BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:07 PM

Facts are scared not sacred. In this day and age they might be fake.
The main thing is to obey Steve's all powerful facts, preferences and self proclaimed infallibility with profound sacred respect. ;^]

All Kidding aside, THROWING the bums out even if they are guilty of genocidal manslaughter is nearly impossible. Even Isreal and the US can not get rid of their discredited leaders. The last leader who got his just deserts was who, Mousselini , Kadaffy?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:33 PM

"Not a big fan of the Guardian." Y'know, I've posted about stuff like this several times before. When you read any news source you are imbibing what an editor has decided is most important. If that editor decides that an item isn't important, he'll either not tell you about it at all or he'll put in on the bottom of page 27. As soon as I see any front-page item about devastatingly-unimportant shite about Megan, Vicky Beckham or the queer old dean, I know that an attempt is being made to mass-manipulate us to buy their paper. And why not. Unless they can sell papers, we wouldn't have papers. It's even worse wth the Beeb. They have half an hour to tell us what they've decided is important for us to know. At the moment they're telling us overwhelmingly about deaths caused by coronavirus. You'd think that little else was going on in the world. They don't even tell us not to worry, only about one in a hundred will actually die, and that flu, which they never mention, will see just as many of us off, pro rata, every winter.

But here's the rub. The Guardian, the Indy and the Beeb, imperfect and arbitrary tho' their news coverage is, strain themselves to separate news from comment. There are news items that read neutrally, and there are opinion pieces. It's impossible to confuse the two (except for poor Iains, who is so bamboozled by his constant resort to his far-right criminal muse that he can't tell news from comment, as he's just demonstrated, a bit like champions of the Daily Mail). Like it or not, you have to educate yourself to be very discriminating as to what you accept from the mass media, and your default mode should be total scepticism. Bejaysus, the Guardian gets me hopping bloody mad at least one a day. The very worst thing is to indulge in confirmation bias. Go to Staines and he'll always tell you precisely what you want to hear. That's how he makes his money. Poor Iains can't see it. He's never tried to discriminate. He wants to hear only what his puppet-masters have decided he should hear and what they've told him he must pass on. Hence the post at 05.17 PM.

That'll do for now...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:35 PM

Go and have another vat of wine, Donuel. You glaringly don't belong in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:41 PM

Steve - Siamese fighting fish thread...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:44 PM

Sorry, mate, I'm staying here. Helen patronises, and she's doing it in that thread. She's a bit of a mod manqué.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:58 PM

Steve - well we've been pushed into and penned up in this quarantine ghetto..
while 'they' freely stride in at will,
poking us with sharp sticks for their own petty amusement,
so convinced they are too righteous and superior to leave us alone...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:23 PM

You're not wrong, mate. But let's not allow the hypocrisy of that thread pass us by...We are ghettoed whereas they can sneer superciliously from outside the fish tank with impunity... At least, I'm guessing that the cod-metaphor in that thread will be not only allowed to stand but will quietly be celebrated by many a yank who can't bear our lustiness...

Hey, see but I did there? Fighting fish? Cod? I mean, whaddam I like!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:33 PM

In the meantime, take in this little snippet about what Toryism really means:

Tenants who asked their billionaire landlord for a rent reduction during the coronavirus pandemic were told to use the money they would have spent on lunches and holidays to pay the full amount due.

More than 100 residents living in a block in Somerford Grove, east London, signed a letter addressed to their management estate agency and the building’s corporate landlords asking for a 20% reduction in rent and an agreement that no tenant would be evicted during the coronavirus pandemic.

But the letting agent, Tower Quay properties, told them their request was “unreasonable” and “unrealistic”, adding that any drop in tenants’ income would be minimised by a reduction in spending on holidays, entertainment, travel, clothes and lunches.

“Subsequently, when all of this is taken into account, in most cases we believe the impact on disposable income will be minimal, and there is therefore no justification for any reduction in rent, especially considering that whilst tenants are isolating the wear and tear in properties is increasing, which will be at the cost of the landlord,” the agent said.

Nice!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:35 PM

Don't bring a shrimp to a fish fight...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:39 PM

Wonder if the tory govt classify bailiffs as essential workers...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:44 PM

Soft faces, hard cases, hit you with their deadly smile...

And so to bed.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 01:56 AM

All heart aren’t they, those billionaire private landlords?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:10 AM

"full of malicious inuendo and shy on fact"
Sez the feller who who baosts about being reliant on blogs from a convicted criminal professional right wing blogger with links to the ultra-right British National Party (and can't spell innuendo)
Yeah - well - I'll have to think long and carefully about that argument
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:10 AM

A further point Iains
Anybody who automatically dismisses a paper of the standing of The Guardian without presenting any evidence as you constantly do, yet relies as heavily as you do on a professional propagandist who employs people to gather his propaganda undermines any chance of his having own credibility accepted in discussions such as this
Nobody with any sense does this without offering back-up argument
I'm not making this as an insult - I'm offering it as a piece of advice
I share the views of those who believe that rational right-wing argument presented in a reasonable if not friendly manner would be a tremendous asset to this forum
As things stand, you don't begin to qualify - sorry
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:11 AM

Pfr an example from the gruniard:
But when asked on Tuesday by the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, Tom Tugendhat, whether there had been policy advice on whether to participate in the EU ventilator scheme, the FCO’s most senior mandarin appeared to contradict the government line.

McDonald told the committee: “It was a political decision. The UK mission in Brussels briefed ministers about what was available, what was on offer, and the decision is known.”

His remarks appeared to blow a hole in the original defence of a “communication confusion” previously put forward by the Cabinet Office minister, Michael Gove.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/21/uk-refusal-of-eu-ventilator-offer-was-political-decision

But we find the Gruniard not only relies on inuendo but also tells a pack of lies unlike the highly esteemed Mr Guido!
How else to explain the following?

Top civil servant is forced into embarrassing U-turn after claiming ministers made a 'political decision' to DELIBERATELY snub EU schemes to buy PPE – and now accepts Downing Street just missed the email

    Sir Simon McDonald made the claim to MPs in remote committee meeting today
    It directly contradicted previous explanation offered by Downing Street
    Matt Hancock later said that the civil servant's version of events was not right
    Health Secretary: 'There was no political decision not to participate in scheme'
    Today Sir Simon wrote to Foreign Affairs committee chair to say he was wrong   

And humiliatingly, Health Secretary Matt Hancock confirmed there was 'no political decision not to participate in the scheme' during this evening's Downing Street press conference.
Sir Simon McDonald told MPs it had been a 'political decision' not to take part in Brussels-orchestrated efforts to bulk-buy protective equipment, but had to U-turn this evening
This evening Sir Simon McDonald sent a letter to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee in an embarrassing U-turn

In the letter, addressed to chair Tom Tugendhat, Sir Simon admits the 'facts of the situation are as previously set out'.

He says: 'Unfortunately due to a misunderstanding, I inadvertently and wrongly told the Committee that Ministers were briefed by UKMIS on the EU's Joint Procurement Agreement scheme and took a political decision not to participate in it.

'This is incorrect. Ministers were not briefed by our mission in Brussels about the scheme and a political decision was not taken on whether or not to participate.'

He went on: 'Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint COVID EU procurement schemes.

'As four initial schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part.'

Previously, Sir Simon, the permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office, told MPs on the committee that officials briefed ministers on what EU schemes were still open to the UK, even though it left the bloc at the end of January.

So we have a sh*t stirring civil serpent and a paper ready to print dirt without fact checking.
Looks like typical lefty politics to me. Utterly disgusting. "quelle surprise" It would appear my first description of the Guardian was seriously in error. The rag is even worse than I initially portrayed it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:31 AM

at a rough guess, how many people do you think read all that post, Ian? was it about some leek?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:36 AM

Anybody who automatically dismisses a paper of the standing of The Guardian without presenting any evidence as you constantly do, yet relies as heavily as you do on a professional propagandist who employs people to gather his propaganda undermines any chance of his having own credibility accepted in discussions such as this
Funny you should mention propaganda
Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists that wrote the opinion piece on Boris and the missed cobra meetings.
Here for your delectation and delight:
the Sunday Times’ Environment Editor, Jonathan Leake, was one of the authors. Leake’s stories are often full of holes…

One stark mistake in the article was claiming immunologist Peter Openshaw “would have recommended increasing the threat to high”, however Openshaw later tweeted “I wasn’t there so can’t say if I would have dissented if I’d been there to hear the arguments”.
Previous gems include:
    Accused Gove of ordering the “killing of sick squirrels and deer”, with DEFRA subsequently explaining it was completely untrue and he hadn’t approached them for comment
    Asserted based purely on anecdotal evidence that “Pets, zoo animals and even Prince Charles’s cattle have been felled by the rampant disease [TB]” – something, again, the department explicitly said was completely untrue only to not have their statement included in the piece
    Wrongly claimed “French warship chases fishermen from scallop bay”, once again without asking the department who would have informed him the ships in question were 30 miles away from each other
    Misled readers that “metered homes pay 60% more for water” by making inappropriate comparisons between metered and unmetered customers with different water companies

Leake has a promising future as a fiction write, a blithering idiot or a budding propagandist.


By the way I look forward to seeing examples of Guido's propaganda.
Not that you will be able to find any of course. That is not what he does, as you well know. …

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:46 AM

"Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists "
Over and ourt and, for the future of this thread I would highly recommend that a total embargo be operated on all behaviour of this nature
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:50 AM

Sez the feller who who baosts
annd corrects mt spelling in the same line.

A true jim gem!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:55 AM

"a total embargo be operated on all behaviour of this nature" is what is being proposed and what you are refusing to do, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:10 AM

OK, here’s a suggestion - how about asking the mods to open a separate thread which only Iains and Jim can post to, and block them both from this thread? That way, they can kick, punch, bite, gouge, and spit in each other’s faces to their hearts’ content, and everybody else can get on with intelligent, civilised discussion here.

Sounds like a starter to me.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:18 AM

"and what you are refusing to do, Jim."
I have made my position clear - I made the suggestion in the first place - I asm not relly happy about blanking anybody in the present circumstances, but neither am I happy about allowing that individual just to refuse to debate and just use this forum for propaganda   
He has not been blanked and while he is responded to his propaganda needs to be exposed for what it is
It is unbelievebly mindless to continue as he does at the time people are dying of the inept politics he is defending
I really have finished with him - that was my last try
It's up to everybody else
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:23 AM

Late yesterday afternoon was mired in political farce when the FCO boss Simon McDonald suggested that Britain’s decision not to take part in the EU’s PPE procurement scheme was a “political” one, in direct contradiction to the Government’s given explanation of an email communications failure. Hancock immediately denied the claim by McDonald and hours later the top mandarin issued a correction stating he was wrong and it was, after all, not a political decision. The writers of Yes Minister would have rejected such a scenario…

Regardless of the merits of UK non-participation at first in a scheme being run by a foreign political body we are no longer members of, it is on form for the media to portray theoretical participation in the scheme as a land of milk and honey, when weeks on from the start of the crisis, the EU scheme has not delivered a single piece of PPE equipment to a single member state.

Not only are countries like Italy and Spain reaching the end stages of their Coronavirus pandemic having not seen PPE help from the EU, according to the Irish Medical Times, on the 24th March an EU Commission spokesman said, “The equipment should be available two weeks after the Member States sign the contracts with the bidders, which they should do very rapidly,”. If the UK Government missed a deadline this badly, you can be sure the media would be canning them…
untrammelled facts from Guido

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:26 AM

INCIDENTALLY (Back to the real world
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:27 AM

Cross posted - by the way
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:36 AM

Your real world is a tad out of date. See : 22 Apr 20 - 03:11 AM

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:56 AM

Here is the key passage in McDonald’s retraction letter, despite the gruniard repeating the lie again today:


Unfortunately, due to a misunderstanding, I inadvertently and wrongly told the committee that ministers were briefed by UKMIS [the UK mission in Brussels] on the EU’s joint procurement agreement scheme and took a political decision not to participate in it. This is incorrect. Ministers were not briefed by our mission in Brussels about the scheme and a political decision was not taken on whether or not to participate.

The facts of the situation are as previously set out. Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint Covid EU procurement schemes. As those four initial schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part.

Needless to say some labour MP is frothing the letter is not credible
With every action and word carefully documented I am sure we will find out exactly what the story is. Right now it is Government 10, servant nil.
Sounds like a case for summary dismissal to me, deliberately trying to sabotage the government .

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:02 AM

So, according to the article, The prime minister's spokesperson had initially said the government had not taken part because the U.K. was “no longer a member [of the EU]” and was “making our own efforts”. Then Downing Street claimed it had missed the deadline. Then there was a "communication problem". Then we had not joined because we were not invited. Now, in spite of having missed the deadline and not being invited, we have joined the scheme but the EU are not sending us PPE anyway...

All in the same article. WTF is going on? You would think a group of seasoned liars with the liar in chief presiding would be able to get the story straight. And people wonder why I say they are not to be trusted.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:25 AM

In so far as there is a pattern to that, Dave, it is that when people are asked what happened when they weren't necessarily prepared for the question they say it was political, and then it is subsequently 'clarified' that it was not.   

Make of that what you will.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:36 AM

A taste of sanity (surprisingly from the guardian)
To Date nothing has been delivered

Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the EU has launched four calls for tender for medical equipment and supplies. It invited companies to supply gloves and surgical gowns on 28 February, personal protective equipment (PPE) for eye and respiratory protection on 15 March and medical ventilators and respiratory equipment on the same day. A final call to companies to supply laboratory equipment, including testing kits, was made on 19 March. The total value of PPE being purchased is around €1.5bn (£1.3bn). The EU ceiling for purchases of ventilators is €790m. The first call for tender of PPE on 28 February failed because of a lack of suitable suppliers. It was relaunched on 12 March. Since then all four calls for tender have successfully found companies willing to supply the goods to the scale and quality required. The timeline for delivery varies. Some of the PPE is expected imminently. There is a longer time frame for deliveries of ventilators with the EU warning member states that it could take as long as a year for all the machines to arrive.

So much for much vaunted EU efficiency (and what were we arguing over?)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 08:36 AM

I gave up reading this thread a few posts back - I'm to busy with real life problems..
I'll try again later..

What I will say now is this..

I try my best to show basic respect and read every word of the few BS threads I follow..
But I've told Iains this before, now I mean it..
His copy and paste posts are too long and boring to read,
with such little reward at the end of the tedium..
So now I can't even be bothered speed read scanning them any more...

This is the final straw - but now you boast it as a virtue...!!!

"Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists that wrote the opinion piece on Boris"

That is no different to the tactics of the BnPs old "RED WATCH" intimidation website..

"We know who you are, where you work, and where you live..
We can get you anytime......"

This supports suspicions of who guidos little helpers really are...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 09:30 AM

I for one have never been arguing that the EU is particularly efficient.

The government should have been pursuing PPE via the EU andindependently from overseas and from local providers. There is no reason at all why pursuing one means you do not pursue the others. Nor does it matter too much in itself whether the EU has yet delivered. Of course, we would prefer it if it did, but if there were a large supply in the offing you should seek it, wherever it comes from, even if it takes several months to arrive. That is actually the logic that has been used for ventilators. If Dyson could deliver many times the number that our domestic resources can, it is worth trying to get them to do that even if it takes months to arrive. (Not that I think Dyson can, but that is the logic.) Meanwhile, of course, you get as much domestic and other supply as you can, and if the EU or Dyson never delivers, well, you are no worse off.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 11:02 AM

" been arguing that the EU is particularly efficient."
As a group of Capitalist countries driven by profit, efficiency is left to the individual countries - it's a mistake (often a deliberate one to treat the EU as a monolith group
It's benefits lie in mutual co-operation, which never suited an ex-empire that couldn't be in charge of
IRELAND did extremely well out of membership
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 11:49 AM

it's a mistake (often a deliberate one to treat the EU as a monolith group
However it was the EU gave out   the invites to join the PPE and ventilator purchase group
From European Commission
DG Health and Food Safety website

The joint procurement of medical countermeasures is included as an article in the 2013 decision on serious cross-border threats to health. As an implementing action of this Decision, the Joint Procurement Agreement (JPA) was adopted on 10 April 2014. To date, the JPA has been signed by 23 EU countries. The Commission launched the procedure to prepare an agreement for the joint procurement of vaccines in the case of a future pandemic.
The JPA enables countries to procure pandemic vaccines and other medical countermeasures and equipment as a group, rather than individually. Through the JPA, any EU country can make a proposal to others to procure medical countermeasures together. A minimum of four Member States, with agreement from the Commission, is needed to launch a joint procurement procedure.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 12:26 PM

It seems right wingers who moan most about EU bureaucracy,
are also the folks most keenly interested in wallowing in it...!!!???

Most of the rest of us, whichever way we voted on brexit,
are bored to death with the over complexities
of all this fathomless red tape officialese...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 12:58 PM

"are bored to death with the over complexities"
I very much doubt if it's now going to happen - (not within may of our lifetimes anyway the way the pandemic is being mishandled)
Economic predictions throughout the world are such that any nation taking such a leap in the dark such as this need to be out of their skull
None of us are going to be left with feet to stand on including prospective trading partners
EVEN THE WORST BREXIT BUMWIPES REALISE THIS

Every cloud hopefully
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 01:50 PM

it has happened, Jim. We left at the end of January. what remains is the future trading relationship. As I have said before the same thing to so is to extend to the end of 2021 but I fully expect the government to stick to Dec 2020.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:38 PM

"We left at the end of January."
Technically, yes, of course we did
The CONSEQUENCES HAVE YET TO BE FACED

It wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't a change of heart when this kicks in alongside the grim financial consequences of the Virus becomes clear
Are people really going to dance to Trump's Tune now he's fully exposed himself as a certifiable liability
I hate to think my country has sun as low as that
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:44 PM

EVEN THE WORST BREXIT BUMWIPES REALISE THIS (I presume you are attempting to describe the victorious Tory party that has such stalwarts as the esteemed Mr Rees Mogg among its cadre of distuinguished members) A poor loser,or what?

Unless the winning Tory party wish to change the law we are out at the end of the year. With a deal, or no deal. Just imagine how much worse the situation would be right now had Corbyn and his 5 ring circus won the election.
You also have to bear in mind that should we be brainndead enough to seek an extension the EU will hold the UK to ransom as it tries to fill its depleted coffers.
I suspect any eurobonds that may be sold will be worthless 5 years down the road. The latest wheeze is to call them corona bonds - I can see why. They will end uo being extremely toxic to anyone daft enough to buy
them, to say "invest" in them is a bit of a contradiction in terms.
The sooner we are away from their piggy little clutches the better.
Rule Britannia I say

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:07 PM

Bollocks, I say.. to that particular Iains persona...

Not for any content you may be trying to express,
but the negative disagreeable way you chose to express it...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:37 PM

I tailor   my   response to whatever triggered it. I would have thought that was abundantly clear.

Serious questions deserve serious answers   Flippant comments do not.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:56 PM

Iains - but you well know we are all stuck in the same boat of having to appease mods
with goody two shoes non insulting behaviour and language...

As tiresome as that is for any of us used to traditional robust British
piss taking humour...

The overseas mods are not so familiar with our kind of blokey wind up banter...

Personally, I'd like our politics threads to be permitted to continue,
even if we must be bowdlerized..[ooer missus..]..

Goody Two shoes is the last thing I am. I'm also not an 'overseas mod' - if I were I think this whole thread would have been closed. I'd like this thread to be able to continue and I don't care about language or behaviour but the people being 'spoken' to certainly get fed up with being insulted and are more than happy to let me know.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:26 PM

He must mean that nice Mr Mogg, stalwart of the Brexiteers, a major player in the ERG, who as soon as Brexit was on the horizon moved his Somerset Capital Management company to Dublin so that is could remain with Europe.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:47 PM

Pfr I think if you look at my responses and what they responded to then you must admit that you are probably talking to the wrong person.
A   position can be stated in several different ways. If deliberately stated or titled in such a way as to cause   maximum   offence to those holding a counter view there can be no surprise if the perpetrator is mocked. Act like a child - be treated as a child is   my view. Check any of my posts and see what previous posting triggered the response I gave. There are few innocents on this forum, especially among those constantly claiming to be so.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:07 PM

But there is one individual - Iains - pushing every button he can think of, to cause dissension.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:35 PM

So you know what to do, then, Maggie...?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:07 PM

So you know what to do, then, Maggie...?

If she doesn't I'm sure Helen can guide her to true enlightenment.

And why the one individual - Iains - pushing every button he can think of, to cause dissension"

having been identified, documented, and acknowledged is tolerated, protected and encouraged is one of the great cosmic mysteries of the age.

Greg F, where are you when we need you???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:12 PM


OK, so we remove one person because they disagree with you in a 'robust' manner. Who then comes along to fill the vacuum? Because come they most certainly will.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:26 PM

How do you know, Barb'ry? That's just received wisdom, which, along with victim-blaming, is a rather easy fallback for you mods when the more difficult decisions (such as sacking idiots) evade you. As I've always said to Maggie, I'm on your side. You have this shite to put up with and no-one's paying you. The recent history is that Iains stepped in bigtime, like the big girl's blouse he is, when Teribus was sacked. But he was here before that happened and was already a complete pain in the arse. I don't see anyone here who is waiting with baited breath to step into a sacked Iains' shoes. So basically, and I know that you're a lusty soul who suffers no fools gladly and who can take flak, er, don't give me that...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:30 PM

My bad - fed the troll.