Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Telling The Truth

13»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Labour are not a left wing party.
    In my view they're veering back to their old ways and this will be accelerated when Gordon steps into no.10. But socialism in any guise is an abomination, even the name "Labour" brings me out in a rash. Can't stand them.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rich Kid wrote:
    In my view they're veering back to their old ways and this will be accelerated when Gordon steps into no.10. But socialism in any guise is an abomination, even the name "Labour" brings me out in a rash. Can't stand them.


    All this does is highlight your complete ignorance of politics.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rich Kid wrote:
    But socialism in any guise is an abomination, even the name "Labour" brings me out in a rash. Can't stand them.

    Why? Why is socialism so bad?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Tory boys and people who see themselves as 'bosses' and 'businessmen' are born with a chip that makes them dislike the words labour and socialist. No, they don't need to understand why.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would have thought as a Christian the ideals of socialism would appeal.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    I would have thought as a Christian the ideals of socialism would appeal.
    I think the two sit very closely together in certain ideals. Like if you love everyone equally you treat everyone as equals. After all, God made all men (and women, I know...) equally and He loves us all equally so who are we to create artificial heirachies based on wealth of all things?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would have thought as a Christian the ideals of socialism would appeal.

    Why?

    "God" didn't send Jesus down to share "His" power out equally. Why would Christian's want to share theirs?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do think Christ emphasized that it is easier for a camel to enter the "eye of the needle" (smallest gate in Jerusalem btw) than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven?

    RK is just another blathering self indulgent materialist who worships his wealth above all (to the extent of even boasting of it in his profile) and looks down on all those at whose expense that consolidated wealth was made.

    You want to speak of "undetected crime" in the other thread, lets examine the much longer running, widespread, and largely unindicted white collar and corporate crime perpetrated on a daily basis around the globe in the insatiable name of "profit".

    RK had best invest in asbestos suits and fire extinguishers given his likely destination. ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Can you stop calling him Phoney Blair, its really very tiresome.

    Ok, how about "Bliar"?

    Ian.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    If he's so obviously a liar and so obviously this country is going to the dogs why are Labour at least 5 points ahead in the polls?

    Because no political party ever failed by overestimating the stupidity of the voting public?

    Ian.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    droid42 wrote:
    Ok, how about "Bliar"?

    Ian.
    Apt. But I prefer Phoney, as the man is a fake, a phoney, a snake-oil salesman.
    To me he'll always be Phoney Blair.
    If he shook my hand I'd count my fingers afterwards.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    why though, every politician is a liar, to be honest hes done some bad things, but he has done more good in one day at number ten than you will ever do in your life
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Rich Kid, Michael Howard has shown himself to be just as untrustworthy as Tony Blair. So, who do you propose we vote for, for Honesty exactally?

    And, the fact is, people turn to crime for a reason. If we remove the reason, people won't do it. Detterent effects won't stop those who have a reason to do it, only opportunists.

    We need not only to hit the criminals, but the motivation for doing as such.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Rich Kid, Michael Howard has shown himself to be just as untrustworthy as Tony Blair. So, who do you propose we vote for, for Honesty exactally?
    I don't necessarily trust Howard either, but lesser of two evils and all that ....

    Anyway I've just realised I'll be off to the US on Thursday and will still be there on 5th May, so I've had to quickly organise a proxy vote.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    droid42 wrote:
    Ok, how about "Bliar"?

    Thats just as pathetic, if not worse because it doesnt work.

    What is a bliar? It doesnt even read properly.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I tend to like the term President Bliar, but then I'm no Jonny Come Lately to not wanting him as Prime Minister (didn't want him in 1997 or 2002).

    However like all terms they need to be used sparingly or else they become a meaningless mantra
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Returning to the topic "telling the truth", its interesting how we're gradually learning more and more about the supposed legality of Blair's Iraq war.
    Each morsel of truth is having to be prised from the Labour Lie Machine but it does seem as though Lord Goldsmith had severe reservations about the legality of the war.

    He said:

    1) The UN, and not the US or UK, was the appropriate body to decide whether Saddam Hussein was in "material breach" of resolutions aimed at curbing his WMD programme.

    2) The UN had not authorised the use of "all necessary means" to enforce its resolutions against Saddam Hussein.

    3) A second UN resolution was necessary before hositilites began.

    4) Earlier UN resolutions authorising military action were no longer valid.

    5) UN weapons inspector Hans Blix was reporting co-operation from Iraq.

    6) The US's legal position on the validity of the war did not apply to the UK.

    So once again the question has to be asked: Can you believe a word Blair says? Answer: NO.
    He took this country into an illegal war in which British lives, amonmg many others, have been sacrificed on the altar of Blair's political ambition. Its a moral disgrace and an effront to democracy, decency, and humanity.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So once again the question has to be asked: Can you believe a word Blair says? Answer: NO.
    He took this country into an illegal war in which British lives, amonmg many others, have been sacrificed on the altar of Blair's political ambition. Its a moral disgrace and an effront to democracy, decency, and humanity.

    So given that Howard would have broadly done the same - will you be encouraging everyone on this baord to vote Lib Dem?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hmmm, is this from the 'evidence' that the Mail on Sunday used for their article yesterday.

    It was a second hand account of what someone saw when they read the paper in the past. Sounds a mite dodgy to me.

    However I would very much like to see the legal advice, yet at the same time I can see why it might set a dodgy president in that legal advice should always be private.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Hmmm, is this from the 'evidence' that the Mail on Sunday used for their article yesterday.
    No. John Humphrey was interviewing that slippery eel Jack Man-of-Straw this morning on Radio 4.

    The 13-page document written by Lord Goldsmith has been leaked. Someone had the decency to put it into the public domain so it could be very interesting to see how it runs - I hope it confirms once-and-for-all the lies and illegality of Blairs Iraq war.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Thats just as pathetic, if not worse because it doesnt work.

    What is a bliar? It doesnt even read properly.

    Wow, such a serious, stick-up-the-arse response I've never seen on here before.... It's just a misspelling of his name to get the word "liar" ... appropriate given the nature of this debate and his track-record so far ;)

    Ian.
Sign In or Register to comment.