Making the news today....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

They don't like it up 'em, do they.

No they don’t, neither ‘side’ seems to like it up’em ?

 

Listening to the Mayor of London referring to honest, decent, hard working, god fearing, pillars of the community as “extreme far right”, like they are some kind of terror organisation just because they oppose or offer a counter view to unrestricted immigration and wholescale social, economic and cultural change within the UK whilst on the AM show illustrates very well how intolerant of ‘the voice of the people’ some sections of the political classes can be. 

 

Personally, and as keeps being rolled out as the ‘reason’ for the Brexit vote (not that it was my principle reason, and I’d hestitate to grant much credibility to anyone who thinks they can interpret the reason for other people’s voting tendencies) if we are to believe that immigration was, in fact, the primary reason for the Brexit vote, then that view, by the majority vote, can, by definition, neither be extreme nor Right wing but rather that it is the majority, centre, opinion. 

 

 

[eggsarascal]

3 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

No they don’t, neither ‘side’ seems to like it up’em ?

 

Listening to the Mayor of London referring to honest, decent, hard working, god fearing, pillars of the community as “extreme far right”, like they are some kind of terror organisation just because they oppose or offer a counter view to unrestricted immigration and wholescale social, economic and cultural change within the UK whilst on the AM show illustrates very well how intolerant of ‘the voice of the people’ some sections of the political classes can be. 

 

Personally, and as keeps being rolled out as the ‘reason’ for the Brexit vote (not that it was my principle reason, and I’d hestitate to grant much credibility to anyone who thinks they can interpret the reason for other people’s voting tendencies) if we are to believe that immigration was, in fact, the primary reason for the Brexit vote, then that view, by the majority vote, can, by definition, neither be extreme nor Right wing but rather that it is the majority, centre, opinion. 

 

 

I voted to leave, and yes, a small part of the reason was uncontrolled 

immigration, a small part. It, in my opinion is business that have allowed "us" to get where we are with immigration. Which party are the "party" of business?

 

"we" needed cheap labour after the war, "we" got used to paying peanuts, Mrs May and her Cohorts still want that, who wouldn't ,when "they" aren't on your doorstep.

[scotspine1]

[westphalian]

Croatia for me. I like the little man concept.
And I hate the frogs

[Mick Dempsey]

Own goal by Mandzukic ha ha ha ha

[Mick Dempsey]

Bugger.

[forestboy1978]

definite penalty....

 

OMG when will we get a world cup not commented on by vanilla Lineker....

[eggsarascal]

2 hours ago, Saw-sick Steve said:

Not a fan of the orange buffoon by any means, but it's difficult to entirely rebuff the charges of hypocrisy levelled at 'the Left' after the recent anti-Trump protests. Like it or not he's the democratically elected President of the USA and, though open to legitimate criticism over many of his policy decisions, his actions pale into insignificance compared to those carried out by leaders of certain other regimes who seem to get a free pass from the permanently outraged - despite being responsible for some truly heinous crimes.

           Where were these people when Mohammed bin Salman - head, lest we forget, of a regime responsible for beheading over 40 people so far this year - was here in March? Where were the protests when Erdogan - a man who, amongst other crimes, has classed journalists as ''terrorists'' and had them imprisoned - was here for a state visit last month? Or does murdering Yemeni and Kurdish citizens rank lower on the scale of outrage than wanting to ''grab them by the pussy''?  

Give me strength! The people who liked this post are, right wing, racist, come from foreign parentage or believe in God. Ya couldn't ask for a more balanced view...

 

At least two of them admit it, which, although I don't agree I admire their honesty.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

2 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

"we" needed cheap labour after the war, "we" got used to paying peanuts, Mrs May and her Cohorts still want that, who wouldn't ,when "they" aren't on your doorstep.

In part, certainly I’d agree Mr ?. 

 

Post war reconstruction,  60/70’s transport, more latterly (if you believe the hype) NHS and cash crop picking / packing.  (In real macro terms)

 

Id suggest however there is a distinct difference between how modern labour migration started and where we have ended up today. Post war, it was as simple as having to replace lost workforce.  That is certainly not the case today and I’m somewhat baffled by (my perception) traditional Left appearing to support continued unrestricted movement of people apparently in preference to upskilling and employing the +/- 2 million indigenous unproductive. It just doesn’t translate as Labour being the party of the worker if they are willing to let so many sit without work whilst (literally) more hungry people come from elsewhere.  It also doesn’t sit right with me that a necessary consequence of unrestricted in-flow of more bodies places greater strain on services and infra structure. Coincidentally, it also doesn’t sit right with me that it has irreversible detrimental effect upon societal cohesion - I know well enough you understand what I mean by that having seen it yourself, and I know some may disagree but I’d say to them take your head out of the sand (being polite since it’s Sunday) 

[eggsarascal]

33 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

In part, certainly I’d agree Mr ?. 

 

Post war reconstruction,  60/70’s transport, more latterly (if you believe the hype) NHS and cash crop picking / packing.  (In real macro terms)

 

Id suggest however there is a distinct difference between how modern labour migration started and where we have ended up today. Post war, it was as simple as having to replace lost workforce.  That is certainly not the case today and I’m somewhat baffled by (my perception) traditional Left appearing to support continued unrestricted movement of people apparently in preference to upskilling and employing the +/- 2 million indigenous unproductive. It just doesn’t translate as Labour being the party of the worker if they are willing to let so many sit without work whilst (literally) more hungry people come from elsewhere.  It also doesn’t sit right with me that a necessary consequence of unrestricted in-flow of more bodies places greater strain on services and infra structure. Coincidentally, it also doesn’t sit right with me that it has irreversible detrimental effect upon societal cohesion - I know well enough you understand what I mean by that having seen it yourself, and I know some may disagree but I’d say to them take your head out of the sand (being polite since it’s Sunday) 

I believe that you know a lot of this isn't true.

 

They ain't traditional Labour, they're a bunch of headbangers,  let's not mix our words ,Eh.

Edited July 15, 2018 by eggsarascal