Prime Minister Starmer Defends Taking Donations Amid Criticism

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

They posted hurty words and were jailed for it.   They didn't have category A images of 7 year olds on their phones.  They didn't physically assault anyone.   It's literally hurty words they were jailed for.

Your constant whataboutary is noted.

[James105]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Give over with the gaslighting, your martyrs were imprisoned for posting grossly offensive content in breach of the communications act.

Read the links you yourself orovided

 

 They both confessed their crimes.

 

Section 127 of the Communications Act linked below for your reference.

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

 

They were imprisoned for hurty words.   They confessed to making hurty word posts.  It doesn't matter what mental gymnastics you put yourself through it is undeniable that they typed some hurty words into facebook and were jailed for it.  I think where you are getting yourself turned in knots is that you are expecting to see 'hurty words' in the legislation as though this is a formal term rather than just a colloquialism for Section 127 of the Communications act.   

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

They were imprisoned for hurty words.   They confessed to making hurty word posts.  It doesn't matter what mental gymnastics you put yourself through it is undeniable that they typed some hurty words into facebook and were jailed for it.  I think where you are getting yourself turned in knots is that you are expecting to see 'hurty words' in the legislation as though this is a formal term rather than just a colloquialism for Section 127 of the Communications act.   

 

   What should happen to a Muslim extremist who post "hurty words" encouraging fellow extremists to blow themselves and others up in suicide bombing attacks in London or the town where you live ?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

They were imprisoned for hurty words.   They confessed to making hurty word posts.  It doesn't matter what mental gymnastics you put yourself through it is undeniable that they typed some hurty words into facebook and were jailed for it.  I think where you are getting yourself turned in knots is that you are expecting to see 'hurty words' in the legislation as though this is a formal term rather than just a colloquialism for Section 127 of the Communications act.   

Oh, so the black and white proof that they were imprisoned for the offenses under Section 127 of the Communications Act, links provided, is some kind of alternative reality?

 

Believe me, I absolutely was not expecting to see the term ‘hurty words’ in the legislation.

 

The term ‘hurty words’ is you grievance strikers came up with to avoid facing the fact of what crimes your martyrs committed and confessed to committing.

 

Please forgive me if that was a bit hurty for you.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   What should happen to a Muslim extremist who post "hurty words" encouraging fellow extremists to blow themselves and others up in suicide bombing attacks in London or the town where you live ?

Oh let’s wander off into imaginary scenarios rather than face the actual reality of these factual cases.

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh let’s wander off into imaginary scenarios rather than face the actual reality of these factual cases.

 

   Its an example  of freedom of speech issues .

Should people be allowed to post incendiary posts on social media or anywhere else ?

   That is the question here .

If you allow some people to post incendiary posts , then you have to allow everyone else to do so .

   

[James105]

The clown is a full on grifter:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader

 

£100,000 of free gifts and he takes away the winter fuel allowance from vulnerable pensioners who needed that £300 just to heat their homes and not die of the cold this winter.   

[Chomper Higgot]

51 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Its an example  of freedom of speech issues .

Should people be allowed to post incendiary posts on social media or anywhere else ?

   That is the question here .

If you allow some people to post incendiary posts , then you have to allow everyone else to do so .

   

That’s a question that the law has already addressed, I have provided a link to the specific law in my post above.

 

[RayC]

Imo the idea that a PM - Labour or Tory - can be brought for the price of a match day ticket, a decent suit and a pretty frock is ridiculous. 

 

That said, this is (yet another) example of a lack of political nous on Starmer's part, and it gives his opponents a stick to beat him with.

 

Starmer can, with some justification, be accused of hypocrisy. Moreover, even if his defence that security dictates he must take match-day hospitality is accepted, it doesn't explain why a couple with a combined income of circa £200k/annum needs to accept gifts of free clothing. Lammy's "defence" that they need to look their best is laughable. Are Mr. & Mrs. Starmer incapable of choosing well-tailored clothes themselves?

[nauseus]

6 hours ago, John Drake said:

Unseemly when one grown man needs another to buy him his underwear.

 

And his wife's.

[john donson]

left right middle, all in just for the money and many many benefits

[JonnyF]

Looks like Free Gear Keir has had over 100,000 pounds worth of gifts (bribes) in the last few years.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader

 

The guy is so out of touch it's unreal.

 

 

Of course, he also "forgot" to declare them. The guy is a walking disaster. It would be amazing if he can see out his term at this rate.  

[JonnyF]

18 hours ago, RayC said:

Starmer can, with some justification, be accused of hypocrisy.

 

Understatement of the year.😂

 

I see "Led by donkeys" has gone quiet. 

[James105]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Looks like Free Gear Keir has had over 100,000 pounds worth of gifts (bribes) in the last few years.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader

 

The guy is so out of touch it's unreal.

 

 

Of course, he also "forgot" to declare them. The guy is a walking disaster. It would be amazing if he can see out his term at this rate.  

 

Does pensioner harmer Starmer have different security to previous PMs?   Sunak had no security issues when he went to watch football in the stands with the normal folks whilst he was PM:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12080333/Prime-Minister-Rishi-Sunak-pictured-stands-St-Marys-stadium.html

 

Considering the cost of a box at Arsenal is about £9000 per game the benefits in kind tax will at least cost him a lot.   He does pay benefits in kind tax on this like anyone else would, doesn't he?   

[JonnyF]

It seems 2 tier Keir thinks there is one rule for him and one rule for the former PM. He was absolutely outraged by 'cash for curtains'. Hardly surprising, given his hypocrisy on other issues.

 

 https://uk.news.yahoo.com/clip-starmer-lecturing-boris-johnson-090515545.html

 

[connda]

Prime Minister Starmer Defends Taking Donations Amid Criticism

 

Of course.  He's not like all the dirty little commoners, you know, working people.  He's Oxford educated!  He's "Special!" His 💩 smells like Lilies of the Valley. He's a "somebody," not a regular pleb.  Of course he can take expensive gifts from wealthy people.  But don't you dirty commoners try this - you'll be arrested and thrown into the dungeon.  Know your place commoners.  Oh - by the way citizens - criticizing Starmer is "Hate Speech."  The constables will be around to throw you in the paddy-wagon and taken to court where you'll be promptly found guilty and send a UK gulag.

 
😬 "Sucks to be you, little people!  Ha ha ha ha ha. Now shut up and take a knee."

[connda]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It seems 2 tier Keir thinks there is one rule for him and one rule for the former PM.

Well there is!  Just like in Thailand! 

"All you commoners get your knickers in a twist.  PMs are "Special People" and "Special People" get to play by a different set of rules - not like you commoner swill.  Now shut up or the constabulary will be coming around to shut you up.  Know your place.  We know our and it's above all of you commoners."