Continuing the discussion from UK Politics Thread (Part 2) - #10161 by Mascot.
Previous discussions:
in before the ban stick.
1 Like
Wouldnât it be great if this thread was about UK politics?
2 Likes
blasphemy!
@Mascot those investments will be run through companies and trusts, dividends will be franked, i understand completely the point and the overiding sentimentâŚ
the games rigged, but by simply increasing company tax, or taxing already franked dividends, your not solving the problem of the top end of town not paying enough taxâŚ
your basically just ripping more coin from the guys trying to get âa little bit aheadâ. a Klopptomist type guy, and i know as much as you guys butt heads on here, you at least understand Klopptomist making an extra couple of K a year on tax breaks isnt going to solve the problem
its fucked, as i say, im making a very black and white statementâŚof course there are loopholes needing to be closed, of course the systems not perfectâŚbut its really not as simple as asking someone with a passive investment to pay more personel tax.
for my 2c worthâŚits not ârightâ, its not perfect, its designed to confuseâŚits like mobile phone plansâŚmake them so confusing everyone just throws their hands up and says, âwhateverâŚjust give me the phoneâ
3 Likes
All I would ask for is transparency.
The opacity if the whole stinking shitheap can only lead me to the conclusion that theyâre doing something reprebensible. You donât structure something in a way noone can follow just for fun, Trump being the most obvious example.
1 Like
And just out of interestâŚthe Tories want to fine beggars ÂŁ1k.
RightâŚanyone know how much it would cost to put this in place in order to collect exactly ÂŁ0?
Tjhe space dogs can take up!
⌠and if the beggars canât pay up do they get a custodial sentence? Food and board at the taxpayers expense.
Not sure that they have thought this through.
1 Like
30 to 45 days depending if itâs considered more or less than ÂŁ1000.
Nutcase country!
I wonder if thereâs no places left in prison if they get to stay in a Hotel?
1 Like
Next theyâll propose all homeless people have to pull rickshaws around the city.
3 Likes
My council tax has gone up. This government is robbing us. I want a revolution now!
This Trans Pacific Trade deal just rubbish deal for the UK.
2 Likes
Just in time for April fools day, no?
I know you have reservations, but you need to vote for whoever will beat the Tory candidate in your seat.
Labour, LibDem, Elmo. Just vote for whoever.
8 Likes
Taking back control right there
Iâm confused! 
Okay!
1 Like
I think @SBYM is saying that with the anger you have for what the Tories are doing, you absolutely must show that you donât stand for that when we vote next, and show them that your disdain for the Tories is far greater than your disdain for the way factions of Labour threw Corbyn under the bus then reversed onto him.
TL;DR warning: Your source is a bullshit hit piece by a racist organisation. Skip.
So something about the preview rubbed me the wrong way, and I spent a long time trying to figure it out. Then I realised, I donât tend to see the word âWesternâ in serious think tanks or journalist organisations, more often in right-wing parlance.
So I tried to find out more about this âFocus on Western Islamismâ. Firstly, itâs a media organisation founded by the Middle East Forum. Sounds benign so far, but keep the name in mind.
Its Managing Editor is Dexter van Zile. A quick Google yields the following:
Doesnât sound very concerned about Islamism so much as concerned about Islam. And those are just the first 3 results.
The publisher is Daniel Pipes, which links back to the Middle East Forum. Daniel Pipes is the founder of the Middle East Forum, which again, sounds benign. But what are they?
Their Wikipedia page points out that they are supporters of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, and the source for this information is the Middle East Forum themselves: Tommy Robinson Free â MEF Heavily Involved :: Middle East Forum.
Now who are they, in their own words?
Note how they donât even mention âdictatorships, radical ideologies, existential conflicts, border disagreements, corruption, political violence, and weapons of mass destructionâ in other regions. The tripartite axis of China, India, and Pakistan doesnât concern them.
What even are Western values? The idea that they know is thoroughly condescending, since âWesternâ is such an ill-defined concept to begin with, and that many they claim to represent would probably disagree with their concept of these ideals anyway.
Crucially, among their goals is this:
Not even peace in Palestine, just Israel victory.
Iâm not sure how anyone can regard them as anything but a thinly-veiled hate group. As much as their article might be interesting, the source along is enough to blemish it.
But on to the article. In it, is mainly guilt by association. It conflates support for the Palestinian cause with a desire for Islamism to take root in the UK, despite grudgingly acknowledging that Yousaf has had a track record of denouncing the interpretations of Islam that he disagrees with. The main accusation levelled against him is that he organised a meeting between the then Scottish Minister for Europe, External Affairs, and Culture and a Hamas commander, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and it seems, someone who advocates for Palestine: Ismail Patel - Wikipedia, even though he has rather abhorrent views. Instead of taking the view that the meeting was about hearing out the Palestinian view, which seems to be the main thing that all of the parties had in common.
Heâs also assigned guilt by association because of his closeness to his cousin, described as thus:
Interestingly however, the calling âfor the establishment of an Islamic caliphateâ, was an opinion piece about how an Islamic caliphate is not incompatible with democracy, and could well instead simply look like an ordinary democratic government, just with labels that are relevant culturally to Muslims.
Take away his religion, and look critically at Saeed, and he appears to be no more than a Jeremy Corbyn, whose worst sins are simply appearing with the wrong people and believing the wrong things about them.
The next criticism is more laughable:
This just in: the British government is now an Islamist regime, since apparently all you need is close association with the Qatari regime.
The one act from Yousaf himself that they cite, is even more ridiculous:
Can anyone claim that Yousaf was wrong? Look at what happened in the end, the US and the UK are more than happy to prop up a corrupt dictatorship to protect their own interests, despite the Muslim Brotherhood government having been democratically elected.
I was going to further dissect the rest of this, but itâs so much drivel I cannot believe Iâve already wasted this much time on it already.
TL;DR: Your source is a bullshit hit piece by a racist organisation. Skip.
8 Likes