Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ofcom’s decision not to classify the Greens as a “major par

13»

Comments

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    TGOHF said:

    Brave decision by David Cameron to rule out the debate without the Greens but politically astute as the controversy caused will result in a lot of publicity for the Greens that they may not otherwise have had and puts Ed Miliband on the spot to declare whether he agrees or not that the Greens should be included as if he is against it could be very negative for labour

    A Kipper will be along to tell you that it is imperative in the fight against Islam and the EU there must be free speech compelling Cameron to appear before this interrogation.
    Oh, a four way debate with an independent moderator is now an "interrogation" for Cameron. God you Tories do like to play the victim, don't you? David can run frit if he likes, but the rest of us will judge accordingly.

    Cameron the Cowardly.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549

    Anorak said:

    "Is this copper a fifth columnist too? I mean he committed crimes that weren't terrorist related"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-30480812

    Of course not: he's white. And even if he *had* comitted terrorist crimes, he still wouldn't get called a terrorist (see also: McVeigh, Timothy).

    How odd, the first para of the McVeigh wiki article says:

    "According to the United States Government, it was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the 9/11 attacks"
    I think he was mentioning the notorious Today front page after the Oklahoma bombing which had the headline "In the name of Allah" with a photo of the attack

    Then in the next few days when the facts emerged they called it the work of "American survivalists"
    As Muslims are responsible for 80% of terrorist attacks and 90% of terrorists deaths wasn't this a safe (albeit incorrect) assumption for Today to make?
    Is that statistically true?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,701
    THREADUS NEWUS.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MikeL said:

    Not because of the debates but the implications for TV news coverage during the campaign.

    Last time it was Con/Lab/LD : 5/5/4.

    Don't get carried away. SNP and Plaid are also 'major' parties
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Socrates said:

    TGOHF said:

    Socrates said:

    TGOHF said:

    Socrates said:

    TGOHF said:

    AndyJS said:

    Socrates said:

    Michael Crick ‏@MichaelLCrick 27s27 seconds ago
    Cameron tells @tombradby he all but rules out joining TV debates, but broadcasters might well proceed with just Miliband, Clegg & Farage

    Cameron correctly realises he has more to lose by taking part in the debates.
    Cam right to avoid a rigged game.

    Ukip have 2 MPs - only one more than the Greens.
    Cluck cluck cluck.
    Cowardice is not the same thing as stupidity.
    Yet Cameron has plenty of both. He is running scared from Farage because he knows Farage will show up his stupid arguments about repatriation. Ironically, those arguments had to be created because of his cowardice in standing up to the EU.
    Your anger shows Cameron's position of strength. You want your bar room barracker to throw rocks at Cam ? Then let the lentil munchers in to do the same to Ed...

    He defends free speech one day. Runs scared from an open debate the next. Sounds like David the coward Cameron, alright.
    How is it open debate to deny a party which won an MP fair and square last time and is polling better than the LDs?
    Its censorship.
    In any event name the last time before 2010 when we had any of these debates? Never.
    How is travelling up and down the country in an election denying free speech. Your arguments are as ever totally bogus.
  • TGOHF said:

    Socrates said:
    True. Will our UK papers step up tomorrow?
    Did the Sun not print 3 CH cartoons today ?
    Not on the front page - but good that they did.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited January 2015
    Socrates said:

    @marktheowl

    Right. The only shared policy between France and the UK in this area is that we've both allowed mass immigration from poor Muslim countries. That was the common mistake.

    Judging by arrest numbers, about 1 in every 5000 Muslims in the UK is involved in terrorist activity.

    0.02% ??

    BTW the total jail pop is at a guess about 0.12% of population. Happy for a more accurate figure.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Socrates said:

    Cameron trying to use Ofcom decision to run cowardly from the debates:

    Patrick Wintour ‏@patrickwintour 51s51 seconds ago
    Big on TV debates @tombradby "are you saying you are not going to go in as it stands unless at least Greens are in?' Cameron:"Correct".


    TBF to Cameron, the debates will be lopsided with UKIP in, but the Greens out.

    The Greens won an MP in the 2010 GE, they didn't need by-elections (which often throw up strange results) to get in.

    The whole ''Opposition leader demands debate... PM refuses ''knockabout is a long standing part of the pantomime tradition of British Politics.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    MikeK said:

    We have a fool for Foreign Sec.,
    http://rt.com/uk/220895-hammond-speech-shooting-paris/

    "Paris shooting ‘product of West’s conflict with ISIS’" – Foreign Sec Hammond

    .....
    1) Russia Today have spun Hammond's words because they are a biased organisation and they don't like Hammond in the past calling out Putin for the thug he is

    2) You haven't been looking very hard have you. Take Nick Clegg today

    http://www.lbc.co.uk/angry-clegg-on-paris-shooting-we-must-be-able-to-offend-102925
    Correct and in Cameron's case he said - (Mail report)
    ''Defending the right to free speech David Cameron said: 'We should be very clear this day that these values that we have are not sources of weakness for us, they are sources of strength.
    'Of course there are all sorts of economic things we have to get right but, as we do that, the countries that succeed in the future I think will be those that stick to the values of freedom, of democracy, of the rule of law.
    'Those are part of the things that make our economies and our societies and our political systems strong and powerful and good and we must not give those up.' ''

    Note the first words - 'defending the right to free speech'. Personally I quite like the right to free speech it enables me to point out that invariably the anti Cameron nutjobs are a bunch of liars.
    FWIW I think Cameron is right to emphasise that 'the countries that succeed in the future I think will be those that stick to the values of freedom, of democracy, of the rule of law.'
    In every way it is to our benefit to ensure the spread of democracy and to support those who fight totalitarianism, especially that based on bigotry from wherever it comes.
This discussion has been closed.