Off Topic Great Britain General Election May 7th 2015.

Its a term of endearment.: biggrin:

 

This can be true though the media are also adept at twisting things and we rely on the 4th estate on the information sadly.
So we have to consume and process what they dish out.

I can take a lot of things Cameron says and make them seem truly appaling.

Not defending Farage, I'm the last person to know about him or UKIP but..
Take for example Cameron's refusal to be pictured with Sturegon. Yet he will happily pose for a snapshot with Katie Hopkins who is by any measure a Nazi.
She openly compares peoples to " cockroaches" Rwanda immediately springs to mind

Yet no police knock at her door, Human Rights Watch chief referred to her work as "Nazi Propaganda"

Would the wider media call into question that contradiction re Cameron? Nope.
The 4th estate's job is to call bullshit, not run PR.

Political comments and retorts are like forum wum now.
Miliband : bombing Libya has led to the immmigrant deaths crysis.
Tories : That's disgusting and outrageous

But the Tores owed the British public an explanation as to why it was so wrong of Miliband and Farage to say that, not use an emotional argument to silence the criticism and the media should have called the Tories on that but they did not.

"How dare you" is not an answer. Someone should tell Cameron that

 

Once again your backing up your points with evidence which doesn't support your argument. The quotes there show UKIP are happy to work with either Labour or the Tories, provided an EU referendum is possible. The stance Milliband is currently taking is to not give an EU referendum and so currently it looks better for UKIP for the Tories to win more seats as they are open to a referendum.

The UKIP stance has been and remains that it will work with either of the main parties to achieve it's goal of an EU referendum. It is Labour and Milliband that are stopping that being a possibility, not UKIP favouring Tory policy which is what your trying to suggest.

 

Is this the dullest ever election campaign ever? It is easier to say who you don't want than who you actually want. My preferred PM is German but alas she is not available to vote for here so I am stuck. If I am honest there is one person I would vote for and that is the Independent in Northern Ireland, Lady Herman who ditched the Unionists when they got too close to the Tories again.

 

Many Tory MPs are UKIP in disguise. Bill Cash, Peter Bonehead and loads more!! Time Cameron chucked them out of the party!!!

 

What about landslide victory for UKIP? Last person to le leave UK to switch off the light.

please log in to view this image

 

Cameron stood up in front of the UN and said, and I quote "9\11 conspiracy theorists are the same as ISIS"

That is how thick that man is Embarrasses himself in front of the whole world. Half the UN assembly must have pissed themselves laughing at that.

 

To be fair as many of the migrants are coming from places like Eritrea and Syria there would still be an issue with migration. There's no doubting that the Libyian situation has excerbated the issue, but it's highly hypocritical for Milliband to bring it up in this way considering he voted for action in Libya. More so too considering Labours lack of post war planning for Iraq.

 

The migrants are coming through Libya in masses and from the pile of war torn rape\murder fest pile of rubble that is Libya itself due to the murderous regime put in power by NATO. Many immigrants were trying to get into Libya before the place was smashed and regime changed, being the most developed African state in almsot all of Africa

But that is another matter, one not fit for this thread. I'm restraining myself these days


So, what you are saying is that it is ok to call Miliband on the voting for Libya, which is entirely correct but not to call Cameron on the lack of an actual response. See what I mean?

It's not about who is right or wrong, my whole point in the context of my last few posts is the partisan nature of political coverage by the UK media.

As we can see, not sure if you realise, but you are taking part in this media driven divide, pointing fingers at Miliband, he did vote for war, but so did Cameron.

So, the media should be running with "You ALL made this mess far worse by destroying a stable nation" but they avoid it completely.
I think that is a fair assessment

 

I know Cameron supported intervention in Libya, but my point was to highlight how hypocritical Milliband is for beating Cameron for it when he voted in support of action too. I thought that was pretty clear in my post. Given there was an urgent requirement at the time to try to defend the people of Benghazi who were being targetted by Gaddafi, I believe that it was the right thing to do at the time. Whilst I agree that there was little thought given to post intervention planning and Cameron deserves some stick for that, but given Labour's track record in Iraq they are not in a very strong position to pontificate on this.

As I already pointed out the situation in Libya means that there are many more avenues open to traffic people. That said the huge volume of people does not consist of just Libyians rather many of them are coming from Eritea and Syria. These people would still be coming, maybe through different avenues, but they would still be coming. Essentially what I am saying is that it's political point scoring of an untasteful nature, gutter politics.

 

Too right, it was a very low blow by miliband and one that has backfired badly. There are enough things wrong with Cameron's leadership, for Miliband to feel he has to exploit the deaths of so many people just to make a headline shows how poor labour are at the moment.

 

General Election 2015: Why Miliband leads Cameron in battle for wavering voters - according to Lord Ashcroft div

please log in to view this image

 

I already agreed with that if you read my post. "ok to call Miliband on the voting for Libya, which is entirely correct" That is not the point of my post, it's abut the media's partisan approach to reporting and who they allign themselves with and said PR they run for the party of editorial choice.

Actually, the militants in Benghazi were not just Libyans, they were a jihadist organisation with AL qeda ties with ranks swelled from Afghanistan's taliban fighters, the very bad guys Britian was supposed to be fighting, as even reported by the BBC, Abdelhakim Belhadj, From Al-Qaeda Commander to NATO Ally and Tripoli Military Governor, the guy running the show. They had nothing to do with the protests, tey had been trying to take over Libya for a decade or more. He had known ties to al-Qaeda leaders and Taliban chief Mullah Omar. He fled Afghanistan when NATO invaded after 9\11. He belonged Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) < the very groups the UK media have been raging about for the past decade. This guy actually pressed charges against the UK for torturing him as a rendition prisoner.

"I believe that it was the right thing to do at the time." The reasons for doing it has nothing to do with helping Libyans, over 1 million Libyans protested NATO bombing in Tripoli, (including those who protested against Gaddafi for more rights) - Of course western media did not cover this conveniently. I mean, who calls for NATO to destroy their country.

"Whilst I agree that there was little thought given to post intervention planning and Cameron deserves some stick for that, but given Labour's track record in Iraq they are not in a very strong position to pontificate on this" Since when does the UK have the right to get involved in the affairs of another nation, Britain the US and France attacked Libya without any resolution from the UN security council. It again, had nothing to do with Libyan freedom and everything to do with French US and British interests in the country, all of which are sorted after putting those terrorists in power, I thknk you should go to Libya and take a look at the place now. "poorly thought out" was Iraq not a lesson? Lets not forget when Gaddafi was alowing BP to take all the oil, Britain had no issue with him, especially when rendition prisoners were tortured there for NATO intelligence agencies, given torture was not legal in their own nations. I do find it funny tho that when Rusia invades claiming they are "helping people" we rightly dismiss that as bollocks, but when our own government do exactly the same thing, we swallow that bullshit right up.

As for the immigrant tragedies, many boats leave from Tripoli and Behghazi.

please log in to view this image

But my whole point again, is the media picking it's targets, I just thought I would correct imo your erroneous post on Libya's destruction cos I'm a ****.

Miliband was most certainly pointscoring but that does not make the point any less valid, that the government(miliband included) helped make the situation there far worse ergo forcing even more people into such desperate circumstances which leads them to take that extrmely dangerous journey.

Your focus on Miliband and point scoring rather than the actual issue of 800 people dying on one boat alone, and the causes of it, is how the media want it, the duscussion should not be about point scoring but about the cause and resolution of the current problems and the many deaths.

No one has accepted responsibility, and the media should call them out on that, but nope.

 

I am not arguing that they should not be called out on the mess that Libya is at the moment, but it should not be used as a method to influence voters. I didn't think that was such a hard concept to grasp.

I don't want to get involved with many of the other points you raise as I haven't got the time or inclination, but I will point out that UN resolution 1973 was used as a legal basis for action which was supported by 10 members with 5 abstaining. Britain and France did not therefore unilaterally take action as you claim.

 

Those votes won't translate into more than about 4 seats so as a player in the post election horse trading, they are irrelevant

 

Fair enough matey, I do agree with you.

Watch this but ignore the message or the fact that it might be propaganda(he is dead after all, hardly propaganda at this stage), just look at the place like, look at the cars houses streets, it's pristine. Not any more. I'm a family man, if tyrrany means my wife and kids living in a beautiful country with many perks and free electricity and healthcare but no vote, and freedom means being ruled by terrorists in a rubble rape fest mashed by foreign armies, I'll choose tyrrany every time thanks. I'm practical like that.
He was a tyrant who took the country from a former Italian ****hole outpost with 12% literacy and mass poverty to the highest literacy level of all african states and housed people for free. Gaddafi didnt kill any protestors, that is complete bollocks, now proven to be lies and propaganda for the bombing.
Mustafa Abdul Jalil, Head of the National Transitional Council in Benghazi in 2011, admits: Gaddafi did not order the shooting that started the "revolution" in Libya - May 20, 2014. Ironically, Ukraine's "revolution" started with murder of protestors too, and Venezuela and Syria. Hmmmm? Rly?

 

Just wondering if you got a link for that quote, sounds hilarious.

 

David Cameron scores own goal by getting the football team he supports wrong
Prime Minister says sorry over 'brain fade' after accidentally saying he wished everyone supported West Ham – instead of Aston Villa
.

It was meant to be a joke emphasising his true football supporting colours during an early morning campaign speech in London.
But David Cameron has accidentally triggered fresh questions about the sincerity of his interest in the sport by wrongly identifying the team he is meant to follow.
The Prime Minister joked that he wished everyone supported West Ham – a Premier League rival of the team he is meant to back, Aston Villa.
The blunder came during a speech on the Conservatives’ plans for supporting Black, Asian and ethnic minority communities as he praised the country’s multiculturalism.
“We’re a shining example of a country where multiple identities work. A country where you can be Welsh, and Hindu, and British. Northern Irish and Jewish and British,” Mr Cameron said.
“Where you can where a kilt and a turban, where you can wear a hijab covered in poppies. Where you can support Man United, the W’Indies and Team GB all at the same time.”
He added: “Of course I’d rather you supported West Ham.”
There was a pause as the audience in Croydon, south London, laughed – apparently unaware of the slip – and the Prime Minister coughed before moving on.
However a BBC journalist came back to the remark in a question and answer session after the speech.
“You’ve said I think before that to govern is to choose. Do you choose West Ham or do you choose Villa?” the Prime Minister was asked.

please log in to view this image

Tim Sherwood, the new manager at Aston Villa, was praised by David Cameron when appointed in February
He replied: “Sorry, I had what Natalie Bennett [the Green Party leader] would describe as a brain fade. I’m a Villa fan. I don’t know what happened to me, I must have been overcome by something this morning.
"But there we are, these things sometimes happen when you’re on the stump.”
The blunder comes despite Mr Cameron often seeming fully briefed on the latest Villa news, the club he has supported after being taken to a game aged 13 by Sir William Dugdale, his uncle and former Villa chairman.
In February, Mr Cameron was asked what he thought of the club’s “new signing” by a Rolls Royce employee in what appeared to be an attempt to catch the Prime Minister out.
Mr Cameron replied by waxing lyrical about Tim Sherwood – the former Tottenham boss who had been installed as manager a few days earlier – and said he believed the coach would save them from relegation.
The Prime Minister has also been asked about his favourite player at the club in recent months and picked Christian Benteke, the Belgian striker who has bagged 10 league goals for Villa this season.
However there have been persistent questions about the strength of Prime Minster’s support - exacerbated by comments he made soon after joining the Commons in 2001.
“Many of those who have spoken in the debate or have written about the subject are either lawyers or football fans, but I have to confess I am neither,” Mr Cameron told fellow MPs during a Commons debate on 15 October 2001.
Yet Mr Cameron can take solace from knowing he is not the first Prime Minister to get into hot water over the sincerity of football support.

please log in to view this image

Tony Blair got into trouble over reported comments he made about Newcastle support
Tony Blair famously once reportedly said he watched Jackie Milburn play at his beloved Newcastle United, only for it to emerge Mr Blair would have been four and living in Australia at the time. It later emerged the remark, which made headlines in 1997, was misreported by a local newspaper journalist.
Gordon Brown, however, suffered from the opposite problem. So strong was his support of Raith Rovers that he supposedly intervened while prime minster to help the club with transfers.
Damian McBride, Mr Brown’s former spin doctor, recalled in his memoirs how a journalist once called asking if it was true the Prime Minister was in a Kirkcaldy pub car park at night discussing contract terms with the highly rated defender Marvin Andrews. Mr Brown’s reaction, Mr McBride wrote, was not denial. Instead the Prime Minister asked: "Have they got photos?"

please log in to view this image

Sponsored by Subaru

 

#liar #liar #pantsonfire

 

You cant make up that kind of stuff.