Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 81 of 81

Thread: Bannon in Europe

  1. #61
    Back on topic
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  2. #62
    Quote entirely out of context there re: Sadiq, Rand, he did not describe wearing of the burqa/niqab as insidious. What he did say is; "What’s insidious is if people are starting to think it is appropriate to treat women differently or that it has been forced on them." In which he is absolutely correct.

    And if other MPs have used inappropriate/childish language it certainly does not excuse Boris doing so, either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  3. #63
    The Conservative Party Code of Conduct.

    They should:

    follow the Seven Principles of Public Life established by Lord Nolan and the Committee on Standards in Public Life:
    Selflessness – Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest.

    Integrity – Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

    Objectivity – Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias.

    Accountability – Holders of public office are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this.

    Openness – Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing.

    Honesty – Holders of public office should be truthful.

    Leadership – Holders of public office should exhibit these principles in their own behaviour.

    They should actively promote and robustly support the principles and be willing to challenge poor behaviour wherever it occurs;
    > lead by example to encourage and foster respect and tolerance;
    > treat others in a professional and straightforward manner;
    > act with honesty and probity and in a manner which upholds the reputation and values of the Conservative Party. Such duty is fundamental. Conduct which the public may reasonably perceive as undermining a representative’s honesty and probity is likely to diminish trust and confidence placed in them, and the Party, by the public;
    > not use their position to bully, abuse, victimise, harass or unlawfully discriminate against others (see further the interpretation annex);
    > take reasonable steps to ensure that people who wish to raise concerns about bullying, discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation by others feel able to do so, and know how to follow the complaints procedure set out in this Code;
    > co-operate fully with any process set down by the Party Board should a grievance process be instigated. This Code will be made publicly available on the Conservative Party website.

    ....

    Discrimination includes victimising or harassing any other person because of race (including colour, ethnic or national origin, nationality, citizenship), sex, gender re-assignment, sexual orientation, marital or civil partnership status, disability, age, religion or belief [which should be interpreted as fully adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism], pregnancy and maternity status.

    Harassment is any unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct that has the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive situation or environment for them. A single incident can amount to harassment. Harassment may involve conduct of a sexual nature (sexual harassment), or it may be related to age, disability, gender reassignment, marital or civil partner status, pregnancy or maternity, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation. Harassment is unacceptable even if it does not fall within any of these categories. Victimisation provisions protect certain individuals who do (or might do) acts such as bringing discrimination claims, complaining about harassment, or getting involved in some way with another complaint (such as giving evidence).

    Victimisation may therefore occur where a person subjects another person to a detriment because either that person has acted in such a way and/or is believed to have acted in such a way, or may act in such a way.

    Bullying is offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour involving the misuse of power that can make a person feel vulnerable, upset, humiliated, undermined or threatened. Power does not always mean being in a position of authority, but can include both personal strength, influence and the power to coerce through fear or intimidation. Bullying can take the form of physical, verbal and non-verbal conduct.
    Anyway. The most frustrating thing about all this is that Boris will be loving it, and we've played completely into his strategy. No doubt he'll be on the phone to Bannon now asking "That worked a treat, Steve, what's next?"

    Boris will be PM within 6 months

  4. #64
    I don't see anything highlighted that is relevant.

    Leading imam says Boris has "nothing to apologise for", simply "for speaking the truth": https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0530743c71456
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  5. #65
    This is the real thing that should be generating outrage, not Boris's speaking the truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    This is the real thing that should be generating outrage, not Boris's speaking the truth.
    As has been mentioned multiple times in this thread, the issue is not with the point Boris is making nor the truth of it, it is the manner in which he made the point.

    As such, he is now being investigated by the Conservative Party for breaches of the code of conduct.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  7. #67
    Pathetic pandering decision. Doesn't mean he did anything wrong. Typical politics though, we must have difficult conversations then shoot anyone who puts their heads above the parapet.

    How is what Boris wrote any different to what the long suffering woman I just quoted is writing in her thread? Click the Twitter post for a thread of comments by her. How is what Boris wrote any different from what Ken Clarke said?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  8. #68
    Nobody is trying to shut the conversation down. Do stop ranting on about because we've said this many, many times.

    Ken Clarke also used inappropriate language.

    That poor long suffering woman isn't an MP - so I don't care what she thinks because we're talking about conduct of MPs.

    Boris' is all the more worse because he has a history of this shit and met Bannon only a few days ago. I'm interested why you're so passionate about this. One is man you have no respect for, and another is one you described as a racist piece of shit. Given that we all support the discussion happening, why defend their use of language? Why are your standards and expectations for the leaders of our country so low?
    Last edited by gogobongopop; 08-09-2018 at 03:07 PM.

  9. #69
    I have respect for Ken Clarke, I don't think he did anything wrong. You may be prepared to say Ken Clarke did something wrong to get at Boris but I'm not. I think that woman I quoted is a victim of this sexist abuse and not saying anything wrong either. Boris, Ken Clarke, Safiya all spoke the truth and that's not a low standard. More politicians should speak the truth. It isn't wrong to call out abuse when you see it. See something, say something should be the slogan for anything related to abuse which is what covering women up basically is ... not say something, be compared to neo-nazis.

    I'm passionate about this because I believe in equality and this is a visible and rather evil sign of inequality and oppression. I wrote what I had to say on this topic years ago long before Boris or Bannon came up on the subject. http://theworldforgotten.com/showthr...ighlight=burqa

    I also think Bannon is utterly irrelevant. He [I assume] wants it banned so is seeking something different to Boris. EDIT: As you know I don't always agree with Hazir but nothing's changed in last couple of years to stop me fully agreeing with him here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    Since it already is about dress codes; my main bone is with the respect people supposedly should show towards headscarves, burqa's and what have you. The thing is; I don't respect them. As far as I am concerned they are pieces of cloth that express backwardness, disdain for one's environment more than anything else. Having said that, except for those pieces of clothing that result in the complete hiding on one's identity I think there should be no restrictions on religiously inspired dress.

    As for Muslims being targetted? I am not so certain that really is the case. Christians and Jews are the butt of jokes that nobody dares make about muslims. A good deal about this whole islamophobia has its base in Muslims having to get to terms with being members of a (small) minority religion where most of them have their roots in countries where Islam is excessively dominant. To the point where it makes it (near) impossible to be openly critical of it. A lot of Muslims also don't quite get how many Europeans are so happy that they have managed to push the Church out of a position of power, that they have little patience for the Mosque making silly demands.

    Well said. Agreed 100%.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Boris, Ken Clarke, Safiya all spoke the truth and that's not a low standard.
    Again, you missed the point. Is that, what, four times now? Five?
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  11. #71
    There is no point. The truth is not to be censored or criticised in a free speech society.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  12. #72
    This lady doesn't think it's the "truth".


  13. #73
    That lady has Stockholm Syndrome. We live in a gender equal society in this country. Does her husband have his face hidden all the time?

    Boris attacked the garment the preposterous position you are taking is we can't ever criticise that which we oppose because that's insulting those who are doing what we oppose and won't win then over. That's a logical fallacy.

    In fact I see zero effort or plan by yourself or anyone else opposing honesty to win people over by any other means.

    No I don't struggle. I negotiate by being honest about where I stand and seeing if I can reach an agreement. I don't negotiate by avoiding being honest about what I believe. I wouldn't feel comfortable doing that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  14. #74
    You didn't answer my question. I'll ask again: how would Boris' remarks help persuade that lady, who chooses to wear what she does, to stop wearing it?

    I didn't say we couldn't criticise what we oppose. You're literally making stuff up. It's perfectly possible to criticise something without insulting people; MPs should try it sometime.

    How about this? Anyone who forces anybody to wear something they don't want to should be punished; but if somebody chooses to wear it in public then that's fine with us. Employers should have the freedom to decide based on the role. Body language is one of the most important tools of communication and being able to see somebody's face is beneficial in establishing and maintaining effective communication. It's not essential, but it is helpful. As a nation, we won't tolerate oppression of any kind, and whilst we recognise that some people choose to wear a Burka for their own personal reasons, others do not and suffer in silence. We encourage communities and neighbours to raise alarm where there are signs of oppression and abuse the law will intervene where necessary.

    See - it's not that hard is it? No insults, no name calling. I'm just a lowly pleb who whipped this up in a minute (and it shows), but I think this is more along the lines of what I'd expect from leaders of our state. It's called decency.
    Last edited by gogobongopop; 08-09-2018 at 07:43 PM.

  15. #75
    Boris's remarks would help by denormalising it and making it clear to that lady that it is not right and making it clear to her oppressors that it's not acceptable to insist that she wears it. We need to be saying it frequently, making it basically taboo. That's how there's been such a successful decline in drink driving rates, not simply fear of a breathalyser but making it socially unacceptable causing peer pressure not to drink and drive. Don't let a friend drink and drive as a concept has worked. Don't let a friend suffer in a burka should be a similar message.

    Your remarks are good too in the same way, if you can quote people saying it I'd appreciate it. I'd just change one thing, it's not "fine with us" if people want to wear it, we won't outlaw it but that doesn't make it fine. There's a lot that's not fine but isn't quite illegal.

    Standing by in silence is not decent. Boris by standing up for her is more decent than those standing by. As John Stuart Mill said "Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing." J. S. Mill is one of the Liberal thinkers I have the most respect for and Boris isn't looking on and doing nothing and for that he should be commended. Our ire should be levied at those who both want and participate in a culture of silence.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by gogobongopop View Post
    You didn't answer my question. I'll ask again: how would Boris' remarks help persuade that lady, who chooses to wear what she does, to stop wearing it?

    I didn't say we couldn't criticise what we oppose. You're literally making stuff up. It's perfectly possible to criticise something without insulting people; MPs should try it sometime.

    How about this? Anyone who forces anybody to wear something they don't want to should be punished; but if somebody chooses to wear it in public then that's fine with us. Employers should have the freedom to decide based on the role. Body language is one of the most important tools of communication and being able to see somebody's face is beneficial in establishing and maintaining effective communication. It's not essential, but it is helpful. As a nation, we won't tolerate oppression of any kind, and whilst we recognise that some people choose to wear a Burka for their own personal reasons, others do not and suffer in silence. We encourage communities and neighbours to raise alarm where there are signs of oppression and abuse the law will intervene where necessary.

    See - it's not that hard is it? No insults, no name calling. I'm just a lowly pleb who whipped this up in a minute (and it shows), but I think this is more along the lines of what I'd expect from leaders of our state. It's called decency.
    Well said
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  18. #78
    Comedy and an editorial.

    Try again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  19. #79
    Yes entirely reasonable ones like Boris's editorial that used standard mainstream language making a reasoned argument.

    Not as hysterically claimed the language of Bannon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  20. #80
    Just out of interest, do you think 'gammon' is an acceptable term to describe angry, bitter, red faced, white old men?

  21. #81


    Like this? Yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •