It could be a coincidence but if people happen to parrot the opinions of every faceless Union Jack account on Twitter which in turn is just parroting the opinion of the Mail and Express then I’m not sure it counts as an original thought. They can sack all the advisers and come up with as many buzz terms as they want. That’s their prerogative after convincing enough stupid ****s to give them that mandate. Blaming anyone, particularly people who clearly know a bit more than politicians, who doesn’t blindly follow the cult is starting to grate a bit. Even Matt Hancock is starting to look relatively competent for suggesting it might not be a good idea to go it alone on fighting pandemics. It’s never a great look when something is obvious to Matt Hancock and it’s still ignored in the name of delivering the holiest of Brexits.
When something is so bleedin' obvious, it's not surprising that people hold similar opinions. It does not mean they copy each other. Of course, Corbyn would hold a contrary position and that's why his Labour Party went down to one of their worst election defeats ever. The civil servant pen pushers have to get behind the government's programme. We saw the chaos that May presided over when everyone was pursuing their own agenda. The electorate (bless them) kicked the likes of Soubry and Grieve out of Parliament. Rutnam had been obstructive, not only to Patel but Rudd also when she was Home Sec. His career record is appalling. Take a look. At the top, the civil service is like an old boys club where you and the gold plated pension are safe for life. Get rid of this job's worth.
With respect as you do form your own opinions that's clear, however I do see the same phrases, the same exact points without deviation, terminology used, the ability to back up things said throughout so many platforms it's impossible for this way of thinking not so originate from a single source parroted out by so many.
Anybody actually surprised? Anyone? https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/01/boris-johnson-reject-eus-human-rights-laws-brexit-12329467/
Well, this may happen on both sides of the argument. And adopting terminology doesn't mean that a poster has not thought about which side of the argument to be on. We are all influenced by media reports on the facts - we have to be, because we don't have personal knowledge. But parroting newspaper articles of opinion is something else. Most independently minded people (and on this site, I think we're all independently minded which is why I took issue with Watford's original riposte to Col's post) will make up their minds on the facts, and have their opinion fleshed out by commentary from journalists they trust and agree with. As I say, it happens on both sides of the argument
He won't look at the Rutnam's record because that doesn't suit his agenda of "everyone else is thicker than me and can't think for themselves". It's childishly pathetic. A purge of the mandarins is long, long overdue. Rutnam was responsible for the Windrush scandal, leaving Rudd to fall on her sword. She was never given the information she needed. Information that miraculously appeared after she resigned. There are rumours of racism from Rutnam too. The idiot tried to suggest that MI5 didn't trust the home Secretary with sensitive intelligence, leading to the agency quickly announcing that there was no truth in it whatsoever. An unprecedented action by them. Treasury Chief Tom Scholar has had his wings clipped and the immensly powerful Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sidwell could be next.
Agree. One of the benefits of an 80 seat majority is that the government can do this. I hope they have a look at the House of Lords in due course too. Too much dead wood there. Fresh blood into a second chamber from all areas of the City and industry, engineering, science, medicine etc could make it a valuable source of information and guidance for the government of the day. As for Rutnam, he's going to an employment tribunal, and perhaps from there to the appeal courts. A lot of fascinating stuff is going to come into the public domain in this process before it's completed, I think
I'd certainly agree there are a few like that, I do seem to find from personal experience (so hardly a definitive thing) that I see it a lot more from Boris's fan club
The extreme Corbynites are even worse individually and probably do more to stop any chances of a sensible left of centre government in the future but the sheer volume of wannabe victim boomer Brexity types still crying about how hard done by and anti-establishment they are is undeniable.
The Ugandan Asians weren't economic migrants, they were asylum seekers under Amin's cosh. Some would certainly come here, presumably pursuant to Commonwealth obligations
Where have I said they were economic migrants? Flee /fli;/ To run away from a place, or a situation of danger.
I didn't say you said it! But Patel is bringing in immigration reforms that will curb economic migration. I'm just saying Ugandan Asians didn't fall under that heading so I'm not sure what your point is
Not a fan of rees mogg since his brexit debacle but tbf to him all the stuff he said about grenfell was exaggerated and misleading. I deliberately watched it live and i didn't think it was bad
