You missed a point.The odds are that at that point they’ll be taken into the control of Social Services.
Translates as any opposition to the Socialist agenda won’t be tolerated by the regime.
That obviously won’t stop at ‘being sent home’.
It means put into the Socialist indoctrination programme at that age and any non conformity shown from that point will mean being removed from parents and placed under total regime control at a regime establishment to force conformity.
Thank God I don’t have any Grandchildren.
I’ve never smoked but I might totally waste some good cigars by just leaving them smouldering in the garden just to spite Starlin.
@cooper1203
It’s amazing how many ‘political activists’ come out of the woodwork in war torn regions. Also, how many of those require the red carpet to be rolled out in far-flung lands.
Political Activists as in useful to UK Socialism.
USA Elections.
Dunno if this should be in Politics, or ShowBiz, or a Religion thread really? Probably all of them.
Mrs Betty Bowers has been a strong voice in the US for several years now. She is a spokesperson for the, umm, moral majority?, religious right?, or uummm, dunno?
She has made several YT vids over time, and has just now released one about the humble origins of Donald J Trump, and his acuity as a financial genius.
I commend this video as an impartial account, produced without interference from Trump and his family themselves.
The question is who is backing Trump’s opposition.Bearing in mind Trump is clearly no friend of See See Pee and that video looks like it was made in Beijing not Hollywood.Even the presenter’s eyes look like they are trying to hide Chyarnese origin.
Are you now turning your trademark discrediting campaigns and character assasinations Stateside now ?
I could personally not give a rats ass where Trump gets his money from, and a minute of that garbage was enough for me.
Now if I WAS so bothered about such as that (and maybe I bloody well should be in this case) I’d be concerning myself where the likes of Rachel Reeves and even her hubby ‘earn’ their vast fortune from, with their fat snouts in the trough with the rest of em…including (and especially) her downright ridiculous expenses claim of 214 k.
£214,000 ffs !
Good luck with you justifying and putting a positive ‘Labour Spin’ on that one.
…as I am sure you will try.
Heres the pic Maoster put up to refresh your memory.
Oh yeah I remember where it comes from, the working people of the UK, people like me aka The working Class, aka Labour’s target audience or in Starmerspeak …‘The Far Right’.
You remember Rachel Reeves…her who cut the pensioners paltry heating allowance…Ahh well at least that will go a long way to fund next years 214 k exs if nowt else…or even more now she has her arse in the C of TE. seat.
So if you are SO bothered how people make their money, maybe look a bit closer to home, which is much more relavant.
Seems to me it is equally important who is funding all parties in any contest.
But this video is not about who is funding the us candidates campaigns, it is about their claims.
Kamal Harris is known to be an ex “civil servant”. She worked as a lawyer for the DA’s offices, until she became a Senator aged 53.
Trump is a businessman. He claims to be good at making money.
He has been in 6 different bankruptcies. He has a long list of debts causing others to be bankrupted.
Where does Reeves’s husband get his cash? From his job I expect. Were you so fussed where Sunak’s wife got her money from? And how she (legally) avoided paying millions in UK tax?
Reeves’s salary and expenses paid by the tax payer, and other financial interests are here:
That is what she really claims. And what she is given. Just click through.
No mention of rolled gold wallpaper or heated stables or duck-houses that I can see?
Starmer has cut expenses by £40million in cutting the PM/Ministerial helicopter contract, by the way.
So Sunak also had his snout in the trough, is this another of your Labour defence mechanisms concentrate on the Tory actions instead of addresing the point…a la Starmer in his parliamentary session?..:the bits I heard anyway.
Well quelle surprise Rodney, he also milked the expenses gravy train…
Of course he did, I keep telling you they are ALL the kin same, in it for what they can get out of it.
As for being ‘fussed’…I aint.
I was commenting on you clutching yer pearls about Trump, when your own party members are milking the system closer to home.
So Starmer has cut back using his chopper, ooh well that makes it ok then.
Jeeez.
So, Starmer does not want the same pictures on his wall as Sunak does?
He isn’t a big fan of Thatcher?
You don.t care about Trump? OK.
So the next time I start a post …
…you can avoid raising your blood pressure by skipping the rest of it.
Well, one of them charges the taxpayer for helicopter rides, and one of them doesn’t.
So obviously, not quite the same.
Earlier on I put up a link to Reeves expenses claims, following the X thingy from Maoster.
If you have followed it through you will have noted that she had not claimed £214 from the taxpayer. I have also looked elsewhere to see if anywhere else has mentioned that figure. I can’t see it.
Any proof? Or just “Karen Offa Facebook” doing her stuff? Again.
You frequently tell us that you are a sceptic and don’t just believe everything you are told. Just share with us what that £214k was spent on.
It wasn’t just Sunak with the picture though was it? This is you being selective once again. It’s a picture that has hung there through successive administrations since her tenure. Even Blair left it there FFS.
No, what it is is the actions of a man who despises everything that Britain stands for, a man who will not rest until he’s irrevocably changed the country to match his vision of what it should be.
Fantasy!
The portrait was commissioned by Gordon Brown, when he was PM.
Y’know? After Blair left office.
“Intimidated by a painting”? Who invented that?
The same person who invented Reeves £214k expenses?
Edit to add.
It seems that Murdo Fraser started the “intimidated” idea.
Murdo Fraser is a Scottish Tory, so probably more endangered than the haggis.
So Starmer has removed (to a different room) a portrait of Thatcher.
As massive an issue, as that seems to be to some, what is he going to replace it with?
A still life?
A bowl of fruit? A lettuce?
Someone suggested, given Starmer’s speeches on the hustings, a tool.
I would not expect Johnson to be available to sit for a portrait though. Not unless he was paid for it.
A portait of Blair? Or is that too many white men?
I know! let him show how he wants to mend fences with the left of his party, and win over the EU:
Diane Abbott holding hands with Ursula von der Leyen.
Sorted 
So a 6% overall Muslim UK population yet an 18% Muslim prison population, take off white Muslims giving a figure of roughly 14.5% non white Muslims incarcerated, define fair?
Great Dianne Abbot the new minister for EU rejoin.That will help the AfD vote.
More like he’s taken it down to keep his useful idiot Bolshevik red army onside.Not because he doesn’t admire Thatcher’s methods in smashing our strategic coal industry and its workforce.Just as Blair did.
Just like he intends to keep our oil and gas resources locked up for his see see pee handlers and friends.
Nah…I would think just a portrait of Thatcher, (not a fan btw before you go off on one again) mainly because it hung in what is called …wait for it…
‘The THATCHER room’ see the connection?
It just shows the man’s sense of insecurity imo.
Btw MY blood pressure is fine btw thanks, it’s you who gets all menstrual about people you hate, parties you hate, and oh yeah results that do not go your way …(for last 7 kin years ) not me.
I just respond to your posts…(ok admittedlly because I know how easy you are to wind up.)
