Tory MP belittles Marcus Rashford

124»

Comments

  • Telford wrote: »
    When we get someone other than Traffickers prosecuted, I will be very surprised. No action with be taken against the RNLI
    The evidence is against you. @chrisstiles has already mentioned prosecutions of people other than people traffickers. The previous version of the legislation has struggled in the court of appeal, for example the case of Fouad Kakaei initially convicted of helping steer a boat across the Channel, which was overturned in March this year. A case could be made that the newest legislation makes an asylum claim illegal if someone enters the UK by such means precisely to sidestep the basis of the appeal, so that more people who are picked up from boats in the Channel are criminalised and sent to prison rather than being treated as the refugees that they are. A case can also be made that under the previous legislation with it's phrase about profit allows appeals against such convictions based on the fact that refugees crossing the Channel in a boat aren't paddling the boat from a profit motive, and by taking that out of the current legislation the government is removing a foreseeable basis of appeal.

    People other than traffickers will face prosecution. No doubt about that at all, the wording of the Act makes it clear that this is one of the aims of the legislation. I agree, action against the RNLI will be politically untenable and is a very remote possibility, but actions against other people who help people in need who don't have a much-loved national institution behind them is possible.
  • Once again a thread has turned into a head-banging-against-the-wall-of-Sid-and-Doris-Bonkers-obduracy exercise.

    :grimace:
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    You are arguing about racism with a man who does not regret voting for Enoch Powell.
  • You are arguing about racism with a man who does not regret voting for Enoch Powell.

    Quite so.

    Knitting fog, or herding cats, are comparatively simple exercises.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    You are arguing about racism with a man who does not regret voting for Enoch Powell.

    Quite so.

    Knitting fog, or herding cats, are comparatively simple exercises.

    I do often find it like trying to nail fog to a wall.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited 12:18PM
    Hehe. That, as well...

    Another analogy might be *walking through treacle*, perhaps?
    Telford wrote: »
    When we get someone other than Traffickers prosecuted, I will be very surprised. No action with be taken against the RNLI
    The evidence is against you. @chrisstiles has already mentioned prosecutions of people other than people traffickers. The previous version of the legislation has struggled in the court of appeal, for example the case of Fouad Kakaei initially convicted of helping steer a boat across the Channel, which was overturned in March this year. A case could be made that the newest legislation makes an asylum claim illegal if someone enters the UK by such means precisely to sidestep the basis of the appeal, so that more people who are picked up from boats in the Channel are criminalised and sent to prison rather than being treated as the refugees that they are. A case can also be made that under the previous legislation with it's phrase about profit allows appeals against such convictions based on the fact that refugees crossing the Channel in a boat aren't paddling the boat from a profit motive, and by taking that out of the current legislation the government is removing a foreseeable basis of appeal.

    People other than traffickers will face prosecution. No doubt about that at all, the wording of the Act makes it clear that this is one of the aims of the legislation. I agree, action against the RNLI will be politically untenable and is a very remote possibility, but actions against other people who help people in need who don't have a much-loved national institution behind them is possible.

    @Alan Cresswell explains it as cogently, and as patiently, as usual. If only the Priti Patel Fan Club would take the trouble to read such posts with comprehension.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Telford's about to tell us all that he didn't expect anyone to agree with him, which is his way of not conceding he's wrong despite overwhelming evidence.
  • Getting back to the point. I am so chuffed that the England players declined the Downing Street invitation.

    Johnson, Patel etc. want it both ways. It's good to see this group of people say no to them.

    AFZ
  • Getting back to the point. I am so chuffed that the England players declined the Downing Street invitation.

    Johnson, Patel etc. want it both ways. It's good to see this group of people say no to them.

    AFZ

    Indeed. There is still some faint hope that, one day, the lunacy will be overcome.
  • AnselminaAnselmina Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Anselmina wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.

    Why do you think it might be a problem that all the people in a given conversation about racism are white?
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.

    I'm sure you fully understand and take the point that 200 years ago an all white Parliament would be the only option for those times. I'm sure you also understand that one of the reasons abolishing the legal slave trade (slavery in Britain is, sadly, still alive and kicking) was such a struggle was because white (mainly male, Anglican/Protestant) politicians weren't particularly interested in listening to others who weren't.

    We don't live 200 years ago. We don't have the excuse for that kind of ignorance. We now live in a nation that has, representationally, people who are not only white but are non-white and from other ethnicities and cultures. It's really not hard to conclude that some of these people have valuable contributions to make about the experience of being non-white and from ethnic minorities. There are even Parliamentarians who are non-white and from ethnic minority backgrounds. As Parliament is going to have a debate about these things, again it's not hard to come to the conclusion the kind of folk who ought to be taking part in the debate at various levels.

    Parliamentarians like Priti Patel who get a lot of abuse on here.

    You'll have to take up the issue of abuse being directed towards Patel with those who have been doing it. It is true she has experience of being a non-white Politician. However, she clearly isn't the only non-white Parliamentarian. BAME in the Houses of Parliament doesn't begin and end with her, or even with her party. It seems strange to debate racism without the formal inclusion of a representative body of those who have experienced it. I'm sure you must know that that is the point being made?

    As for your implication further down the thread that I resent people of colour being Tory politicians I'll leave that fluffy piece of nonsense in the land of make-believe where it came from! Thanks for the label 'left wing' by the way. I don't know if that phrase means to you whatever it might - if anything - mean to me. But if it means I am clearly not a supporter of the current Tory Government, you're spot on.
  • AnselminaAnselmina Shipmate
    Priti Patel gets so much flak on this issue because she described the English football team taking the knee before matches as gesture politics

    Kneeling is a gesture, and a political statement. Isn't it exactly gesture politics?

    In the sense of using the English language to mean that when a man uses his hands to do a job, he's engaged in a handjob? :smile: Perhaps context brings a little more meaning to the task of understanding what is meant than just sticking words together.
Sign In or Register to comment.