Forum List | Politics Forum
Start Previous 1 -- [ 2 ] -- 3 -- 4 -- Next End| Topic: Ann Widdecombe |
|---|
| 21. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Sun 12th Jul 2026. 18:25 There is a high chance it is politically motivated, but thats not terror related, which is what certain parties will try to use. I see Reform have now given all MPs 24 hour security protection - politics should never come to that no matter what your policies are. Post Edited (Sun 12 Jul 18:25) Reply |
| 22. Author: wee eck Date: Sun 12th Jul 2026. 20:26 Police are saying there was nothing to suggest her killing was politically motivated. Reply |
| 23. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Sun 12th Jul 2026. 21:53 wee eck, Sun 12 Jul 20:26 Then thats fair enough 🤷🏻‍♂️ some people wont believe that mind you Reply |
| 24. Author: wee eck Date: Mon 13th Jul 2026. 13:08 Counter-terrorism police are now leading the investigation according to the Home Secretary. Reply |
| 25. Author: Bletchley_Par Date: Mon 13th Jul 2026. 13:15 "The 28 year old man has been re-arrested on suspicion of commission, preparation, instigation of acts of terrorism" according to police. The idea that this man drove hundreds of miles to a remote hamlet on Dartmoor killed a well known politician then travelled back home again was some random act was not going to hold.  Reply |
| 26. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Mon 13th Jul 2026. 13:15 They are having a bit of a mare with this one. Probably shouldn’t have said anything except looking for a suspect/got a suspect etc. Putting their own theories out there before any concrete evidence was found has had negative effects on this. Reply |
| 27. Author: red-star-par Date: Mon 13th Jul 2026. 17:59 Probably trying to contain the true story over the weekend. Imagine if it is terror related, england get pumped out the World Cup and Farage and his idiots stoke up the brain dead to hit the streets, england is ready to errupt Reply |
| 28. Author: LochgellyAlbert Date: Mon 13th Jul 2026. 20:44 Aye, just imagine how stupid that would be, if it wasn`t for immigrants there wouldn`t be an England team!🤔 Reply |
| 29. Author: DBP Date: Wed 15th Jul 2026. 18:36 Are you saying it’s stupid to think that without immigration, England wouldn’t field an international team? I don’t think that’s correct? I think what you can say is that without immigration, the current England team would have different players than it does today Reply |
| 30. Author: NMCmassive Date: Thu 16th Jul 2026. 18:58 Someone’s been arrested for hurty words about Ann Widdecombe and everyone’s still arguing about irrelevant stuff. As much as what was said about Ann Widdecombe is absolutely reprehensible, arresting someone for saying something doesn’t sit right with me. They could well use it as an excuse to tighten hurty words laws. We’re well on our way to blasphemy laws. Something Ann would have been dead against. COYP Reply |
| 31. Author: Wotsit Date: Thu 16th Jul 2026. 20:25 Ann Widdecombe wrote passionately about her desire to limit people`s freedom to mock the tenets of Christianity. She seemed fine with mocking the institutions and practitioners of Christianity to be fair. And she didn`t seem to have a problem with people mocking the tenets of other religions, or at least I can`t find any articles where she mentions it. To me, it sounds like she was in favour of blasphemy laws in some form. I think she was Shadow Minister for Home Affairs when Gordon Brown`s government repealed England`s last (hopefully) blasphemy laws in 2008, and looking at her voting record she voted against it. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” Reply |
| 32. Author: red-star-par Date: Thu 16th Jul 2026. 20:26 I agree NMC. I had read that the Police had originally said it wasn`t a criminal matter, and thought that common sense had prevailed but it looks like they are now going to take it further, which is pretty disappointing. Reply |
| 33. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Thu 16th Jul 2026. 21:02 Will Nige call out her arrest since he is against arrests for “hurty words”? I wont hold my breath….. Reply |
| 34. Author: jake89 Date: Thu 16th Jul 2026. 23:24 Much as I disagree with speaking ill of the dead, there are always going to be exceptions and everyone should be free to voice and opinion (and expect some to disagree with it). The problem with the far right is they pick and choose which rules apply. Basically, they`re thick as mince. Reply |
| 35. Author: Bletchley_Par Date: Fri 17th Jul 2026. 03:55 The University employee has not been charged under any "hate speech" law, he has been charged under the Communications Act for "severe public offense", something quite separate. It is the same law count Dankula was prosecuted under for training his girlfriend`s pug to do a Nazi salute. In Dank`s case the police sought out a Jewish scholar, showed him the video (that he had previously never seen and did not know of it`s existence) and asked if he was offended. Due to a previous precedent in law judges must evaluate whether a message is an actual threat or just an obvious piece of satire before deciding if it is "grossly offensive", the judge in Dank`s case ruled that it was not satire. We are where we are with these ridiculous laws and maybe now it is rebounding on the people who introduced them (he is a green party member) we might find that they are looked at again. Post Edited (Fri 17 Jul 03:56) Reply |
| 36. Author: NMCmassive Date: Fri 17th Jul 2026. 16:38 I don’t really care what act they use to arrest anyone for that type of thing. it’s government/state authority overreach however it gets dressed up. It’s not a left v right issue. If your first thought is what the other political side is saying, you’re missing the point completely. COYP Reply |
| 37. Author: Wotsit Date: Fri 17th Jul 2026. 16:52 I don’t really care what act they use to arrest anyone for that type of thing. it’s government/state authority overreach however it gets dressed up. It’s not a left v right issue. If your first thought is what the other political side is saying, you’re missing the point completely. I would tend to agree. It is society`s role to decide on these things, and society can shun those whose speech it deems unacceptable. There`s no need for government involvement. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” Reply |
| 38. Author: Dandy Warhol Date: Mon 20th Jul 2026. 07:14 jake89, Thu 16 Jul 23:24 You ever conversed with the radical lefties? Much the same. I don`t wanna go down like disco. Reply |
| 39. Author: Wotsit Date: Mon 20th Jul 2026. 12:29 I am a radical leftie, educate me on my obvious hypocrisy please. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” Reply |
| 40. Author: NMCmassive Date: Mon 20th Jul 2026. 13:00 Not sure if you’re joking but you come across as someone who thinks they’re a radical leftist without realising they’ll never be left enough COYP Reply |
Post your Reply
Your Message:
By using your account you have implicitly accepted the DAFC.net Forum Rules and agree to be bound by them. You also agree that you will take sole responsibility for your post and indemnify dafc.net on all matters and costs. Refrain from making any potentially libelous comments about anyone
- - -