General Election

This is a general message forum for all football and other general posts. Images, banter and topic wandering allowed. ALL TICKET RELATED POSTS IN DEDICATED THREAD IN HERE ONLY. All ticket related posts elsewhere will be deleted.

Moderators: Virginia_R, nige101uk, willesdenr, qprdotorgadmin, ZENITH R

User avatar
Esox Lucius
dot.org legend
dot.org legend
Posts: 19290
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:17 pm
Location: Banbury, Oxon.

Re: General Election

Post by Esox Lucius » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:12 pm

SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:01 pm
DUP are a fully engaged party in Parliament, whereas Sinn Fein do not even take up their seats which shows their contempt.

However, Corbyn met with the IRA when they were active in a bombing campaign, not just a political party.
So... in your mind that makes it acceptable? FYI. Sinn Fein won't ever be taking up their seats as it requires them to pledge allegiance to the Queen before doing so.
It's not the despair that will kill you, it's the hope.

User avatar
dm
dot.org player kit 2007
dot.org player kit 2007
Posts: 11873
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Just over the border...

Re: General Election

Post by dm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:39 pm

SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:01 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 am
William wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:11 am
Wheras your man Corbyn has no links to terrorists......................
If you think he has had links then you must concede that May has links - no, not links - is actually getting into bed with them today. And not only so. By doing this she's showing what an absolute hypocrite she is after her and her party have lambasted Corbyn for doing much less in the past.

Again, it's downright shameful.
DUP are a fully engaged party in Parliament, whereas Sinn Fein do not even take up their seats which shows their contempt.

However, Corbyn met with the IRA when they were active in a bombing campaign, not just a political party.
The issue is about links to terrorism not whether a party takes seats in Parliament.

The DUP have had past links to loyalist paramilitarty groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Ulster Resistance, a group that was founded by some who later became prominent DUP politicians. You cannot defend the Tory attacks on Corbyn in this regard when they are now working with the DUP without the charge of hypocrisy being raised. That is what it is.

William
Level 3 dot.orger
Level 3 dot.orger
Posts: 1816
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:48 am

Re: General Election

Post by William » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:43 pm

dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 am
William wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:11 am
dm wrote:
Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:36 pm
I've been discussing/arguing the toss as to whether the Tories won the election or not. I maintain that nobody won, so everybody lost including the Tories. They are having to do a deal with, frankly, a bunch of bigots with past links to terrorists organisations in order to keep themselves in power. An embarrassing if not downright shameful act of politicking.
Wheras your man Corbyn has no links to terrorists......................
If you think he has had links then you must concede that May has links - no, not links - is actually getting into bed with them today. And not only so. By doing this she's showing what an absolute hypocrite she is after her and her party have lambasted Corbyn for doing much less in the past.

Again, it's downright shameful.
Links, Corbyn SUPPORTED them, so did Abbott, links, do not try and change history to suit your arguement............

User avatar
dm
dot.org player kit 2007
dot.org player kit 2007
Posts: 11873
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Just over the border...

Re: General Election

Post by dm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:24 pm

William wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:43 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 am
William wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:11 am
Wheras your man Corbyn has no links to terrorists......................
If you think he has had links then you must concede that May has links - no, not links - is actually getting into bed with them today. And not only so. By doing this she's showing what an absolute hypocrite she is after her and her party have lambasted Corbyn for doing much less in the past.

Again, it's downright shameful.
Links, Corbyn SUPPORTED them, so did Abbott, links, do not try and change history to suit your arguement............
What do you mean they supported them? And, show me evidence.

You make no defence of or even reference to May's hypocrisy so I take it you concede that point.

User avatar
SheepRanger
dotorgsponsor
dotorgsponsor
Posts: 6834
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Swine Down

Re: General Election

Post by SheepRanger » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:55 pm

dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:39 pm
SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:01 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 am


If you think he has had links then you must concede that May has links - no, not links - is actually getting into bed with them today. And not only so. By doing this she's showing what an absolute hypocrite she is after her and her party have lambasted Corbyn for doing much less in the past.

Again, it's downright shameful.
DUP are a fully engaged party in Parliament, whereas Sinn Fein do not even take up their seats which shows their contempt.

However, Corbyn met with the IRA when they were active in a bombing campaign, not just a political party.
The issue is about links to terrorism not whether a party takes seats in Parliament.

The DUP have had past links to loyalist paramilitarty groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Ulster Resistance, a group that was founded by some who later became prominent DUP politicians. You cannot defend the Tory attacks on Corbyn in this regard when they are now working with the DUP without the charge of hypocrisy being raised. That is what it is.
Current DUP links are during a period of peace. Corbyn's links were during acts terrorism. The two are completely different. End.

Damien
dotorgsponsor
dotorgsponsor
Posts: 9730
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:23 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: General Election

Post by Damien » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:57 pm

SheepRanger wrote:
Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:25 pm
Damien wrote:
Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:22 am
SheepRanger wrote:
Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:55 am


I've listened to LBC a fair bit over the last few weeks and although they are criticised as favouring the Tories I've found little evidence of it. All presenters play devils advocate and they have been scathing about the Tories in the latter stages of the election, mainly because May refused to be interviewed, the dementia tax and U turns. I think their questions on the Labour manifesto and budget numbers were fair game and was justified based on the weak responses.
They are only scathing on the Tories because they lost. We hear different things I suppose.
,
No, before the election too.
PS - They didn't lose, they just didn't do as well as expected.
Yep - there weren't really any winners. As for SF and the DUP... both as bad as each other. The silent sizeable minority over here detest both of them(as do most in the ROI). Even though SF continuously moan about Brexit and the DUP getting into bed with the Tories (who they hate even more than the DUP) - secretly they are delighted as they see it speeding up their United Ireland agenda... which is all they care about. Same with the SNP. I detest all Nationalist politics, and can only apologise that people in GB will have to put up with their poisonous politics now.

User avatar
SheepRanger
dotorgsponsor
dotorgsponsor
Posts: 6834
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Swine Down

Re: General Election

Post by SheepRanger » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:14 pm

Damien wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:57 pm
SheepRanger wrote:
Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:25 pm
Damien wrote:
Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:22 am
They are only scathing on the Tories because they lost. We hear different things I suppose.
,
No, before the election too.
PS - They didn't lose, they just didn't do as well as expected.
Yep - there weren't really any winners. As for SF and the DUP... both as bad as each other. The silent sizeable minority over here detest both of them(as do most in the ROI). Even though SF continuously moan about Brexit and the DUP getting into bed with the Tories (who they hate even more than the DUP) - secretly they are delighted as they see it speeding up their United Ireland agenda... which is all they care about. Same with the SNP. I detest all Nationalist politics, and can only apologise that people in GB will have to put up with their poisonous politics now.
https://youtu.be/wxpYW_w5pgo

User avatar
dm
dot.org player kit 2007
dot.org player kit 2007
Posts: 11873
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Just over the border...

Re: General Election

Post by dm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:48 pm

SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:55 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:39 pm
SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:01 pm


DUP are a fully engaged party in Parliament, whereas Sinn Fein do not even take up their seats which shows their contempt.

However, Corbyn met with the IRA when they were active in a bombing campaign, not just a political party.
The issue is about links to terrorism not whether a party takes seats in Parliament.

The DUP have had past links to loyalist paramilitarty groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Ulster Resistance, a group that was founded by some who later became prominent DUP politicians. You cannot defend the Tory attacks on Corbyn in this regard when they are now working with the DUP without the charge of hypocrisy being raised. That is what it is.
Current DUP links are during a period of peace. Corbyn's links were during acts terrorism. The two are completely different. End.
Your quote of ‘End’ is not like you Sheepy. You’ve always been willing to discuss matters and I hope you will continue to do so. To get in a little deeper into this issue, here are some points in no particular order.

I am quite sure most of those who criticise Corbyn’s ‘links’ to terrorists also criticise his stance on nuclear weapons and other violent means. But there is a real sense that those who do criticise Corbyn cannot have it both ways. Whatever people believe he was doing in talking with Sinn Fein, or any others of their ilk, it’s surely clear it has never been to encourage them to carry out their violence.

All wars and conflicts are negotiated in the end. It’s known that Margaret Thatcher’s government engaged in secret talks with the IRA from the time of the hunger strikes. I can’t remember anyone accusing Thatcher of being a terrorist sympathiser.

It has been pointed out that the engagement offered by Corbyn and others in Labour during the 1980s spurred on those in Sinn Fein who wanted to go down the political route to a solution in NI.

Gerry Adams secret dialogue with the SDLP leader, John Hume in the late 1980s was a precursor to peace and Hume is universally lauded for being an effective go-between to get the journey to peace started. And, of course, the peace process that led to the Good Friday agreement itself began with talks.

So why does Corbyn get criticised? The reason is simple. He believes the Irish have a right to want a united Ireland. Personally I agree with him, but you’ll not be surprised with that. It is, I hope you’ll agree, a perfectly reasonable position to take. That is why Corbyn cops so much criticism over NI. He believes Britain was wrong in partitioning Northern Ireland almost 100 years ago and the establishment don’t like people who take that position. That said, he’s never supported violence as the solution to the problem.

jm
Level 1 dot.orger
Level 1 dot.orger
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 10:57 am

Re: General Election

Post by jm » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:35 am

dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:48 pm
SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:55 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:39 pm


The issue is about links to terrorism not whether a party takes seats in Parliament.

The DUP have had past links to loyalist paramilitarty groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Ulster Resistance, a group that was founded by some who later became prominent DUP politicians. You cannot defend the Tory attacks on Corbyn in this regard when they are now working with the DUP without the charge of hypocrisy being raised. That is what it is.
Current DUP links are during a period of peace. Corbyn's links were during acts terrorism. The two are completely different. End.
Your quote of ‘End’ is not like you Sheepy. You’ve always been willing to discuss matters and I hope you will continue to do so. To get in a little deeper into this issue, here are some points in no particular order.

I am quite sure most of those who criticise Corbyn’s ‘links’ to terrorists also criticise his stance on nuclear weapons and other violent means. But there is a real sense that those who do criticise Corbyn cannot have it both ways. Whatever people believe he was doing in talking with Sinn Fein, or any others of their ilk, it’s surely clear it has never been to encourage them to carry out their violence.

All wars and conflicts are negotiated in the end. It’s known that Margaret Thatcher’s government engaged in secret talks with the IRA from the time of the hunger strikes. I can’t remember anyone accusing Thatcher of being a terrorist sympathiser.

It has been pointed out that the engagement offered by Corbyn and others in Labour during the 1980s spurred on those in Sinn Fein who wanted to go down the political route to a solution in NI.

Gerry Adams secret dialogue with the SDLP leader, John Hume in the late 1980s was a precursor to peace and Hume is universally lauded for being an effective go-between to get the journey to peace started. And, of course, the peace process that led to the Good Friday agreement itself began with talks.

So why does Corbyn get criticised? The reason is simple. He believes the Irish have a right to want a united Ireland. Personally I agree with him, but you’ll not be surprised with that. It is, I hope you’ll agree, a perfectly reasonable position to take. That is why Corbyn cops so much criticism over NI. He believes Britain was wrong in partitioning Northern Ireland almost 100 years ago and the establishment don’t like people who take that position. That said, he’s never supported violence as the solution to the problem.
nailonhead

User avatar
SheepRanger
dotorgsponsor
dotorgsponsor
Posts: 6834
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Swine Down

Re: General Election

Post by SheepRanger » Sat Jun 17, 2017 9:58 am

dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:48 pm
SheepRanger wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:55 pm
dm wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:39 pm


The issue is about links to terrorism not whether a party takes seats in Parliament.

The DUP have had past links to loyalist paramilitarty groups such as the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Ulster Resistance, a group that was founded by some who later became prominent DUP politicians. You cannot defend the Tory attacks on Corbyn in this regard when they are now working with the DUP without the charge of hypocrisy being raised. That is what it is.
Current DUP links are during a period of peace. Corbyn's links were during acts terrorism. The two are completely different. End.
Your quote of ‘End’ is not like you Sheepy. You’ve always been willing to discuss matters and I hope you will continue to do so. To get in a little deeper into this issue, here are some points in no particular order.

I am quite sure most of those who criticise Corbyn’s ‘links’ to terrorists also criticise his stance on nuclear weapons and other violent means. But there is a real sense that those who do criticise Corbyn cannot have it both ways. Whatever people believe he was doing in talking with Sinn Fein, or any others of their ilk, it’s surely clear it has never been to encourage them to carry out their violence.

All wars and conflicts are negotiated in the end. It’s known that Margaret Thatcher’s government engaged in secret talks with the IRA from the time of the hunger strikes. I can’t remember anyone accusing Thatcher of being a terrorist sympathiser.

It has been pointed out that the engagement offered by Corbyn and others in Labour during the 1980s spurred on those in Sinn Fein who wanted to go down the political route to a solution in NI.

Gerry Adams secret dialogue with the SDLP leader, John Hume in the late 1980s was a precursor to peace and Hume is universally lauded for being an effective go-between to get the journey to peace started. And, of course, the peace process that led to the Good Friday agreement itself began with talks.

So why does Corbyn get criticised? The reason is simple. He believes the Irish have a right to want a united Ireland. Personally I agree with him, but you’ll not be surprised with that. It is, I hope you’ll agree, a perfectly reasonable position to take. That is why Corbyn cops so much criticism over NI. He believes Britain was wrong in partitioning Northern Ireland almost 100 years ago and the establishment don’t like people who take that position. That said, he’s never supported violence as the solution to the problem.
There's a difference between showing support for a united Ireland and standing side by side with the IRA at numerous events, of which I wont bother linking as you are well aware of them. I do understand your stance but dont accept that at the time he was some sort of peace envoy. His associations at the time crossed the line in my opinion and he should have left it to back door diplomacy. Whatever he real motives were, its all guess work for the likes of us, but he opened himself ip to scrutiny. Time is a great rewriter of history, and the young dont care about these ancient things, but I'm from a generation that saw all this and have friends who are ex-army of which two are Belfast lads. Its all too murky for the likes of me, but my generation will be dying out soon and youngsters clearly didnt care from the voting stats.

User avatar
dm
dot.org player kit 2007
dot.org player kit 2007
Posts: 11873
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Just over the border...

Re: General Election

Post by dm » Sat Jun 17, 2017 11:51 am

Thanks for coming back, Sheepy. We have different views but, as you point out, it's hard to be certain about the details of things that happened 30 years ago. I also appreciate your take on things will understandably have been influenced by those you know.

You say your generation is dying out. You're not that old are you!?

User avatar
SheepRanger
dotorgsponsor
dotorgsponsor
Posts: 6834
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Swine Down

Re: General Election

Post by SheepRanger » Sat Jun 17, 2017 9:26 pm

dm wrote:
Sat Jun 17, 2017 11:51 am
Thanks for coming back, Sheepy. We have different views but, as you point out, it's hard to be certain about the details of things that happened 30 years ago. I also appreciate your take on things will understandably have been influenced by those you know.

You say your generation is dying out. You're not that old are you!?
50, but sadly some are no longer here.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests