Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Maybe, but when you look at this 30 second clip in combination with Labour's previous stance and statements on the conflict it starts to look rather concerning.
Especially when you consider the powers police now have to curb protest.
Has anyone ever referred to Twitter as a "community" in that literal sense? Come on now...
If the context of that speech was hatred and the outcomes of that hatred leading to tangible impacts beyond feelings being hurt, then those communities wouldn't be existing online...
Hi, yes Twitter is a social media platform in which communities form via interactions. It even has a tab for "Communities", although it would not need to be officially formed to be treated as such. TikTok, Facebook etc all host communities.
I'm not sure if you are arguing that the only tangible harm that can come online is through 'hurt feelings', or if I may have misconstrued? I do believe that tangible harms can be caused by online activities though. Defamation, harassment, stalking are things the courts have dealt with in recent years and yet sites and groups who allow those things still exist.
Purge isn't quite working as intended? Better kick out a few more lefties, and outlaw the terms 'genocide', 'ceasefire' and 'occupation' too just to be safe.
No, I'm talking about communities in the sense of living and breathing things. Not the corporate speak of Twitter/"X".
In the context of Rachel Reeves' speech, I'm not sure any of the above things are relevant. Which is why I'm asking, who the "some communities" she's referring to? By the by, and I'm sure it's a coincidence, but a passing greyhound was howling when I played the clip in the quoted tweet.
You either agree with her clear nonsense comment about cracking down on communities (plural) with police force for anyone who has anti Israel /anti zionism opinions or not.
Where do you stand?
We all know what she means by "some communities" but if anyone wants to be deliberately disingenuous, do, whatever makes you sleep at night.
Being anti-Israeli is considered a crime now? How much more are they going to move the goal posts? Will the Palestinian flag soon be considered a hate symbol?
From the BBC:
In other news, we're now hearing that the Speaker of the House, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, has rejected a bid by the Scottish National Party (SNP) for an emergency debate on the situation in Gaza.
Sir Lindsay says that under Commons rules, an emergency debate has to be on an issue for which ministers have responsibility, and that there is no other way that MPs can discuss it.
He told MPs the SNP application didn't meet the criteria, adding that there was a "probability" of a government statement on Gaza tomorrow.
He was speaking after the SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, asked for an explanation of why the emergency debate was being denied them - especially since Sir Lindsay first raised the possibility of one himself.
It all follows an uproar in the Commons last week, when Sir Lindsay allowed MPs to vote on a Labour amendment to the SNP's ceasefire motion.
It meant the SNP motion was not voted on, prompting the party to say Sir Lindsay should quit as Speaker.
----
There are parliamentary rules which must be followed, you see.
In other news, we're now hearing that the Speaker of the House, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, has rejected a bid by the Scottish National Party (SNP) for an emergency debate on the situation in Gaza.
Sir Lindsay says that under Commons rules, an emergency debate has to be on an issue for which ministers have responsibility, and that there is no other way that MPs can discuss it.
He told MPs the SNP application didn't meet the criteria, adding that there was a "probability" of a government statement on Gaza tomorrow.
He was speaking after the SNP Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, asked for an explanation of why the emergency debate was being denied them - especially since Sir Lindsay first raised the possibility of one himself.
It all follows an uproar in the Commons last week, when Sir Lindsay allowed MPs to vote on a Labour amendment to the SNP's ceasefire motion.
It meant the SNP motion was not voted on, prompting the party to say Sir Lindsay should quit as Speaker.
----
There are parliamentary rules which must be followed, you see.
How they can sit there and say the SNP, whose leader's family were trapped in Gaza, were "playing politics" is beyond contempt
Oh yeah, absolutely. I just wanted to hear it from DanH himself.
Here's Hoyle saying the SNP can have an SO 24 (that's the standing order that governs emergency debates). It's at 0.56 if I haven't cued it properly.
Here's Standing Order 24
Here's the clause that Hoyle's denying it under:
Standing Order 24: Clause 5 said:
Fair point.
Annnnnnd another one
Usually I say "The US is fecked", but let's not forget that the UK is fecked too. This ELECTED MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT really thought that the UN went ahead and not only had a meeting where they decided to plan "the end of the family unit" (and all the other crazy and cringe shit), but then they went ahead and put it on a nice formal document.
Yes. It is free to visit, but Hunt is charging people for access.
More journalists should be behaving like this, the BS would be removed if this was the case.
Nick Ferrari is usually awful but this is brilliant and the way journalism should work.
Excrement had me rolling.
Culture wars have consequences.
Agreed, however the majority of the time Nick Ferrari is laughing and backslapping on air with his Tory chums.
I expect them to have their citizenship removed immediately, based on precedent of people working with terror groups.
That’s only limited to brown skinned people.
A law suit might be coming this guys way soon....
Has he confused Dianne Abbott and Dawn Butler? He switched from one to the other at the end. I mean it wouldn't surprise me.
Starmer must condemn and sack Mandelson or Labour will remain a unsafe and racist party.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/02/26/lord-mandelson-leaves-synagogue-event-early-labour/
Starmer must condemn and sack Mandelson or Labour will remain a unsafe and racist party.
The bit before for context. Also, isn't Lord Mandelson Jewish?
Yes yes. thats what you understand. How cheap can he be. He is making good money already. Not to speak the threat of who are you inviting to the HoC
Yes, and if you're really lucky you win a Lordship and a yacht.
