He is such a coward. Hiding behind the most transparent of excuses.Blaming the Chief Whip when his CoS had been briefing about it for over a week. Cnut!
He is such a coward. Hiding behind the most transparent of excuses.Blaming the Chief Whip when his CoS had been briefing about it for over a week. Cnut!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
As he will refuse this, what's the likely backlash, or will there be none?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I don’t doubt the impact but the context is deliberately and persistently lied about by the left wing outrage crew. That’s what annoys me.Firstly, why did you originally challenge the accuracy of the statement when you evidently knew full well Johnson made those comments?
Secondly, never underestimate the importance of language. It was inevitable that a leading political figure using such language would only embolden bigots.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...terboxes-burqa-islamphobia-rise-a9088476.html
I also worry about someone who would describe the comment that people wearing the hijab/burka resemble letterboxes and bank robbers as "comedy". Not because it's offensive, but because if that makes you laugh then your sense of humour must be pitiful. It's the sort of thing a few 12 year olds might find mildly amusing.
Did you read the article? It criticised burka bans and defended their right to wear whatever they want even if they do walk around looking like bank robbers etc. Lighten up!No he didn't. He used them as epithets of ridicule and threat in order to emphasise as well as he could his position. IE that he finds the niqab/burka ridiculous and oppressive, feels businesses and people in authority should be entitled to ask for their removal during professional interaction but that a blanket ban would be counterproductive and set dangerous precedent.
Calling women who were the burka bank robbers and letterboxes is not OK, in any context. I thought this much would be obvious.I don’t doubt the impact but the context is deliberately and persistently lied about by the left wing outrage crew. That’s what annoys me.
Did you read the article? It criticised burka bans and defended their right to wear whatever they want even if they do walk around looking like bank robbers etc. Lighten up!
Very much this I'd presume.As he will refuse this, what's the likely backlash, or will there be none?
The 1922 committee is all Tory backbenchers, not just a subdivision. And yes it does.“One Nation”, “1922 Committee”. Fecking hell. How many Tory sub-divisions are there? And do they all sound a bit fascist?
Not the TM Withdrawal Agreement. But as I understand it, the outcome of the joint TM and Labour discussions which were not presented to parliament.Kinnock et al are supposed to be trying to amend to bring back Theresa May’s deal I believe.
Why wouldn't they. Whatever people think about the EU, they have a vested interest in ensuring that the UK exit is as orderly as is possibleReporter on Sky News said his sources telling him the EU would grant an extension
One nation Tories are the centrists like Cameron and Osbourne. I think the idea of the moniker is that they look after the common man as well as the rich cnuts. Boris was one once until he figured he could get into power by jumping on the Eurosceptic bandwagon.“One Nation”, “1922 Committee”. Fecking hell. How many Tory sub-divisions are there? And do they all sound a bit fascist?
Yes. Evidently you did not as my description of its contents is entirely accurate..Did you read the article? It criticised burka bans and defended their right to wear whatever they want even if they do walk around looking like bank robbers etc. Lighten up!
They should just leave and start a Progressive Conservative party. Leave behind the fascist one to BoJo, JRM, IDS and CummingsAs he will refuse this, what's the likely backlash, or will there be none?
Brexit, mate. We’re getting on with itWhat the hell is happening.
Did they just add all the amendments with out any opposition because there were no tellers?Brexit, mate. We’re getting on with it
If anyone actually believe that the UK is better off by 'getting into bed' with the US and that we will get a favorable trade deal, compared with our current relationship with the EU, then think again.Just listening to BoJo is like listening to Trump.
Lies and more lies.
That's how I understood it too. (am equally amazed at the procedure)Did they just add all the amendments with out any opposition because there were no tellers?
Just the Kinnock one. No idea what the hell is going on now.Did they just add all the amendments with out any opposition because there were no tellers?
Taking back control soo hard it hurts.What the hell is happening.
Vicki Young literally just said they think it passed by mistakeHow can an amendment pass by mistake?
Because we still like to pretend we're living in the 17th century.How can an amendment pass by mistake?
So even after you've seen the tangible impact that Johnson's comments had in facilitating a rise in bigoted and Islamophobic attacks, you still defend the comments as light-hearted and their significance as overstated. Maybe, you could show some humility and accept that the precious snowflakes who were offended at the time were offended for good reason. You keep trying to place the comments 'in context', but there is no context that makes comments like that by a high-profile politician defensible or justifiable. Imagine the uproar in the press if Corbyn had written an otherwise perfectly reasonable article about Jewish rites but included within it comments that made jokes (and childish and unfunny ones at that) about the appearance of Jewish men when they wear the yarmulke.I don’t doubt the impact but the context is deliberately and persistently lied about by the left wing outrage crew. That’s what annoys me.
Did you read the article? It criticised burka bans and defended their right to wear whatever they want even if they do walk around looking like bank robbers etc. Lighten up!
Sky said:Amid some confusion among journalists and MPs in the chamber alike, they are now voting on the third reading of the bill, as amended (see below).
The legislation would compel Boris Johnson to delay Brexit to avoid no-deal on 31 October.
But in an intriguing twist, an amendment which essentially resurrects a version of Theresa May's deal has been passed as well and becomes part of the bill.
The Brexit Party won't bother turning up after a while - same as UKIP. Not a great concern for the EU parliament.Not with all those Brexit Party MEP's remaining in place in the EU Parliament and attempting to create havoc wherever possible, the Farage/Boris axis 'fifth column' writ large I suspect.
At the end of the day it has to be remain by revoking A50, or out with No deal... it cant be anything else.
No. I don't either. I smell a rat.What's happened? Was putting little one to bed.
Don't believe they couldn't find a teller, did they not just go through unopposed?
Not quite. It apparently is the WA but with the changes resulting from the joint TM and Labour discussions.The passing of the Kinnock Amendment means that Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement is back on the table.
Well, well, well...