• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Danishfurniturelover said:
Probably doing just to keep an MP at the next election, she is absolutely despised in her constituency, we know people over there and they hate her even blue rinses tories cant stand her.
Click to expand...
That's because she's fudging awful.

A perfect example of why positive discrimination does more to hinder the cause it purports to advance than to help it.
 
I couldn't stand Rudd. She has the same psychopathic coldness as May has

It will be interesting to see who replaces her. May's usual MO suggests it will be female remainder. Greening is the high profile one of those, but there's too much antagonism between the two. Brokenshire is probably the most capable candidate currently without a job and has worked in the home office before.
 
Gutter Boy said:
I couldn't stand Rudd. She has the same psychopathic coldness as May has

It will be interesting to see who replaces her. May's usual MO suggests it will be female remainder. Greening is the high profile one of those, but there's too much antagonism between the two. Brokenshire is probably the most capable candidate currently without a job and has worked in the home office before.
Click to expand...

Brokenshire was like the invisible man when in N Ireland and his inaction played a big part in creating the current stalemate there.

So, in Theresa’s government of the untalented, he’s perfect!
 
Did anybody see Diane Abbott's interview on ITV this morning, oh my fudging christ

This halfwit cretin could be a future home secretary, very worrying
 
All the attention has been on immigration, but that's not the most important thing in the Home Office.

Javid's brother is a chief super at West Mids. That'll be interesting: a classically Thatcherite Home Secretary who knows a bit about policing, and understands how much May has tinkled off the rozzers over the last eight years.
 
scaramanga said:
Is there something racist about something Rudd has done in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Rudd, maybe not. She's been used as a human shield for Theresa May. May oversaw the introduction and implementation of the Immigration Act 2014, which is an example of institutional racism imo and the main cause of the Windrush scandal.

Something that the "cretinous" Diane Abbott warned about at the time, in Parliament (and therefore voted against, one of the few MPs who was brave enough to go against The Daily Heil that most of our politicians are so scared of). The "competent" Theresa May said, at the time, that this had all been taken into account and everything was fine. Either she knew the policy would end up trying to turf out a bunch of black British people and didn't care (racist) or she was just sh1t at her job and had no idea that this was a possible consequence.

The incompetence of Theresa May outdoes Abbott by orders of magnitude, yet some people were fine with her as Home Secretary and some of them seem fine with her as Prime Minister. For all of her faults and her general awfulness infront of a camera/microphone, I'm not aware of Diane Abbott implementing policy that disproportionately hurts a minority group, detains them, deports them, denies them access to healthcare etc. Some smartarse will probably come back with a tweet or something, but what's worse - a tweet or actually ruining someone's life?
 
the dza said:
Rudd, maybe not. She's been used as a human shield for Theresa May. May oversaw the introduction and implementation of the Immigration Act 2014, which is an example of institutional racism imo and the main cause of the Windrush scandal.

Something that the "cretinous" Diane Abbott warned about at the time, in Parliament (and therefore voted against, one of the few MPs who was brave enough to go against The Daily Heil that most of our politicians are so scared of). The "competent" Theresa May said, at the time, that this had all been taken into account and everything was fine. Either she knew the policy would end up trying to turf out a bunch of black British people and didn't care (racist) or she was just sh1t at her job and had no idea that this was a possible consequence.

The incompetence of Theresa May outdoes Abbott by orders of magnitude, yet some people were fine with her as Home Secretary and some of them seem fine with her as Prime Minister. For all of her faults and her general awfulness infront of a camera/microphone, I'm not aware of Diane Abbott implementing policy that disproportionately hurts a minority group, detains them, deports them, denies them access to healthcare etc. Some smartarse will probably come back with a tweet or something, but what's worse - a tweet or actually ruining someone's life?
Click to expand...
So what's racist about the policy. It seems I don't know it as well as I think I do - care to detail those parts?
 
the dza said:
Rudd, maybe not. She's been used as a human shield for Theresa May. May oversaw the introduction and implementation of the Immigration Act 2014, which is an example of institutional racism imo and the main cause of the Windrush scandal.

Something that the "cretinous" Diane Abbott warned about at the time, in Parliament (and therefore voted against, one of the few MPs who was brave enough to go against The Daily Heil that most of our politicians are so scared of). The "competent" Theresa May said, at the time, that this had all been taken into account and everything was fine. Either she knew the policy would end up trying to turf out a bunch of black British people and didn't care (racist) or she was just sh1t at her job and had no idea that this was a possible consequence.

The incompetence of Theresa May outdoes Abbott by orders of magnitude, yet some people were fine with her as Home Secretary and some of them seem fine with her as Prime Minister. For all of her faults and her general awfulness infront of a camera/microphone, I'm not aware of Diane Abbott implementing policy that disproportionately hurts a minority group, detains them, deports them, denies them access to healthcare etc. Some smartarse will probably come back with a tweet or something, but what's worse - a tweet or actually ruining someone's life?
Click to expand...

May is evil, Abbott is incompetent.

Most politics is that being balanced out across successive governments
 
scaramanga said:
So what's racist about the policy. It seems I don't know it as well as I think I do - care to detail those parts?
Click to expand...

The policy meant that people who never used to require documentation to prove their immigration status suddenly found that they required it. These people would overwhelmingly be non-white.

Diane Abbott, in 2014, asked May in Parliament: "Has she given no thought to the effect that her measures, designed to crackdown on illegal immigrants, would have on people who are British nationals but appear as if they might be migrants?"

Theresa May responded that they "have put in a great deal of thought into how these particular measures will operate."

A government policy that disproportionately hurts a particular race can be said, imo, to be institutionally racist (The Home Office being the institution).
 
Last edited:
the dza said:
The policy meant that people who never used to require documentation to prove their immigration status suddenly found that they required it. These people would overwhelmingly be non-white.

Diane Abbott, in 2014, asked May in Parliament: "Has she given no thought to the effect that her measures, designed to crackdown on illegal immigrants, would have on people who are British nationals but appear as if they might be migrants?"

Theresa May responded that they "have put in a great deal of thought into how these particular measures will operate."

A government policy that disproportionately hurts a particular race can be said, imo, to be institutionally racist (The Home Office being the institution).
Click to expand...

The measures implemented gave us greater ability to tackle illegal immigrants, which is perfectly valid.

That the Windrush generation is caught up in this is shocking, and shows how poorly implemented the policy was - but that doesnt mean it is either racist or even incorrect.

A good idea, badly implemented, is still a good idea. There should have been much clearer communication, with the like of the Windrush generation targetted to have them attain the required documents. A passport, some sort of certification, something to give them the ok.

That being done, this was a perfectly valid policy. Make it harder for ILLEGAL immigrants to thrive here, make it less appealling to them and easier to send them home. Im totally ok with that, even if I think what has happened since is awful.

I fail to see any racism in it though, unless the idea of borders themselves are racist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back