melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
Probably.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] People you'd rather see as Foreign Secretary than Boris Johnson
- Thread starter Tooting Gull
- Start date
Probably.
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
The difference is she hasn't mocked burqa wearers, just voiced an opinion that she has reservations over them. She hasn't said she doesn't like them because they look like bank robbing post boxes.
It's not that Johnson is pro or anti burqa, a valid debate BTW. It's the manner and wording he has used, and the intention behind the wording, from someone who wants to lead the country.
I don't really understand why some are finding it hard to differentiate between the two
I thought it would be different.
pb21
Well-known member
- Apr 23, 2010
- 6,293
Can you point me to where she mocks burqa wearers. It's not a subtle differentiation so even you should be able to spot it.
What's this got to do with left or right politics? You sound like you've swallowed a copy of the Daily Mail.
I've read what Johnson wrote and I actually agree with quite a lot of it. Unfortunately, as ever, he can't help himself when it comes to chucking in a bit of racism to make it controversial. It undermines what looks like the point of the article, but in reality it IS the point of the article.
He's just a nasty chancer who will do and say whatever he thinks will increase his profile and his popularity amongst the hard of thinking.
He proved this with his U turn on Brexit. It couldn't have been more clear that this was a man who values himself over everything and is willing to lie through his teeth to advance himself. But people still listen to him and some morons still vote for him. It's very sad really.
I don't see this as anything to do with left or right. It's just discussing a **** being a ****.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 7,795
Did I say it was exclusively left? These are career politicians who lie for a living
You said - precisely - "What I do find strange is the instant outrage, venom and bile of those on the left"
- Aug 7, 2003
- 7,795
No “exclusively” in there. Let’s beg to differ, Look, I respect your views, please respect mine.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 7,795
Thanks for the response, but when I see references to the Daily Mail I give up. I don’t read that rag or the vaunted (on here) Guardian. As for the rest of your post, I didn’t bother. Keep trying to pigeon hole people if that’s what you want.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Well the thing is about a burka is it covers everything so you can't tell what's underneath it till it's off.Don't suppose you considered that cos you're a bit of an alcoholic,and you don't get many beermats with burkas on.Well maybe you do.
As usual you're making no sense at all. The robbers in Manchester that you mentioned had TROUSERS. You said that yourself. You said they had a machete down their trousers. So the thing is I think they should ban trousers as you can't tell what's underneath them till they're off (this would also prevent young ladies being disappointed in nightclubs for the same reason).
You also can't be a "bit of" an alcoholic, You either are one or you aren't. It's an addiction, a disease. You'd better decide if you think I have it once and for all. I doubt you can prove it seeing as you can't even provide a link for robbery you claim was committed in a burka by people wearing trousers so you might as well look up a good lawyer at the same time
And his initials being BJ
I am not a supporter of the Burka and I am undecided whether I would support a ban. What I absolutely know for certain though is that I do not wish our politicians to reduce serious discussion to distracting nonsense with deliberate provocation about extremely sensitive and emotive subjects.
The man has an enviable public position, his voice is heard and his words hold sway. It is a damning indictment of the man that he chooses to use his priviliged position to stir up racial discourse.
Free speech. Just because something is free doesn't mean you should waste it.
The man has an enviable public position, his voice is heard and his words hold sway. It is a damning indictment of the man that he chooses to use his priviliged position to stir up racial discourse.
Free speech. Just because something is free doesn't mean you should waste it.
Last edited:
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,309
The difference is she hasn't mocked burqa wearers, just voiced an opinion that she has reservations over them. She hasn't said she doesn't like them because they look like bank robbing post boxes.
It's not that Johnson is pro or anti burqa, a valid debate BTW. It's the manner and wording he has used, and the intention behind the wording, from someone who wants to lead the country.
I don't really understand why some are finding it hard to differentiate between the two
It is worth pointing out for balance as no one appears to have read the article, the thrust was a pop at other EU countries for banning it.
He does drop in some offensive language which he should rightly apologise for, but I read it as an anti EU article more than anything else.
Problem with him is that he is a shock jock journalist or was. He's got form and what worries me about him more than anything else is that he is pretty devoid of any ideology at all beyond being Prime Minister.
Last edited:
Cool debate bro. If you're going to ignore someone's point then it's probably better to just ignore it. You know, instead of writing another mouth frothing post about how you've ignored it. When you clearly haven't but don't have a decent reply.
Nice flounce though.
Two year old grasp of reality, two girlfriends (left and right hands), League Two level of debate, Y2 standard of writing and comprehension.
So many user names that would have fit perfectly. But you chose the completely ironic one. Unless of course the professors involved are both dead and their decomposing brains have been mostly eaten by worms.
Nitram
Well-known member
- Jul 16, 2013
- 2,178
He's dog whistling, sees Trump succeeding with it, latest play to build an alternative platform for right leaning leadership bid. Probably wants to gain ground on Jacob Rees Mogg.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
Where did Emily Thornberry mock their appearance here then?
What Thornberry has said here is EXACTLY what Johnson's defenders are saying they want - a debate, without playground insults.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
I'm hardly going to have an intelligent debate with an aggressive drunk.Do you talk down to your Y2 children like that?If so that's why you're stuck in Sheffield.
The Two Professors highlighted the utter unwarranted arrogance of some in the teaching profession,and I see nothing much has changed.
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
Yeah, what she said was perfectly acceptable. Labour supporters wouldn't see it any other way. Thornberry is one of those people whom seems to say what she wants. I love the way the left jump all over what Johnson says but defend the racism and anti Semitism that is rife in labour.