• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

[Continuation] General UK Politics V Suella Strikes Back

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
As for Nadine Dorries, her public infatuation with Boris Johnson is so embarrassing, no-one can take her seriously. However, IMV she does have a point about being passed over for a peerage to the House of Lords. Johnson had (disgracefully) put her and quite a few others forward (including his own daughter???!!!) so if Prime Minister Sunak is going to approve the others together with the HoL committee bods but strike out Dorries (who was, after all, a working MP and a member of the Cabinet), it seems terribly unfair to have left Dorries out and I think she is right to kick up a stink about it. Maybe Boris lied to her when he said she was on his list.
Click to expand...

Elevation to the House of Lords should (leaving aside the issue of whether the House should exist in the first place) be a reward for public service, and a recognition that the recipient would be able to contribute to the running of the country, not an entitlement. Regardless of whether other equally qualified people were on the list, Mad Nad simply demonstrates her utter unsuitability by demanding to know why she was left off the list. Of course Al lied; that's what he does.
 
There is no credible evidence the protestors plan to disrupt the Armistice commemorations they have already held marches on the prior Saturdays without any issues, regardless of what the Daily Express would have people believe. The fact is that the government is yet again looking for an excuse to prevent people protesting in public. I would say the rhetoric issuing from the Home Secretary is a far greater threat to public order.
And on that topic Sunak has refused to distance himself from Braverman's remarks about the protestors and the homeless.
 
There's going to be trouble.
Lots of people going to London to guard the cenotaph and other national monuments from' desecration.

GBNews talking heads saying it's our duty to go and defend our way of life and culture from these jihadists.

Some are positively drooling in anticipation.
 
Andy_Ross said:
There's going to be trouble.
Lots of people going to London to guard the cenotaph and other national monuments from' desecration.

GBNews talking heads saying it's our duty to go and defend our way of life and culture from these jihadists.

Some are positively drooling in anticipation.
Click to expand...

Sadly the wrong group of people will end up being charged with incitement. :mad:

For some reason, media outlets like GBNews escape censure for whipping public opinion up..
 
Lozza Fox says he will be on the front line protecting the cenotaph.
I bet he never leaves the house
 
Braverman's solution regarding the homeless, is not a solution. It is an attempt to hide the problem, make it less visible, so she can pretend the problem has gone away. It is a way to avoid spending the money needed to solve the problem of homelessness, which is to build more, cheaper, housing and hostels.
 
Nessie said:
Braverman's solution regarding the homeless, is not a solution. It is an attempt to hide the problem, make it less visible, so she can pretend the problem has gone away. It is a way to avoid spending the money needed to solve the problem of homelessness, which is to build more, cheaper, housing and hostels.
Click to expand...

In 1999 the government set up the RDU - Rough Sleepers Unit. The target was to reduce rough sleeping by 2/3 by April 2002 (refers to England only). That was achieved by November 2001. By 2010 rough sleeping/ street homelessness (there are some differences in how the two are defined) was practically eliminated. The figures today are now back to the heights of the 1980s.

How on earth did the government lose control of this now particularly important issue?

I'll leave that for the students of history to try to tease out what could have changed after 2010 to possibly account for us again having such an unsightly problem.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Government officials have drawn up deeply controversial proposals to broaden the definition of extremism to include anyone who “undermines” the country’s institutions and its values, according to documents seen by the Observer.

The new definition, prepared by civil servants working for cabinet minister Michael Gove, is fiercely opposed by a cohort of officials who fear legitimate groups and individuals will be branded extremists.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...extremism-would-include-undermining-uk-values
Click to expand...

Like the modern Conservative Party.

Edit: Ninja'd
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
In 1999 the government set up the RDU - Rough Sleepers Unit. The target was to reduce rough sleeping by 2/3 by April 2002 (refers to England only). That was achieved by November 2001. By 2010 rough sleeping/ street homelessness (there are some differences in how the two are defined) was practically eliminated. The figures today are now back to the heights of the 1980s.

How on earth did the government lose control of this now particularly important issue?

I'll leave that for the students of history to try to tease out what could have changed after 2010 to possibly account for us again having such an unsightly problem.
Click to expand...

It's all Labour's fault for failing to ensure that the Tories couldn't reverse their policies.

It goes to show who really cares for the less well off in society, the Tories demonstrate their support by increasing the number of food banks by orders of magnitude whilst Labour sit on their hands while the Conservatives undo their policies. :rolleyes:
 
It seems that our ongoing woes can still be blamed on covid and the war in Ukraine. No mention of Brexit though.
 
King's Speech. Charlie says the government is to toughen sentences for sexual crimes.

Oh the ******* irony !
 
GlennB said:
It seems that our ongoing woes can still be blamed on covid and the war in Ukraine. No mention of Brexit though.
Click to expand...

The last Labour government is still being blamed thirteen & a half years on, so I wouldn't expect covid & Ukraine to be dropped any time soon.
 
The Tory party Word Of The Day following Chucky's Blether is, apparently, "certainty".

Some Tory drone or other is being interviewed on PM and half of the interview consists of the word "certainty".

I know what I am "certain" of regarding this bunch of shysters and crooks...
 
Andy_Ross said:
King's Speech. Charlie says the government is to toughen sentences for sexual crimes.

Oh the ******* irony !
Click to expand...
The cameras should have panned across the Tory backbenches when Charles announced that to see how many of them looked nervous.

The real issue isn't the sentences for sexual crimes, its the dismal failure of the police and CPS when investigating and prosecuting offences, and of course the poor treatment victims receive at the hands of the police.
 
Darat said:
In 1999 the government set up the RDU - Rough Sleepers Unit. The target was to reduce rough sleeping by 2/3 by April 2002 (refers to England only). That was achieved by November 2001. By 2010 rough sleeping/ street homelessness (there are some differences in how the two are defined) was practically eliminated. The figures today are now back to the heights of the 1980s.

How on earth did the government lose control of this now particularly important issue?

I'll leave that for the students of history to try to tease out what could have changed after 2010 to possibly account for us again having such an unsightly problem.
Click to expand...

They just didn't care.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
They just didn't care.
Click to expand...

Affordable housing would cut into the profits of the Tory landlords that voted against a requirement that housing be fit for human habitation. Nothing like a the odd hypothemia death on the street to help their tenents dig a little deeper when the rent is due.
 
Garrison said:
The cameras should have panned across the Tory backbenches when Charles announced that to see how many of them looked nervous.

The real issue isn't the sentences for sexual crimes, its the dismal failure of the police and CPS when investigating and prosecuting offences, and of course the poor treatment victims receive at the hands of the police.
Click to expand...

It was quite enough to see Brian momentarily baulk at the mention of 'child sexual abuse'. He would have rehearsed this stuff in advance, of course, but that didn't stop the split second 'Are they having a dig at me' moment. Chas. has been associated with some dodgy characters, being a good friend of Jimmy Savile, Reverend Ball and dear Uncle Louis, so a fleeting moment of panic crossed his face and then onward and upward to the next page.
 
jimbob said:
Never attribute to malice...?

Braverman?

Modified Hanlon's razor for Braverman and quite a few Tories.

Never attribute solely to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
Click to expand...

Not 100% stupidity. From her student days, Braverman has been associated with the likes of Doug (the eminence grise Mad Nads mentions in her book extracts) and had been linked along with the Mirza woman to the RCP (see journalist Andy Beckett). She is controlled by some murky 'think tank' figures. It is all carefully designed to normalise fascism.
 
Jonathan Pie on Suella Braverman

Not as many jokes as usual but very accurate



 
jimbob said:
Never attribute to malice...?

Braverman?

Modified Hanlon's razor for Braverman and quite a few Tories.

Never attribute solely to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity AND malice
Click to expand...

More accurate surely?
 
Braverman is trying to get as many headlines as possible, and it is working;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67364745

She criticises the police for the perception they are biased against right wing and nationalist protests and are more favourable towards pro-Palestinian ones. She offers no evidence to back up that perception, or should I say, lie.
 
Suella Braverman is now claiming that the Met are playing favourites at demos:

Home Secretary Suella Braverman has accused the Metropolitan Police of "playing favourites" over its handling of pro-Palestinian protests.

Writing in The Times, she said right-wing protests that became aggressive were often stopped, while "pro-Palestinian mobs" were permitted.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67364745

Yes, the Met has bias, but in completely the opposite way she claims. :mad:


Edited to add...

Ninja'd by Nessie.
 
Garrison said:
There is no credible evidence the protestors plan to disrupt the Armistice commemorations they have already held marches on the prior Saturdays without any issues, regardless of what the Daily Express would have people believe. The fact is that the government is yet again looking for an excuse to prevent people protesting in public. I would say the rhetoric issuing from the Home Secretary is a far greater threat to public order.
And on that topic Sunak has refused to distance himself from Braverman's remarks about the protestors and the homeless.
Click to expand...


Organiser of Armistice Day Cenotaph event backs pro-Palestine march

“I think a lot of people are trying to whip this up,” said Hughes, the association’s legal trustee, who is also responsible for organising the annual commemoration. “The police are not going to let anyone near the Cenotaph. We are a democratic organisation that commemorates those who fought for democracy, so free speech is important.”
Click to expand...
 
Nessie said:
Braverman is trying to get as many headlines as possible, and it is working;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67364745

She criticises the police for the perception they are biased against right wing and nationalist protests and are more favourable towards pro-Palestinian ones. She offers no evidence to back up that perception, or should I say, lie.
Click to expand...

The Don said:
Suella Braverman is now claiming that the Met are playing favourites at demos:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67364745

Yes, the Met has bias, but in completely the opposite way she claims. :mad:


Edited to add...

Ninja'd by Nessie.
Click to expand...

Yet speak to folk and you'd think the police were the most woke organisation around, given all the recent inquiries and reports it is a most persistent case of cognitive dissonance.
 
I think there's going to be trouble. A lot of right wingers and gammons are promising to turn up and defend our sacred monuments from the jihadist take over of the country.

Some are openly calling for a war to take back the streets.
 
Andy_Ross said:
I think there's going to be trouble. A lot of right wingers and gammons are promising to turn up and defend our sacred monuments from the jihadist take over of the country.
Click to expand...


But they're going to be a couple of hours too early, and in the wrong place.
 
She's hung the police out to dry.

Any trouble or disturbances by the right wing 'patriots' will be laid at their door.

We have to clamp down harder on any form of protest, the police can't be trusted to control it so I'm putting the army on the streets. You made me do it!
 
Last edited:
Looks like Sewerla has managed to also upset the Irish with her bleating:

Here we reach the heart of the matter. I do not believe that these marches are merely a cry for help for Gaza. They are an assertion of primacy by certain groups — particularly Islamists — of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland. Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.-
Click to expand...
TIMES

Suella Braverman has been dubbed a “pound-shop Enoch Powell” as Unionist and Republican politicians in Northern Ireland united to attack her comments about the province, Oliver Wright writes.

Braverman equated the pro-Palestinian protests in London to an “assertion of primacy by certain groups” of the kind seen in Ulster and suggested they were also linked to terrorism.

Jamie Bryson, a loyalist political activist, accused Braverman of using “clumsy” language which appeared to imply that she was criticising traditional unionist marches.

“I imagine Suella Braverman meant to conjure up a comparison with IRA terrorist events, but the totally clumsy way she has written this makes it appear she is including the rich cultural marching band tradition,” he said.

“Given it went out in her name, the home secretary should personally clarify it.”

Colum Eastwood, leader of the nationalist SDLP, called Braverman a “pound-shop Enoch Powell”. Describing the piece as a “display of aggressive ignorance”, he said Braverman was “deliberately stoking division to bolster her own brand among the Conservative Party’s right wing”.
Click to expand...
TIMES


Braverman, the poor man's Enoch Powell?

She seems to believe that simply spouting a load of gung-ho rhetoric that she appeals to the reactionary hoi-polloi. She writes (and no. 10 refuses to endorse it as she failed to issue the corrections it demanded):

Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters. During Covid, why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?

Right-wing and nationalist protesters who engage in aggression are rightly met with a stern response yet pro-Palestinian mobs displaying almost identical behaviour are largely ignored, even when clearly breaking the law? I have spoken to serving and former police officers who have noted this double standard.
Click to expand...
TIMES ibid

Football fans are even more vocal about the tough way they are policed as compared to politically-connected minority groups who are favoured by the left. It may be that senior officers are more concerned with how much flak they are likely to get than whether this perceived unfairness alienates the majority.
Click to expand...
ibid

Let's unpick this. So Braverman has been talking to 'serving and former police officers who have noted this double standard', no doubt members of the thin blue line (version II) and fully paid up members of far right groups.

Problem is anyone who has been to a football match, with as many as twenty to forty thousand people in attendance all converging into one spot, often along narrow residential roads, knows it is common sense to have a strong police presence keeping rival sets of fans separate from each other. When I was a QPR season ticket holder, we often had to flee visiting Millwall and Portsmouth fans, all, together with some of our own fans, proud hooligans who loved nothing better than a ruck. We'd have motor cycle police escorts any time we visited away games by supporters coaches. Thank goodness for the police presence. Braverman is nuts if she thinks this shows any 'favouritism' at all or heavy handedness by the police.

Likewise 'taking the knee'. When cops were seen dancing at Notting Hill Carnival or taking the knee elsewhere, this was surely in the interest of oiling the wheels of good community relations. Showing a potentially untrusting community that hey, police could be friendly and good-humoured, too. This could only be a positive thing. What does the Home Secretary expect them to do, bang them up against a wall and taser them?

The other problem is Braverman constantly reminding us all about how her ethnic Indian father was hounded out of Kenya by presumed Black Africans (or so she claims). In addition, having identified as ethnically Indian, she commented that Pakistani men were prone to grooming young English girls. Muslims, by extension are now responsible for violent anti-Semitic demonstrations against Jews, is her latest rhetoric. Given that traditionally India has a history of violent war and clashes against Pakistan, despite her being a Buddhist, she serves as being seen as a racist by the Muslim sector of society as well as being racist against the Black population. Then there is the perceived insult to the various Northern Irish groups thrown out for good measure: does Braverman really believe she is appealing to jackbooted bother boys? Most likely they are laughing long and hard at her pathetic attempts to out-Enoch Enoch. Not even close to his intellectual level.
 
Last edited:
Sunak demanded changes and Braverman simply ignored him. He's pathetic. A laughing stock.

He's lost all authority and control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom