Making the news today....

[Ratman]

Get back to your life time post/thread!

 

[Mark J]

34 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

A banker is asked by three immigrants to lend them money..

 

One was a doctor from Syria, One, a Lawyer from Canada, and One a retard from Africa...

 

Guess who didn't get the money...

 

Three men went for a job,  Black man who worked like a trojan, a White man on drugs and a pregnant woman..   brash dragging for an arborist...   guess who's getting the job...

 

Banks are forced to give mortgages to the low paid and economically inactive...  guess what they do.

 

sell the mortgages to a third party lest its they that get lumped with the bill when those they know can't pay wont pay...

 

 

As to Corbyn, he'd demand banks lend to the retard, to give a job to the drug addled, and in so doing force banks to close..   He's a well meaning idiot.. thats why he's dangerous...  

 

 

 

 

I think that you ought to get a new hobby.

Edited January 1, 2019 by Mark J
No idea how Gulliver got in there.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

5 hours ago, Mark J said:

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/think-corbyn-is-a-danger-to-britain-heres-how-youve-been-brainwashed/12/12/?fbclid=IwAR2yogEpVyHVcEjPLovS_j-c2_U_4R9VCUdXniify6_xMMfX0Y2k4MoLjlI

 

The theory in the article - if people voted according to ‘policy pledges’ rather than party bias, falls over (and reenforces the ‘threat’ of biased reporting that it purports to expose yet entirely falls into its own claims) when it suggests that Green & Lib Dem should have done better - but COMPLETELY fails to recognise that actually, the same could be said for BNP and UKIP. 

 

Its a self fulfilling example of the danger it claims to be exposing. 

 

 

[Mark J]

31 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

The theory in the article - if people voted according to ‘policy pledges’ rather than party bias, falls over (and reenforces the ‘threat’ of biased reporting that it purports to expose yet entirely falls into its own claims) when it suggests that Green & Lib Dem should have done better - but COMPLETELY fails to recognise that actually, the same could be said for BNP and UKIP. 

 

Its a self fulfilling example of the danger it claims to be exposing. 

 

 

You spent your career as a  'Yesman' for the establishment. I wouldn't expect you to get it.
However, you have said that you'd vote Green in the past.

It's only racists who think the BNP is a good thing.
Lib Dems went tits up because they lied to their biggest client base (18 - 25) about tuition fees.
People have long memories.
I'd vote green if I thought there was a chance of them winning.

In the mean time I'd vote for Labour under Corbyn, he's the only politician I've come across who comes across as honest.
In my opinion.

 

[difflock]

I do suppose that I must agree that Comrade Corbyn is honest, since that is how we know about his terrorist supporting views, i.e. he made those revealing if deeply unsettling/disturbing statements in unequivocal support of various known terrorist organsations.

And as you said, people do indeed have long memories.

marcus

P.S.

I was disturbed to learn that JRM is coming to NI to speak at a fundraiser for the DUP, talk about strange bedfellows.

All in all "interesting times"

[skyhuck]

Ok so you say Corbyn is being smeared and miss represented, fine. Lets as I believe they say in football "play the ball, not the man"

 

Look at Labours policies and aims. You really think our country would prosper with them in power?

 

IMO, its only short sighted public sector workers, those on benefits and the ideologically deluded who vote Labour.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

7 hours ago, Mark J said:

You spent your career as a  'Yesman' for the establishment. I wouldn't expect you to get it.
However, you have said that you'd vote Green in the past.

It's only racists who think the BNP is a good thing.
Lib Dems went tits up because they lied to their biggest client base (18 - 25) about tuition fees.
People have long memories.
I'd vote green if I thought there was a chance of them winning.

In the mean time I'd vote for Labour under Corbyn, he's the only politician I've come across who comes across as honest.
In my opinion.

 

HNY Mark!

 

Yes man for the establishment? You must, at least have an inckling, that that is about as far from the reality as could be possible? Had it been true I’d likely still be “in” and playing the game at a much more senior level.  It is precisely my anti-establishment, dare to challenge, direct and undiplomatic nature that contributed to my early departure from Service under the voluntary redundancy scheme. We’ll have a beer and I’ll spin some dits one day. 

 

As to politics, or more precisely, pre-programmed political allegiances, here too we have a very early indicator of this deeply engrained anti-establishment tendency I’m trying to illustrate to you. 

 

By all of the ‘traditional’ levers of political allegiance (from a simpler, earlier, more binary era) I should, absolutely be like a stick of Blackpool rock, cut me in half and you’d find Labour written through the core.   I vividly remember a conversation with father prior to the first election in which I was able to vote - “...this is a Labour house, I expect everyone to vote Labour...”  In that respect, I can thank him for causing me to read all the manifestos prior to voting (a rather tedious and time consuming habit which has stuck with me.)

 

And that brings us neatly back to the point under discussion, playing the ball rather than the man. Personally, I can’t bear Corbyn but it’s not just him, it’s the more lunatic, more dangerous, more radical cronies that elevated and surround him. 

 

Your article presented the case that people are blinded by party allegiance rather than policy - and I TOTALLY agree, but the point I was seeking to highlight is that it is exactly that point which applies across the ENTIRE political spectrum but that the article failed (intentionally?) to highlight this. 

 

I mentiined BNP & UKIP (not to illustrate any personal allegiance) because the argument being presented in the article is perfectly illustrated when “blind tasting” of policies (most notably foreign aid, foreign policy, military) are measured against those 2 parties policy positions. 

 

So, in many respects, I agree with the over-arching concept of the article - people are stupidly aligned to political ‘colour’ rather than political promises. What I found objectionable however was the lack of balance, nefarious misdirection and blatant bias.  

 

It was, in that respect, an almost PERFECT example of the fake news and influence ops that it sought to denigrate. I would have thought you’d have seen through it rather than flag it for broader consideration. 

 

 

[westphalian]

More debacle about non existent ferry services I found in the Irish Times. Aer Lingus offered up it sister company Sea Lingus for the channel tender. PM May declined stating she had previously had a bad experience with Sea Lingus, getting into a sticky mess with Irish seamen in Rosslare.
The Irish Times editorial quite rightly says policy decisions should never be taken over a verbal conversion and should be put in writing so this sort of confusion doesn’t arise.

[Mark2]

Here’s a bit more truth am reality for you guys. Sorry !https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-4/

[eggsarascal]

What's this about?

 

150 trucks set off to 'mimic' what might happen if there is a no deal Brexit, not quite... 89 trucks turned up, compared to the many thousands of trucks that could be stacked, if we believe what we are being told.

 

Mrs May really is clutching at straws. The rest of Europe must me laughing at the shambles that 'we've' made of Brexit.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-live-updates-no-deal-latest-theresa-may-vote-date-mps-conservative-lorry-labour-corbyn-eu-a8715006.html