Donald Trump

[Boss]

Just now, viRdjil said:

That Khan actively organised the baby trump blimp protest.

I said he sorted it out, which he did. Do you have a counter point to this? Can you show that he wasn't the chair of the Greater London Authority on that day, and didn't in fact give it the go ahead?

[Rico1304]

He didn’t sort anything out.  He saw no reason to refuse the request. 

[Boss]

He sorted it out by authorising it. Self explanatory. His refusal would've stopped it from happening. Hence he had an active role.

[aRdja]

8 minutes ago, Boss said:

I said he sorted it out, which he did. Do you have a counter point to this? Can you show that he wasn't the chair of the Greater London Authority on that day, and didn't in fact give it the go ahead?

My counterpoint is that he didn’t sort it out. He just didn’t stop the protestors. You made it up just to attack him for it. 

[TheHowieLama]

It is probably the best thing he has done to date

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, Boss said:

He sorted it out by authorising it. Self explanatory. 

He had to have a reason not to authorise it. Otherwise it’d be challenged in court. There was no reason. 

[Boss]

Just now, viRdjil said:

My counterpoint is that he didn’t sort it out. He just didn’t stop the protestors. You made it up just to attack him for it. 

The more you double down on your nonsense does not give it credence you know? 

[Boss]

Just now, Rico1304 said:

He had to have a reason not to authorise it. Otherwise it’d be challenged in court. There was no reason. 

How about depicting the leader of our biggest ally as a petulant baby in a diaper during a state visit. Is that not reason enough?

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, Boss said:

The more you double down on your nonsense does not give it credence you know? 

You missed ‘Note to self’

[aRdja]

Just now, Boss said:

The more you double down on your nonsense does not give it credence you know? 

I’m more than happy to take it back if you could provide evidence that helped organise it or fund it. 

[Rico1304]

Just now, Boss said:

How about depicting the leader of our biggest ally as a petulant baby in a diaper during a state visit. Is that not reason enough?

Ha ha ha I think you are bringing in hurt feelings into the argument.  

[Boss]

Just now, Rico1304 said:

Ha ha ha I think you are bringing in hurt feelings into the argument.  

I don't see what attacking our biggest ally offers us when we are on the cusp of a no deal Brexit and need to secure trade arrangements with countries outside the EU. Maybe Corbyn's hoping we can strike up a trade deal with Hezbollah to keep us afloat. 

[Pureblood]

Wanker.

[TheHowieLama]

Just now, TK421 said:

Wanker.

Calling the leader of the free world a wanker is not helping Britain either....

[cloggypop]

Rather call him a wanker than accept a trade deal on his terms. 

[TheHowieLama]

May end up doing both

[Rico1304]

11 minutes ago, Boss said:

I don't see what attacking our biggest ally offers us when we are on the cusp of a no deal Brexit and need to secure trade arrangements with countries outside the EU. Maybe Corbyn's hoping we can strike up a trade deal with Hezbollah to keep us afloat. 

Free speech. People hate him and should be allowed to do what they want as long as it doesn’t break the law.  

 

You usually agree with this to be fair.   

[Rico1304]

Obviously on this argument I’m right as it’s supporting the view that’s popular in here.  

[Boss]

8 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Free speech. People hate him and should be allowed to do what they want as long as it doesn’t break the law.  

 

You usually agree with this to be fair.   

I agree with free speech, and I agree with protest. I don't agree with senior figures in government attacking our allies in the manner they have, or facilitating the public mockery of their leaders. I hope this also answers the question cloggy asked on the other page.

[Jairzinho]

We should at least wait to see what Hezbollah are offering.

[Rico1304]

4 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

We should at least wait to see what Hezbollah are offering.

I think it’s time shares. 

[Trumo]

4 minutes ago, Boss said:

I agree with free speech, and I agree with protest. I don't agree with senior figures in government attacking our allies in the manner they have, or facilitating the public mockery of their leaders.

 

I can't recall any comments that attacked the country, only its Commander-in-Chief. Sure he might think he holds sway over policy but even with the decks stacked in his favour he hasn't achieved an awful lot.

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

We should at least wait to see what Hezbollah are offering.

China is waiting by the phone

[Rico1304]

6 minutes ago, Boss said:

I agree with free speech, and I agree with protest. I don't agree with senior figures in government attacking our allies in the manner they have, or facilitating the public mockery of their leaders. I hope this also answers the question cloggy asked on the other page.

Free speech is the government not interfering.  You want the government to interfere.  How hard is this?   

[Boss]

18 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Free speech is the government not interfering.  You want the government to interfere.  How hard is this?   

I can 100% guarantee if there's a Donald Trump blimp portraying him in a good light - as a counter protest to the baby blimp - Khan will not authorise it to be flown. Therein lies the rub. 

 

Khan couldn't care less about free speech. He's cares about himself and those sympathetic to his beliefs only.