Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Psychology Of A Scumbag


Executive Sadman

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/caught-unawares-david-miliband-finally-makes-true-feelings-known-2092570.html

harman_getty_gal.jpg

The former Foreign Secretary, who backed the 2003 invasion, sat stony-faced as Ed Miliband declared at the party's Manchester conference that Labour was "wrong to take Britain to war and we need to be honest about that".

David Miliband's anger boiled over when Harriet Harman, Labour's deputy leader, joined the applause for his brother's attack. "You voted for it, why are you clapping?" David asked her in a remark picked up by an ITV News microphone.

"I'm clapping because he is the leader. I'm supporting him," Ms Harman replied.

Adolf would be proud. Screw afghans and Iraqis, screw our soldiers putting their lives on the line, party politics is what matters.

FFS. Sheeplism is well and live in the Liebour party. Utter insanity, Do these 'people' have hearts and souls?

Bloody disgraceful. I am almost lost for words. Hopefully she'll rot in hell very soon, tormented by those whose lives she ended with such weak conviction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1
HOLA442
2
HOLA443
3
HOLA444
Guest tbatst2000

This is the same woman that was a civil liberties lawyer chairperson of Liberty yet voted for ID cards, detention without trial and whole bunch of other totalitarian measures. She is morally bankrupt. Why would anyone be surprised by this latest piece of cognitive dissonance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
5
HOLA446

I agree with all the negative comments about Harperson. She is scum. I am delighted also that David M, who had a hand in the CIA torture rendition flights, as well as the disgusting Iraq war, has been put in an impossible position and is thinking of quitting frontline politics. Rot in obscurity, Dave Banana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447
7
HOLA448
8
HOLA449
9
HOLA4410

This is the same woman that was a civil liberties lawyer chairperson of Liberty yet voted for ID cards, detention without trial and whole bunch of other totalitarian measures. She is morally bankrupt. Why would anyone be surprised by this latest piece of cognitive dissonance?

She's just yet another left wing party drone. My Party right or wrong, and 2 + 2 = 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411
11
HOLA4412
12
HOLA4413
13
HOLA4414

I don't have a problem with an MP having voted for going into Iraq (only way to get rid of that sick ******* Saddam IMO), although I do have a very big problem with them voting for it without insisting on a proper well-thought-out plan about what to do next, which is 100% responsible for the mess and utterly criminal. However, that's not the issue with Harman. What's unacceptable with her (in this situation, listing all the reasons she's unacceptable would take all day) is the turning for convenience. Either stick with your principles or at least give a reason that you truly believe they were wrong and have been convinced they were wrong. So blatently changing tune just for convenience is so contemptible it's a wonder that she can do so and not expect people to sneer at her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415
15
HOLA4416

This is the same woman that was a civil liberties lawyer chairperson of Liberty yet voted for ID cards, detention without trial and whole bunch of other totalitarian measures. She is morally bankrupt. Why would anyone be surprised by this latest piece of cognitive dissonance?

Its just the 'he is the leader' bit, as if that alone is a reason to support him.

Reminded me of people supporting Hitler simply because he's "der Fuhrer". or die Fuhrer, or das or whatever.

Its just this blind adherance to anything that is considered good for the party. They are slaves, sheep, just like the rest of us. Just on another level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417

What's unacceptable with her (in this situation, listing all the reasons she's unacceptable would take all day) is the turning for convenience. Either stick with your principles or at least give a reason that you truly believe they were wrong and have been convinced they were wrong. So blatently changing tune just for convenience is so contemptible it's a wonder that she can do so and not expect people to sneer at her.

I guess they see how Claire Short and Kate Hoey (ie, that rare thing, decent labour MPs) got sidelined and marginalized for having convictions.

Still doesnt make it acceptable in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17
HOLA4418

I guess they see how Claire Short and Kate Hoey (ie, that rare thing, decent labour MPs) got sidelined and marginalized for having convictions.

Still doesnt make it acceptable in my mind.

There used to be a few decent Labout MPs but Blair forced most of them out pretty quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
19
HOLA4420

Saddam like many politicians have carried out bad things.

The US and the lapdog wasnt interested in whats best for Iraqi people becuase Saddam even offered to go into exile for the measly price of $1bn! The US wants the oil security becuase the US military machine is the largest consumer of oil. The pentagon alone consumes more oil in a day than the whole of Sweden! Its all about the oil nothing else.

http://www.dailymail...-1bn-exile.html

I thought that was obvious, no? huh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20
HOLA4421

Saddam like many politicians have carried out bad things.

The US and the lapdog wasnt interested in whats best for Iraqi people becuase Saddam even offered to go into exile for the measly price of $1bn! The US wants the oil security becuase the US military machine is the largest consumer of oil. The pentagon alone consumes more oil in a day than the whole of Sweden! Its all about the oil nothing else.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-484162/Saddam-asked-Bush-1bn-exile.html

Oh, I can well believe that they weren't the slightest bit interested in what's best for Iraq, but I wanted to point out that I'm not necessarily against someone for voting for it. It's the change of stance for convenience that's so disgusting to me. A vote for a war might make you think that someone has got bad principles, but such a willing change is a sign of no princples at all. I suppose one thing you can say about Blair is that at least he stuck to his position and didn't try to change it in a blatant attempt to court popularity (perhaps only because he knew that no-one would believe it anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21
HOLA4422
22
HOLA4423

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information