Bank Account Cheques For Pip Claimants
How it Works0 min ago
Oh Dear, More Bad News
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//The Wikipedia article defines a gammon as follows:-
'In 2018, it became particularly known as a term to describe either those on the political right or those who supported Brexit.'//
Not unusually, you have cherry-picked the facts because it also says:
"It is a pejorative"
Dictionary definition: A word or grammatical form expressing a negative or a disrespectful connotation, a low opinion, or a lack of respect toward someone or something.
As well as that it says this:
“Due to its referencing of skin colour, there is controversy as to whether the term is racist.”
Whether or not it’s racist doesn’t bother me much. But it’s clearly used by you to insult those with whom you do not agree and cannot get the better of by rational argument. I occasionally used to enjoy our exchanges, Hymie. When you engaged properly in debate you were sometimes quite lucid and challenging. But it is clear in recent weeks that things are getting the better of you. I've tried numerous times to steer you back to reasoned debate but have failed miserably.
I think you could do with a spell away from the internet. You are clearly suffering mentally as a result of your rabid obsession with Brexit.
I’ll help you along the way by no longer responding to your posts and I suggest others do likewise.
'In 2018, it became particularly known as a term to describe either those on the political right or those who supported Brexit.'//
Not unusually, you have cherry-picked the facts because it also says:
"It is a pejorative"
Dictionary definition: A word or grammatical form expressing a negative or a disrespectful connotation, a low opinion, or a lack of respect toward someone or something.
As well as that it says this:
“Due to its referencing of skin colour, there is controversy as to whether the term is racist.”
Whether or not it’s racist doesn’t bother me much. But it’s clearly used by you to insult those with whom you do not agree and cannot get the better of by rational argument. I occasionally used to enjoy our exchanges, Hymie. When you engaged properly in debate you were sometimes quite lucid and challenging. But it is clear in recent weeks that things are getting the better of you. I've tried numerous times to steer you back to reasoned debate but have failed miserably.
I think you could do with a spell away from the internet. You are clearly suffering mentally as a result of your rabid obsession with Brexit.
I’ll help you along the way by no longer responding to your posts and I suggest others do likewise.
Wikipedia is written by a member of the public and so may not be as everyone sees it. I don't agree with the definition all. My experience of the phrase is that it is simply an attempted insult at the "baby boomer" generation, by those still to experience life sufficiently to get past the strange idea phase of their life. With little ability to defend their strange views they throw in a name calling tactic in the hope it will help. It's best ignored.
I think the term ‘gammon’, well suited to those on the political right, or those mad enough to believe Brexit a success for the UK.
Whenever I post a thread demonstrating that the current Tory government is corrupt, incompetent, or just plain lying; or how well Brexit is going – I invariably get called a troll, lefty 5C, or that I am posting BS propaganda by the usual suspects. But I don’t go crying to teacher, saying they are being mean to me.
Hopefully the more intelligent amongst you will read/view the information provided and make up your own mind.
Whenever I post a thread demonstrating that the current Tory government is corrupt, incompetent, or just plain lying; or how well Brexit is going – I invariably get called a troll, lefty 5C, or that I am posting BS propaganda by the usual suspects. But I don’t go crying to teacher, saying they are being mean to me.
Hopefully the more intelligent amongst you will read/view the information provided and make up your own mind.
//Hopefully the more intelligent amongst you will read/view the information provided and make up your own mind. //
As one of 'the more intelligent amongst you', NJ at 08.38 has done just that - as I think have many others who, for want of sensible discussion, no longer frequent a News section now relentlessly dominated by inane drivel.
As one of 'the more intelligent amongst you', NJ at 08.38 has done just that - as I think have many others who, for want of sensible discussion, no longer frequent a News section now relentlessly dominated by inane drivel.
Whilst it has become this Tory government’s stock-in-trade to lie, demonstrate gross incompetence and corruption, and while they are doing this on a daily basis – I still think it newsworthy, otherwise we are in danger of accepting this behaviour as normal from our government (of whatever political persuasion).
Maybe I’m in a minority expecting our government to act with integrity and honesty – but there you go.
Maybe I’m in a minority expecting our government to act with integrity and honesty – but there you go.
-- answer removed --
[email protected]
I completely agree with you. Pity there are no moderators on this thread. Oh, hang on . . .
I completely agree with you. Pity there are no moderators on this thread. Oh, hang on . . .
Just thought I'd look in, yet another nice day on arguebank. What's wrong with you people, the world is bad enough without all this childish tittle tattle. If you are so interested in making arguments on politics, go be a politician, going on about it on here won't make any change to the world you want.
I can appreciate the Tory faithful being upset at me pointing out how corrupt and dishonest the Tories are – but many may not have time to read through the daily news to catch the highlights.
How many have the time to follow the daily Covid pandemic inquiry and its findings – my post yesterday captured what I considered the most important finding (of the day); that Tory government ministers were found to have been lying about knowing that asymptomatic transmission of the virus was possible.
Information is power, what you decide to do knowing what a bunch of liars the Tories are, is up to you.
How many have the time to follow the daily Covid pandemic inquiry and its findings – my post yesterday captured what I considered the most important finding (of the day); that Tory government ministers were found to have been lying about knowing that asymptomatic transmission of the virus was possible.
Information is power, what you decide to do knowing what a bunch of liars the Tories are, is up to you.
//anyone who didnt know that politicians lie have something wrong with them//
That may well be true, but I’ve never known a time when the lies are continuous; in times done by a politician telling such blatant lies would be a career ending event with the press calling out their lying.
But now no one cares, politicians can appear on TV safe in the knowledge that if they lie, no-one will question their lies.
There was a time where if a minister was to make an incorrect statement in the House of Commons, they were expected to correct it at the earliest opportunity – but no more.
That may well be true, but I’ve never known a time when the lies are continuous; in times done by a politician telling such blatant lies would be a career ending event with the press calling out their lying.
But now no one cares, politicians can appear on TV safe in the knowledge that if they lie, no-one will question their lies.
There was a time where if a minister was to make an incorrect statement in the House of Commons, they were expected to correct it at the earliest opportunity – but no more.
for want of sensible discussion, no longer frequent a News section now relentlessly dominated by inane drivel.
yup
first 30 answers on Gammon. Jesus. I wd never describe the thread as the usual bobbi-*** tempered with the spite malice from the usual suspects. because I am not and never have been an innsulter.
[ notice the similarity to "I never comment on things like this" - er sorry you have just commented]
now my dears
Now, Gully is in a minority ( of one) so we much ask: Is gully right? - The minority is always right ( Ibsen)
well lets us look at the recent history of the Human Rights reform. - The Gammon faced Cameron - ( Cameron the gammeron - hmm I am not sure that will catch on) talked about substituing the Great Bill of British Liberties
Talk about Liars - Cameron was one of the first. You repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with an Act where the liberties are less, not greater. So it is the *** Bill of Liberties masquerading as The Great bill.
And as you can see from above (and before) numpties like TTT swallowed it hook line and sinker. see his many jibes over pinko wets spewing knitted peace yoghurt.
The ECHR ( euro ct of human rights) is separate from the European Court of Justice - altho even men like New Jesuit have allowed the confusion to continue
ECHR is tied to a treaty that we were one of the first to sign in 1952. If we are going to withdraw from the ECHR we have to abrogate the treaty to which it is aligned ( 1952 treaty ) and not the common market legislation.
Abrogation is a very very big deal - Hitler did it when he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941. Trump did it with one of the Paris accords. Justin Trudeaus father tried to being home the Canadian constitution and stated he would then abrogate the treaties made 1800-1860 with the indigenour Indian tribes. London said: they were made with the then monarch and you cant.
so all the govt ministers - mandarins - O level lawyers, dabblers in law - readers of the LabyBird book of Treaties - have come to the conclusion - you cant
bill dead - to general whooppee
yup
first 30 answers on Gammon. Jesus. I wd never describe the thread as the usual bobbi-*** tempered with the spite malice from the usual suspects. because I am not and never have been an innsulter.
[ notice the similarity to "I never comment on things like this" - er sorry you have just commented]
now my dears
Now, Gully is in a minority ( of one) so we much ask: Is gully right? - The minority is always right ( Ibsen)
well lets us look at the recent history of the Human Rights reform. - The Gammon faced Cameron - ( Cameron the gammeron - hmm I am not sure that will catch on) talked about substituing the Great Bill of British Liberties
Talk about Liars - Cameron was one of the first. You repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with an Act where the liberties are less, not greater. So it is the *** Bill of Liberties masquerading as The Great bill.
And as you can see from above (and before) numpties like TTT swallowed it hook line and sinker. see his many jibes over pinko wets spewing knitted peace yoghurt.
The ECHR ( euro ct of human rights) is separate from the European Court of Justice - altho even men like New Jesuit have allowed the confusion to continue
ECHR is tied to a treaty that we were one of the first to sign in 1952. If we are going to withdraw from the ECHR we have to abrogate the treaty to which it is aligned ( 1952 treaty ) and not the common market legislation.
Abrogation is a very very big deal - Hitler did it when he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941. Trump did it with one of the Paris accords. Justin Trudeaus father tried to being home the Canadian constitution and stated he would then abrogate the treaties made 1800-1860 with the indigenour Indian tribes. London said: they were made with the then monarch and you cant.
so all the govt ministers - mandarins - O level lawyers, dabblers in law - readers of the LabyBird book of Treaties - have come to the conclusion - you cant
bill dead - to general whooppee
Latest Posts
News3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
The Perils Of Privatisation - Part X
News32 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles46 mins ago
