Bunch of fucking Labour cunting cunts
Arrest Detain an 82 year old under the Terrorism Act for shouting "nonsense" at someone talking nonsense?
I'm not sure I can express my views on this without swearing profusely, so I'm, glad other people already have. (Legal explanation, anger and surprisingly calm disgust in turn.)
For Christ's sake, the guy's been a member of the party for 60 years - that amount of loyalty surely deserves a little respect? Or doesn't it work both ways?
Had I ever been a member of the Labour party, and had I not had the bollocks to quit already over their shameless shift to the authoritarian centre right, surely witnessing their thugs assault a pensioner would be the clincher? But then again, if you're still a member of the party you've either got to have an insane amount of hope, faith and patience or simply not care about all the deaths and fuck-ups Blair's caused. If the former, you're deluded if you think your voice is ever going to be heard, as yesterday's events prove; if the latter, you're an abject cunt.
Party membership is never something I can approve of at the best of times - summons up all sorts of images of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, none of which are pleasant, which is why I have never and will never join any party - but Labour party membership today I cannot even slightly understand, and especially the continued membership of old Labour supporters.
Why? How can you approve of what they're doing? How can you still think that this is the party you used to know? How can you still cling to the hope that they might, possibly, someday swing back towards the political ground they once occupied? How can you justify continuing to give them your money to enable them to pay hulking security guards to assault octogenarians?
I simply do not get it. I can't come up with a single logical argument for it, nor any take on current Labour policy which could in any way be described as left-wing. Can anyone justify Labour party membership any more? Can anybody justify the Labour party?
Update: Heckler returns to hero's welcome, while meanwhile,
"The Labour Representation Committee claimed there had been intimidation of delegates, allegations of corruption of the democratic process and 'blatant gerrymandering' of the conference agenda.And this from an MP hardly known for his rebellious nature - until, that is, the most recent splurge of stupid legislation on gambling, terrorism, freedom of speech, ID, immigration, public private partnerships, judicial reform, etc. etc. etc.
"It alleged that emergency resolutions to the conference had been excluded for 'spurious' reasons, that delegates received text messages from party officials telling them which way to vote and that speeches had been 'planted' by party officials.
"Labour MP John McDonnell, chairman of the committee, said: 'Enough is enough - we cannot put up with this treatment any longer.
"'We need a thorough independent investigation into the whole New Labour culture of intimidation, suppression of dissent and the gerrymandering of conference.'"
16 Comments:
Yes, because unlike over excited teenagers such as yourself (the headline suggests a 15-year-old chavista) I have kids in school, I have relied on the NHS to save family members' lives in the last year and I think the National minimum wage is a good thing. The so-called "real alternative" opposes education reform, wants to break up the NHS and opposed the minimum wage. They are the bankrupt ones.
As opposed to no bid contracts to sell off public services... what New Labour doesn't like is competition in any context.
Michael Howard now looks like a "chain-me-to-the-railings-and-sing-We-Will-Overcome" hippy. Norman Tebbit is now an immigration liberal. Jonathan Aitkin appears relatively honest. I could go on.....
Oh, and education reform started long before New Labour.... remeber the horror at the idea of checking whether schools actually worked?
you want logical thinking and party politics NM? Come on old boy, you're smarter than that.
As for Labour Party membership, it has halved under Blair.
And you're never going to kill off blind ideological optimism completely.
It's the sheer quality of debate that impresses me here. If you don't like the Labour Party fair enough but the language is all too redolent of the authorianism you claim you oppose - why not pull the whole page out of Herr Adolf's book and start comparing Labour's members to a disease infecting the population?
And for the person who said membership halved under Blair - it hasn't it has fallen by a net 50,000 or so. It has halved since it's peak but that was after a big rise under Blair too. I suspect the net fall is proportionally smaller than under any Labour Prime Minister, though I don't have the figures at hand to check that.
"Membership has slumped from around 400,000 in 1997 to 201,000 at the end of 2004, according to official figures published yesterday"
the Guardian, Sep 26, 2005.
:)
Tony Blair became leader in 1994 when membership was in the 240 - 250,000 range.
Generally speaking I find it a good idea to know what I am talking about before I start offering an opinion. Clearly you disagree.
lol. I think given Blair's shift post premiership (evidenced by plenty of contradictory quotes pre- and post- 97), it is fair, IMO, to take '97 as a start date. That, and it's a bit harsh, even for me, not to take a bit of pity on the credulous fools who got sucked in thinking he wouldn't be a bit crap.
Apologies for not being more explicit earlier, I just find caveats so tiresome... bit like Blair really :)
And I wasn't offering an opinion. Except just then. But that's different. :)
anonymous is a cretin. You know who you are ;)
Fortunately it is episodes like this which make it plainer to the average daily mail reader that we are heading for a police state, with anti-terrorism legislation that allows the detention of an innocent man on the whim of a (disturbed and fuckwitted) Prime Minister or his (equally disturbed and fuckwitted) cronies.
Innocent men being gunned down by the 'police' (out of uniform, carrying fully automatic weapons and semi-automatic handguns).
Legislation that allows the government to intercept, copy and record telephone conversations, email and snail-mail.
Welcome to 1984. Give echelon a cheery wave next time you pass a cctv camera ;)
And FWIW, NM's original point was 'how come people keep supporting this once it became clear that it wasn't what they thought it was', which didn't become clear until NL had any power, so in the context, the 97 stat is more important than the 94 one.
And, also FWIW, membership was 265,000 in 1994, then TB made it cheaper to join, it went up to about 407,000, and now resides around the 200,000 mark. God stats are dull...
Hitler swore? The bastard. No seriously, I don't recall that side of him. Maybe I'm just misinformed.
Anonymous (you could at least choose a name), according to http://www.politics.co.uk/party-politics/labour-membership-hits-record-low-$6019186.htm membership in 1994 was 265,000. When you say, "Generally speaking I find it a good idea to know what I am talking about before I start offering an opinion" you wouldn't like to start giving sources, just so we know, would you?
anonymous @ 12:08, 2:07 and 5:04 -
Now I'm at home and can comment (cunting swear filters...), a few points:
1) At 2:07 you mentioned the "quality of debate" here. I might point out that you were the one who opened your contribution with a personal insult... Ho hum.
2) The NHS was founded a fair while ago now, and as such is hardly something Blair can take credit for - especially considering that via foundation hospitals and outsourcing of surgery, cleaning and God knows what else to the private sector he's done more to privatise the bloody thing than Thatcher ever managed.
3) The minimum wage is, in many ways, a good thing - agreed. Considering I had a job in the mid-90s that paid only £1.20 an hour (though I still got whacked for National Insurance and tax that took months to claim back), I am fully aware of what it's like on a low wage.
But considering my father's a small businessman, I also know it's not all rosy - he's currently understaffed simply because he can't afford to hire anyone. Plus he's regulated to fuck these days, and is currently having to fork out £60,000 for new equipment to comply with what he assures me are largely arbitrary regulations, when his old equipment still works fine.
(He is, by the by, a Dentist, 85% of whose work is NHS. He's currently worried he may have to close his practice not only due to all the new legislation, but also because in real terms his NHS payments have dropped massively since their high-point - which was under the Thatcher government...)
4) Perhaps the most important point, this - just because you criticise Labour does not mean you support the Tories (or any party, for that matter - I don't). Cf. also, just because you criticise the Iraq war does not mean you support Saddam (or even that you don't support the idea that removing him was a good thing), nor does criticising the current wave of anti-terror legislation mean you support terrorism.
5) Again at 2:07, you said "the language is all too redolent of the authorianism you claim you oppose" - I must have missed Hitler's speech where he said "cunting cunt", I guess. Or, if you were referring to the other language, the ones where he expressed support for freedom of speech...
And as for my opposition to authoritarianism, check the "Civil Liberties" section of the archives for my track record.
6) Finally - engage properly, stop trying to act superior and patronise people about whom you evidently know nothing, and could you possibly enter some kind of name/pseudonym when you comment (for sheer courtesy, so we can identify which anonymous person we're talking to). Either that or fuck off, either's good. I enjoy a good debate, but your contributions so far have amounted to neither. Cheers.
Oh dear, you nursing a bad hangover or somefink Mr Nosemonkey? Or maybe you just don't like somebody disagreeing with you? You've gone all a bit on the silly side, haven't you?
Incidentally, the 1994 figures you quote are for the end of the year - ie after Tony Blair became leader.
The NHS, you mean that institution that New Labour has been quietly privatising since it came to power?
With 'NHS diagnosis and treatment centres' (shortened to hospitals) that New Labour has set up. Privately run, privately staffed, claiming money back from the NHS as if it was an insurance system.
Or 'waiting list initives' doctors treating NHS patients as part of their private practice privately in private hospitals.
Blair has done more to privatise your precious NHS than the Tories ever managed. A good thing, that should be taken further in my view.
But do not hold up Labour's socialism of 50 years ago as an excuse for New Labour authoritarianism of today. New Labour is not the old Labour party that created the NHS.
Tony Blair is easily the worst prime minister in this countrys history, hes doing a job that Hitler couldnt do, ruining a once great country, i could beat the shit out of him for the way he has ruined everything.
Note to the cronie: 1984 was a warning, not a fucking manual.
Post a Comment