Tories battered

RoaryTheLion said:
No offence taken. I’m saying (tongue in cheek) that certain posters wield an unhealthy and unfathomable influence on this board. Seemingly free to act as they please without fear of recriminations. A secret clique if you will. I’ll keep winding them out without your permission. Thanks for the attempted lexicology lesson though.
Click to expand...
There's nothing secret about me nor indeed most people on this thread. The majority of posters know my views. You'll find me on most pro-Labour and/or anti-Tory threads. You'll also find me on a whole host of thread topics including Boro, general football, cricket, boxing, F1, music and drinking etc. etc.

Oh and seeing as you're bit new around here, the reply function is splendid. It makes it clear who and what you're actually replying to. You're welcome.
 
BoroFur said:
It's a sad day when posters criticise others on the standard of their debating skills.

Even worse, they then go on to describe how they will educate said posters in the most patronising way imaginable.
Click to expand...
It's even sadder when said posters are incapable of even the most basic debate.

He's clearly a sad troll. Best ignored
 
SuperStu said:
False. See my post #130. Proroguing parliament was before, lying to parliament was before, hiding in a fridge was before.

If those weren't enough he'd also: cheated on his wife while she had cancer. Tried to arrange for a journalist to be beaten up. Disappeared millions of pounds on a garden bridge that was never going to happen. Given a load of public money to the American bird he was rattling.

Its an absurd line of argument to pretend anything has substantially changed with regards to Johnsons character between 2019 and now. He's dreadful and he always was.
Click to expand...
So, we might actually be getting somewhere then. You seem to agree with me that they aren't "all the same". So hopefully you can see why I worry about people like scrug who seek to want to prolong this Tory government with the argument that "Labour are no better" when clearly they are
 
BoroFur said:
There's nothing secret about me nor indeed most people on this thread. The majority of posters know my views. You'll find me on most pro-Labour and/or anti-Tory threads. You'll also find me on a whole host of thread topics including Boro, general football, cricket, boxing, F1, music and drinking etc. etc.

Oh and seeing as you're bit new around here, the reply function is splendid. It makes it clear who and what you're actually replying to. You're welcome.
Click to expand...
Its always amusing to me, that thr trolls who just want to insult people and cause arguments have also invented a "secret clique" that control the board.

Its almost as if it never occurred to them that most of us didn't want to get involved in petty squabbles and actually want to debate issues. There's a Johnsonesque lack of comprehension from them!
 
SuperStu said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1540989229811073025

Jesus. This Lib Dem MP wants to send the army to break the RMT strikes. And we're meant to be relying on their party to be a force dragging Starmer towards progressive policy in a coalition? This is beyond Thatcher in how far right authoritarian it is.
Click to expand...
I dont actually have a problem with that specifically. The union can cause disruption with the strike which I definitely agree with and the government cause its resources to mitigate against that disruption.
 
BoroFur said:
There's nothing secret about me nor indeed most people on this thread. The majority of posters know my views. You'll find me on most pro-Labour and/or anti-Tory threads. You'll also find me on a whole host of thread topics including Boro, general football, cricket, boxing, F1, music and drinking etc. etc.

Oh and seeing as you're bit new around here, the reply function is splendid. It makes it clear who and what you're actually replying to. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

I get it, you take this place and your reputation on it seriously. For some it’s simply a way to pass the time during the test match lunch break.
 
BoroFur said:
I don't take it so seriously that I feel compelled to turn this place into the Teesside version of the Oxford debating society.
Click to expand...

You do take it seriously though. Fear not, your reputation at the FMTTM enforcer is very much intact. I’ll stay away from your turf.

BoroFur said:
You'll find me on most pro-Labour and/or anti-Tory threads. You'll also find me on a whole host of thread topics including Boro, general football, cricket, boxing, F1, music and drinking etc. etc.
Click to expand...
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
I dont actually have a problem with that specifically. The union can cause disruption with the strike which I definitely agree with and the government cause its resources to mitigate against that disruption.
Click to expand...
That really doesn't sit well with me. You're happy with setting rhe army on its own people? That's not something I would endorse
 
SuperStu said:
Yeah great. Turning the army on law abiding UK citizens. Sounds great, who'd have a problem with that... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That's not what she's saying though is it? I don't agree with her, but her argument is that the army could run services to get workers like doctors and nurses to work while the strikes are ongoing.

That's a world away from "turning the army on law abiding UK citizens". You make it sound like she's urging them to open fire on the picket lines.
 
festa5 said:
That's not what she's saying though is it? I don't agree with her, but her argument is that the army could run services to get workers like doctors and nurses to work while the strikes are ongoing.

That's a world away from "turning the army on law abiding UK citizens". You make it sound like she's urging them to open fire on the picket lines.
Click to expand...
I'ld agree, that is what she meant.

Basically turns the armed forces into scabs mind you.
 
I fully support the strikes despite being affected by them but tweets like that are part of the problem with any level of debate in the modern world.

She specifically said contingency planning.

She's right that the government should be involved with facilitating talks. Or, if they are going to use an excuse that government doesn't get involved with such disputes, they could at least take the handcuffs off network rail and others to ensure there some movement in the negotiations.

But the truth is that they are scared stiff that paying people fairly will cut into their own and their mates'profits.

Greed
 
Paintolerance said:
I'ld agree, that is what she meant.

Basically turns the armed forces into scabs mind you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, fair enough. That also doesn't sit well with me. It still makes a them and us environment and, rather than actually trying to negotiate with strikers they'll just ignore them. Losing us yet more power
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top