoism and political correctness that dominates this important policy area. Attacks at home show clearly that the status quo, spending millions on increasing security at home while spending billions on wars that spread insecurity overseas, is not working. Just like in economic policy, Corbyn’s non-interventionist approach may be lampooned by the mainstream media but is based on rational insights and values, and increasingly reflects the views of the population.

Anyone else..thoughts?

[El Kabong]

Also I know Soros had a Jewish father and I have a Jewish Father but he is not British and has nothing to do with the UK election. Try reading something other than Brietbart and watching something other than Infowars Lyle. Start a thread on him if you like but please try and keep this thread about the UK election or just don't bother posting in it if you cannot. Plenty of other threads.

Thank you for answering my questions.....I appreciate it.

You brought up the guys who own the tabloid rags, I brought up Soros and if you assume that he has 0 to do with politics in your country, then you sir are sadly mistaken. George Soros and his Open Society Foundations are BIG time into the European Union and therefore they'd love nothing more than for England to never trigger article 50 and for the Brexit referendum to be forgotten about.



But I suppose you will carry on your merry way

[Gandalf]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a7752706.html"Tragic terror attacks like that in Manchester, inspiring fear and anger, often drive voters to back the incumbent. It is ironic then that one of the essential long-term solutions to the terror threat lies within the foreign policy agenda articulated by leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. In articulating his international vision at Chatham House, Corbyn went on the front foot, laying out a comprehensive vision for Britain’s place in an insecure world. Seeking to throw off the caricature-like branding of him as an ageing hippy, Corbyn’s approach evinced the rational thinking of a seasoned observer of global politics. Corbyn has been on the right side of history since he began his long political career, and his response to terrorism inspired by events in the Middle East is no different. Corbyn has been astute enough to realise the link between Western interventions in the Middle East and the terror threat emanating from the region. This is a link which is rarely discussed except in dismissive terms due to a form of right wing political correctness. As such, his approach targets some of the root factors driving terror ideology and facilitating the conditions under which terror spreads. It is also the most cost-effective method, important given the apparent lack of funds available for other policy areas like the NHS and the elderly.Corbyn opposed the ill-fated regime changes in Iraq and Libya. He questioned the justifications when it was unpopular to do so. He was right. He warned of the repercussions. He was right. There is no longer any debate that both of these helped provide the space, motivation and chaos for extremist groups to thrive. Isis of course would not even exist if not for the Iraq War, and Al Qaeda would have less recruits. With regard to Libya, a 2016 report by the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee stated that the intervention was based on “erroneous assumptions”, not on accurate intelligence."In holding these views, Corbyn is in tune with the ‘intervention-fatigue’ and anti-regime change sentiment that has grown alongside the anti-establishment wave sweeping the West. This has been harnessed by those from the far right like Le Pen and the alt right, libertarians like Rand Paul, and other maverick left-leaners like Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard and Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Donald Trump himself used it as a club to beat opponents like Jeb Bush and Clinton. Corbyn even went close to joining the dots between the refugee crisis and interventions in the Middle East, something successfully exploited by Nigel Farage. Even some of the staunchest supporters of expansive anti-terror laws domestically oppose continued interventionism overseas. When addressing Chatham House, Corbyn clarified that questioning interventionism does not make him a “pacifist”, the vague but guffaw-triggering label studiously pinned on him by the mainstream media. Challenging the amnesia that pervades public debates over war, Corbyn provided a historical perspective including WWII, the Cold War, Vietnam, and the post-Cold War promise. Stating that military action, as a last resort and under international law, is sometimes necessary, he aligned with what most members of the public would consider reasonable, and what most countries officially support. The Labour Leader seems to understand that a multipronged approach is necessary to combat extremism, from military actions, to policing, to mental health services.Corbyn has also drawn attention to the double standards which undermine the West’s image around the world. His speech noted the inconsistency of Tory intervention enthusiasts given the party’s unwillingness to impose sanctions on apartheid South Africa, a cause which Corbyn himself was arrested while fighting for. He has also identified situations of mass carnage, such as Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, where intervention could have been justified but which were ignored due to vested interests. Throughout his speech, Corbyn included anecdotes of his travel to some of the world’s worst conflict-zones, a subtle message that he’s not a social justice warrior snowflake but a man whose view is informed by seeing the real effects of war.The Labour leader has promised an ethical foreign policy committing not only to consistently applying human rights (which already receive much attention), but also to addressing massive levels of inequality which should garner more focus. Targeted and working alongside other measures, this would enhance the West’s image and further weaken the drivers that enable terror groups to garner new recruits.Corbyn has offered a sober, carefully considered approach to international security, free of the jingoism and political correctness that dominates this important policy area. Attacks at home show clearly that the status quo, spending millions on increasing security at home while spending billions on wars that spread insecurity overseas, is not working. Just like in economic policy, Corbyn’s non-interventionist approach may be lampooned by the mainstream media but is based on rational insights and values, and increasingly reflects the views of the population.

Anyone else..thoughts?

The Independent was strongly against Corbyn but something has changed lately. The article articulates alot of my own views. Corbyn is the perfect antidote to the poison of the blinkered and failed right.

[brocktonblockbust]

Corbyn is a weakling Kumbaya piece of Jack Rabbit Shit.

[Dark Lord Al]

Corbin wants open borders. That's all you need to know about the UK election you f*** wit

Corbyn.

And so typical of your pedantry will you would now care about the spelling of a word rather than what I said to you. Keep going beans pretty soon you will be diagnosed with worse obsessive compulsive disorder then I have

Corbyn is nothing more than a professional liberal mature student ponce.

Who are you going to vote for then Al?

Well I'm voting for the only viable party , who has sounds policies.


MP - Ivor " Jest Ye Not Madam " Biggun ,

Party - Standing At The Back Dressed Stupidly And Acting Stupid Party.