I know he's taken out the workers rights section with a committment to deal with it elsewhere, not sure what the other two are yet as for the 'been told' it's guess work so could be right or wrong time will tell. The Conservatives have laid out what they want to achieve and they will be judged on that and get a another term in office or out on their ear if it's a fail.

I suggest you read my post closely because I was referring to the Milliband case and the last time I checked he was not a terrorist supporter nor was his family. I would rather not read the Mail and was it not the Sun and even Johnson who blamed Liverpool and their supporters for Hillsborough.

Your words 'as usual untrue' implying other reports simlilarly so.

I don't read the Sun,Mirror or Star but I scan the rest and I do beleive that you are correct in your comments about the Sun and Boris and the Hillborough tragedy, not sure on Boris's standing in Liverpool now but the Sun is a no no all over the City.

Personally the peace process was the important issue at the time, not some United Ireland that so many of the Irish wanted no part of.

Like I said before, his cause is all well and good but the fact is in all the years since every time he gets asked about the IRA he will not condemn their actions, plus what about him standing in honor of dead IRA terrorists, was that him just wanting a United Ireland? it's things like that, that have spoken volumes to many people, rightly or wrongly.
Ateotd there is a very clear difference between talks at a government level to seek a peace process, and a maverick backbencher actively associating with Sinn Fein and the IRA on his own Republican campaign. I am sure that Corbyn knew exactly what he was doing, and examples such as inviting convicted IRA prisoners to Parliament after the Brighton bombing, was deliberately inflammatory and not obvious how such actions aid peace or anything else he may want? Even I recall at the time the strength of feeling from both the Labour party, as well as the Government, and the rest of Parliament.

One of the problems I have with the hard left is they jump on to causes and pick sides without applying critical thinking.

You see it with Israel and Palestine. It's seen in black and white: Israel = bad, so someone fighting against them = good. Similarly, US corporations = bad, so if there's a left wing populist ruler somewhere in South America who is standing up against them, they are seen as good. In the 1980s, the Irish republican cause attracted a lot of the hard left. British imperialism = bad, so the IRA 'volunteers' fighting against them = good.

Corbyn and some of his supporters have history of 'picking sides' and aligning themselves with / turning a blind eye to the criminal actions of people on 'their side'.

Now there is some hypocrisy in the right wing media about the way they react to similar questionable choices by their own leaders. Look at Donald Trump and his love-fest with Chairman Kim of North Korea. Can you imagine if Corbyn, or Bernie Sanders had been saying 'we need to open a dialogue with Kim', it would have been seen as the ultimate proof of leftie derangement, thinking you could engage with him. But they hailed Trump as some kind of diplomatic genius when he went over fawning over Kim like Denis Rodman had done.

Similarly we had all that stuff about Corbyn's links with Moscow spies and whatever, but it's the Conservatives who are getting donations from shadowy sources in Russia and Boris hanging round Putin's oligarchs and it was Boris' government that surpressed the report into Russian involvement in UK politics. Dodgy af...

I was by no means a fan of Theresa May but one area where I trusted her far more than Boris was national security. Boris I suspect has a cavalier attitude to taking money/support from shadowy sources in states that don't have Britain's best interests at heart, if he thinks it can benefit his personal advancement. Trump is the same in the US.

So whilst I think Corbyn and the hard left are naive in some of their alliances and I would have some concerns about national security if they came in to power, I have more concerns about the likes of Boris and Trump who are in power and whose vanity makes them Trojan horses for hostile states.

Can not see Conservative losing next Election even if everything goes pear shaped big time.They have got to many businesse men who are super rich and get away with things that Joe Public would get sent to jail for eg paying no tax .They will lie there way to power again,and make shore the newspapers and BBC news downs anyone who tries to take them on

Whilst I'm not a religious person, I've been thinking recently about what I would imagine is an ancient subject for argument and discussion. How many people who voted Conservative last week can also describe themselves as Christians. Surely the beliefs and ideals of folk like Johnson and his ilk are based on greed, selfishness, privilege, military dominanc, their "superiority" over the common man in the street, denying certain sections of society the basics of food and shelter etc. From what I've read of the Bible the gentleman referred to as Jesus Christ was opposed to all these traits. How, then can Tories align themselves with Christianity?

Must be a lot of tories in Cas, because only 2 in 10 pay tax over there.

Tories have made sure that the people of Cas don't earn enough to pay tax.

No offense to you because I've read similar before. But this is what loses me in general, this pigeon holing, reaching to make some kind of point, using Labour's supposed moral superiority as a crutch.
Just because you voted this way, you must be this kind of person, or hold these kind of beliefs.I mean this isn't America, the Cons are not the Republicans, and generally Con voters don't hold their same beliefs on Abortion and homosexuality; we've moved on from that crap as a country and we have a clear separation between state and church. So even though some people on both sides may say they're Christian, like everyone I know and probably any survey done to look into Religion in Britain in 2019, the closest they get to a church is getting married, or attending a funeral, it is me but then again I hate religion, always have but it doesn't stop me holding the same basic morals as Christian. Aren't most people that way?
Like most GE some people don't change, some people do, some float but in most voters they certainly don't completely buy every bit of who they vote for, it's just who they most agree with, or the best of a bad bunch. There's just so much grey area in politics when it comes to all aspects of it.
Could you imagine voting in the last USA election, as bad as ours may seem I still maintain a vote between Trump and H Clinton was a vote between a douche and a turd sandwich.

Not that much to argue with the
As say, Corbyn imparticular had this almost obsession of aligning himself with what he believed were the good guys, which also happened to mean his own Country were the bad guys, especially in his eyes. Then again he was the bloke that not only opposed the Kosovo campaign, but denied that Milosevic had committed war crimes. Speaks annually at the Connolly/Sands commemoration in London to honor dead IRA terrorists and support imprisoned IRA 'prisoners of war'. I could go on but long story short, he's spent his career being a serial opposer, it's what he was known for in the Labout Party and what got him nearly kicked out on a number of occasions and tbh as someone who remembers him and had relatives who detested him back then, so much has stuck with me.
Anyway I tap out I'm done on politics and we've gone a bit off topic in a way.

Anyway how about that RL stuff, can't wait for it to start

Good points that you mention there Shifty. I was just trying to say in a simplified way that those subjects and examples that are emphasised in the New Testament are fundamentally more in line with a socialist ethos rather than Tory attributes.

[i'That[/i source that Wikipedia no longer allow to be used as a source because of it's unreliability

I've seen this a lot on Twitter over the Xmas period - "Jesus was a socialist" and similar guff; it's about as meaningful as speculating whether Harry Potter, Gandalf or Bruce Wayne would vote Tory, in that the imagined political ideology of a fictional character add nothing to the debate.

Unless of course, the initials of our outgoing leader are more than just a strange coincidence...

More than co-incidence, Bren

Harry Potter was definitely a Troy (well his parents were) have you seen the fees for Hogwarts

Helen and Brian Troy have said he only got to Hogwarts on a Scholarship, they could not afford the fees as they spent all their saivings on building a wooden horse

Definitely an odd coiuple probably explains Harry

Who's Harry Potter?????????????





(

)

Run the Phoenix Club didn’t he

He still does, the Ironside of the club world, a legend (just in the North West)

Didn't he burn it down?

That was that nasty sod Den Perry

The cad!!!Was that after he did the voiceovers on old episodes of Catchphrase?

Unsure, but thank god for Crime Watch