• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

scaramanga said:
What rot.

There was no abuse of power because there was no power used (other than the physical kind, in which case I refer you to my earlier questions). The power wielded by those at the dinner wasn't recognised by those trespassing - the woman didn't leave because her superior asked her to, she left because she was physically removed.

Which leads me back to the physical aspect. What do you think would have happened if some thug for hire, embarrassed that her and her lot had snuck past him? I'd imagine the outcome would have been worse,y calling for security is what most who disapprove of his actions are suggesting should have happened.
Click to expand...
If that happens you would be upset about the security, whataboutery does not make the original actions less bad /good.
 
r-u-s-x said:
If that happens you would be upset about the security, whataboutery does not make the original actions less bad /good.
Click to expand...
The actions were precisely what I would want and expect from security. Their role is not just to remove the unwanted from the venue, but also to discourage them and their like from trying to do so again. I don't see the actions as being at all disproportionate.

Nobody was permanently hurt but hopefully they were all given enough of a shock to think twice about ruining the dinners of people who matter.
 
scaramanga said:
The actions were precisely what I would want and expect from security. Their role is not just to remove the unwanted from the venue, but also to discourage them and their like from trying to do so again. I don't see the actions as being at all disproportionate.

Nobody was permanently hurt but hopefully they were all given enough of a shock to think twice about ruining the dinners of people who matter.
Click to expand...
You were talking about other people's reaction to it not your own.
 
glasgowspur said:
Why far right? Is there no far left loonies?
And why would a far right terrorist attack a tory shindig?

There's three mistakes in this situation imho,

1, burst in and protest, fine, but she should not have sought out and approached the main speaker. That is iffy, and makes it look like a possible attack.

2. He shouldn't have been quite so 'enthusiastic' in his handling of her.

3. The biggest issue for me though is the complete over reaction, most of it just to score points.

It's all totally bizarre and a sad reflection of today's politics.
Click to expand...
I was illustrating the main threat factors that might make you act with force to protect someone. They didn't exist in this situation. Far left loonies there might be but I am not aware of them attacking and killing anyone in the UK recently.

This was a protest by a climate change group, not known for attacking politicians and I would be very surprised if there was not close protection security nearby the Chancellor. I am sure Field had had a few drinks and was irritated by the speech and meal being disrupted. Hence his reaction. Again I am certain he wouldn't have done it had he felt that there was a genuine threat.

I find Itthe whole overreaction pov slightly hypocritical. We have had talk of Jo Cox, that the reaction wouldn't be the same if it was a Labour politician, that we are soft on crime. Ultimately this was a woman in a dress gatecrashing an event to make a point to an MP who represents the public. We don't need to go all Jo Cox on everyone who does that surely. For me personally his behaviour was disgusting because I do not condone violence to women unless there is a clear threat. If that happened on the street when I was a copper I would be having a word with the bloke.

There is a point worth considering. The PM herself felt Field's behaviour was inappropriate and suspended him. So this is not some left wing conspiracy.

Anyway this discussion had gone on too long and as is typical going around in circles.
 
Last edited:
Robspur12 said:
I was illustrating the main threat factors that might make you act with force to protect someone. They didn't exist in this situation. Far left loonies there might be but I am not aware of them attacking and killing anyone in the UK recently.

This was a protest by a climate change group, not known for attacking politicians and I would be very surprised if there was not close protection security nearby the Chancellor. I am sure Field had had a few drinks and was irritated by the speech and meal being disrupted. Hence his reaction. Again I am certain he wouldn't have done it had he felt that there was a genuine threat.

I find Itthe whole overreaction pov slightly hypocritical. We have had talk of Jo Cox, that the reaction wouldn't be the same if it was a Labour politician, that we are soft on crime. Ultimately this was a woman in a dress gatecrashing an event to make a point at an MP who represents the public. We don't need to go all Jo Cox on everyone who does that surely. For me personally his behaviour was disgusting because I do not condone violence to women unless there is a clear threat. If that happened on the street when I was a copper I would be having a word with the bloke.

There is a point worth considering. The PM herself felt Field's behaviour was inappropriate and suspended him. So this is not some left wing conspiracy.

Anyway this discussion had gone on too long and as is typical going around in circles.
Click to expand...

The last politically motivated murder in this country was by a left wing Marxist group.

I just find it all very that that the critism of him is that he used disproportionate force and yet those making the claims can't see that their reactions to him and those defending him are equally if not more disproportionate.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Yeh and that was my earlier point, the Corbyn crew have no chance because they cry about this and lie that they would act different in a situation they were never in...and think Boris Johnsons socks being inside out is news and his personal life is key.

Then they wonder why they haven't done fudge all for the last number of years.
Click to expand...

I would not disagree that Corbyn and Labour are a total mess.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Well whilst the rest of the world are concerned about iran and real issue of last week the left spend it crying into their Soya Milk about this Mark lad and trivial crap.
Click to expand...

I think it is possible to be concerned about both things, proportionately too. We probably don’t want to discuss Iran though. I will say this; the Mullahs are insane evil nutcases, but they do not represent all Iranians any more than Trump represents all Americans. And the course Trump and Bolton are charting over Iran ends up strengthening the Mullahs AND leaving Europe vulnerable. A disaster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back