Anti-Iraq war campaigners to stage protest over Alastair Campbell visit

This Is Local London: Alastair Campbell is set to visit Walthamstow Alastair Campbell is set to visit Walthamstow

Left-wing campaigners are planning to protest during a visit by one of the architects of New Labour at a fundraising night billed as 'curry with a spin'.

Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's controversial spin doctor, will attend the event on Thursday, organised by the Walthamstow Labour Party at The Asian Centre in Orford Road, as a guest speaker.

The event, starting at 7:30pm, invites Labour supporters to meet the 'orginial spin doctor'. 

Waltham Forest Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) plan to picket the event in protest at Mr Campbell's involvement with the government's justification for the invasion of Iraq.

TUSC's Nancy Taffe said: "We find this invitation insulting.

"In Waltham Forest thousands of people protested on the day that the allied powers attacked Iraq.

"Walthamstow Labour always claimed to be anti-war. We can only assume that their need to get power overrides any principles that they may have on the war."

But Walthamstow's Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war, welcomed Mr Campbell's visit.

She said: "Mr Campbell is kindly coming to help raise funds to support our community organising activities in Walthamstow on issues such as payday lending, women's equality, action on housing and access to healthcare in our community.

“As a volunteer-led organisation, we would not be able to do the work we do without such fundraising so these kinds of events, so fundraising at these kind of events, which we hold regularly, are vital to our movement.”

"As well as speaking about his role in Government he will also be taking questions from attendees as I know he is happy to debate a wide range of issues."

Ms Creasy defended TUSC's right to protest, but said she hoped they would not stifle open debate.

"The TUSC are a political party who of course have their own objectives ahead of the elections, and have sought to disrupt a number of our events in previous years by staging similar such protests," she added.

"As a democrat I support their right to disagree and I hope they will not seek to disrupt the rights of others to take part in such discussions."

Comments (33)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:47am Tue 25 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -10

12:58pm Tue 25 Feb 14

mdj says...

' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...'

Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?
' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...' Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line? mdj
  • Score: 8

4:08pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Very easy to find out any MP's voting record

http://www.theyworkf
oryou.com/mp/24949/s
tella_creasy/waltham
stow
Very easy to find out any MP's voting record http://www.theyworkf oryou.com/mp/24949/s tella_creasy/waltham stow Alan_1976
  • Score: 6

6:27pm Tue 25 Feb 14

faro0485 says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.[/p][/quote]Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war. faro0485
  • Score: 0

6:33pm Tue 25 Feb 14

faro0485 says...

mdj wrote:
' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...'

Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?
It says on theyworkforyou.com "Never rebels against their party in this parliament.". There's a list of her voting record here http://www.publicwhi
p.org.uk/mp.php?id=u
k.org.publicwhip/mem
ber/40629&showall=ye
s
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: ' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...' Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?[/p][/quote]It says on theyworkforyou.com "Never rebels against their party in this parliament.". There's a list of her voting record here http://www.publicwhi p.org.uk/mp.php?id=u k.org.publicwhip/mem ber/40629&showall=ye s faro0485
  • Score: 3

7:03pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

faro0485 wrote:
mdj wrote:
' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...'

Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?
It says on theyworkforyou.com "Never rebels against their party in this parliament.". There's a list of her voting record here http://www.publicwhi

p.org.uk/mp.php?id=u

k.org.publicwhip/mem

ber/40629&showal
l=ye
s
I'd be more curious as to which of the issues she voted for and against as per her record that would be a subject of concern?

Hard to be held accountable for voting on an issue when you never had a chance to vote on the issue.

As to Cornbeefur's plentiful down votes I think they are likely to be more of a reflection of his commenting record!
[quote][p][bold]faro0485[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: ' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...' Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?[/p][/quote]It says on theyworkforyou.com "Never rebels against their party in this parliament.". There's a list of her voting record here http://www.publicwhi p.org.uk/mp.php?id=u k.org.publicwhip/mem ber/40629&showal l=ye s[/p][/quote]I'd be more curious as to which of the issues she voted for and against as per her record that would be a subject of concern? Hard to be held accountable for voting on an issue when you never had a chance to vote on the issue. As to Cornbeefur's plentiful down votes I think they are likely to be more of a reflection of his commenting record! Alan_1976
  • Score: 8

8:18pm Tue 25 Feb 14

snacker says...

faro0485 wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.
Wow, people thumb down a know troll's continued soppy comments and attacks against a decent enough local MP and suddenly they are all warmongers ! Still I suppose your monochrome lenses make a change from his cranberry ones..
[quote][p][bold]faro0485[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.[/p][/quote]Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.[/p][/quote]Wow, people thumb down a know troll's continued soppy comments and attacks against a decent enough local MP and suddenly they are all warmongers ! Still I suppose your monochrome lenses make a change from his cranberry ones.. snacker
  • Score: 3

8:54pm Tue 25 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

faro0485 wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.
Exactly what I was thinking. All for the Bliar's war. They adore Stellar Creasey though and the reason she always sits on the fence is because she has her eyes on the Leadership like young Bliar had in the 1980's, was all smiles and no substance. So, Creasey now advocates ignoring the human life cost of the futile war for the sake of some fund raising event, thereby undermining the loss of life further. I think I will join the protest. All those soldiers killed and horrifically wounded for nothing as well as the civilian sacrifice.

Let's hope Stella and Campbell enjoy their curry and do not get too hot under the collar when the protesters start shouting.
[quote][p][bold]faro0485[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.[/p][/quote]Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.[/p][/quote]Exactly what I was thinking. All for the Bliar's war. They adore Stellar Creasey though and the reason she always sits on the fence is because she has her eyes on the Leadership like young Bliar had in the 1980's, was all smiles and no substance. So, Creasey now advocates ignoring the human life cost of the futile war for the sake of some fund raising event, thereby undermining the loss of life further. I think I will join the protest. All those soldiers killed and horrifically wounded for nothing as well as the civilian sacrifice. Let's hope Stella and Campbell enjoy their curry and do not get too hot under the collar when the protesters start shouting. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -11

11:37pm Tue 25 Feb 14

mdj says...

Thanks for the feedback. An MP can be a loyal and dependable supporter of their party, and still make it clear that there are certain issues on which they will go their own way. John Cryer, for example, is known to vote against his party line on some EU issues without being seen as a boat-rocker or maverick.

Stella Creasy urged Tory MPs to oppose their party line over a measure before Parliament to do with her campaign against pay-day lenders. Having never done so herself at that point despite some 400 voting opportunities, the cry fell a little flat.
Thanks for the feedback. An MP can be a loyal and dependable supporter of their party, and still make it clear that there are certain issues on which they will go their own way. John Cryer, for example, is known to vote against his party line on some EU issues without being seen as a boat-rocker or maverick. Stella Creasy urged Tory MPs to oppose their party line over a measure before Parliament to do with her campaign against pay-day lenders. Having never done so herself at that point despite some 400 voting opportunities, the cry fell a little flat. mdj
  • Score: -4

6:42am Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Mdj,

Again. Which issue are you referring to that she should have "rebelled" on. Or should she just rebel every now and again for the sake of things? For example which issue did John Cryer rebel on that she did not?
Mdj, Again. Which issue are you referring to that she should have "rebelled" on. Or should she just rebel every now and again for the sake of things? For example which issue did John Cryer rebel on that she did not? Alan_1976
  • Score: 3

1:46pm Wed 26 Feb 14

mdj says...

I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it; yet again you seem to put words into people's mouths that are only yours.
It is fair to point out that she calls on others to act in a way she never so far has herself.
I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it; yet again you seem to put words into people's mouths that are only yours. It is fair to point out that she calls on others to act in a way she never so far has herself. mdj
  • Score: -3

2:25pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

mdj wrote:
I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it; yet again you seem to put words into people's mouths that are only yours.
It is fair to point out that she calls on others to act in a way she never so far has herself.
Mdj,

Again not putting words anywhere
"' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...'

Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?"

The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. Your basis for that statement? She has not voted against her party so far.

If there is no issue in front of her that she disagrees with her party's line then that is not her fault.

You are using inductive not deductive reasoning with all the confirmation bias that entails.

I would prefer to judge the politicians on their actions not their lack of actions when presented with no opportunity.

If you wanted to criticize Stella her silence over the council's many issues would be the clear point where there has been many opportunities to act and none taken.
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it; yet again you seem to put words into people's mouths that are only yours. It is fair to point out that she calls on others to act in a way she never so far has herself.[/p][/quote]Mdj, Again not putting words anywhere "' Labout MP Stella Creasy, who has said she would have voted against the war...' Just as a matter of interest, has she ever once voted against her party line?" The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. Your basis for that statement? She has not voted against her party so far. If there is no issue in front of her that she disagrees with her party's line then that is not her fault. You are using inductive not deductive reasoning with all the confirmation bias that entails. I would prefer to judge the politicians on their actions not their lack of actions when presented with no opportunity. If you wanted to criticize Stella her silence over the council's many issues would be the clear point where there has been many opportunities to act and none taken. Alan_1976
  • Score: 3

2:51pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Dave mp says...

faro0485 wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.
Yes can't understand that? Unfortunately there are too many 'stupid' people here who will 'thumb down' anything certain people say regardless of the truth.
[quote][p][bold]faro0485[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.[/p][/quote]Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.[/p][/quote]Yes can't understand that? Unfortunately there are too many 'stupid' people here who will 'thumb down' anything certain people say regardless of the truth. Dave mp
  • Score: -5

3:10pm Wed 26 Feb 14

mdj says...

'The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. '

We are entitled to judge the likelihood of what someone claims they would have done by referring to the record of what they actually have done, wouldn't you say?
SC says she would have voted against the war;
SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip to favour her own cause;
SC has never voted against her own party Whip.

Do you see a pattern here?

I agree 100% on your last point; one could make the same point about almost all MPs with respect to their municipalities, sadly, so it might be unfair to single her out.
'The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. ' We are entitled to judge the likelihood of what someone claims they would have done by referring to the record of what they actually have done, wouldn't you say? SC says she would have voted against the war; SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip to favour her own cause; SC has never voted against her own party Whip. Do you see a pattern here? I agree 100% on your last point; one could make the same point about almost all MPs with respect to their municipalities, sadly, so it might be unfair to single her out. mdj
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Dave mp wrote:
faro0485 wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.
Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.
Yes can't understand that? Unfortunately there are too many 'stupid' people here who will 'thumb down' anything certain people say regardless of the truth.
Interesting use of the word "truth" with regards to the original comment.

Presumably you're one of the "intelligent" people who aren't able to remember the difference between the Iraq war and the invasion of Afghanistan. One was a country harbouring a terrorist who had just committed a heinous act of terrorism. One was war of dubious legality committed without any UN support. Guess which one the comment refers to..
[quote][p][bold]Dave mp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]faro0485[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: All those young men killed in Bliar's war. Absolute waste of lives. They will soon be leaving Afghanistan and the Taliban will be back as normal. A fruitless exercise spun by Campbell as a co-conspirator. As for Stella Creasey 'she would have' done this and that in the comfort of a cold light of day situation as is now, she could prove her worth by forgetting about fund raising and curry and challenge Campbell to condemn and apologise for his involvement in the slaughter of Briitish Troops and numerous civilians in a fruitless war. This is the thing, people like Campbell has no shame and now without any qualms appears in a place like Walthamstow as though nothing has happened. Shame on him and Creasey if she thinks nothing is wrong here.[/p][/quote]Wow, Creasy's supporters thumbed you down. It's like they loved the Iraqi oil restriction and Afghanistani opium war.[/p][/quote]Yes can't understand that? Unfortunately there are too many 'stupid' people here who will 'thumb down' anything certain people say regardless of the truth.[/p][/quote]Interesting use of the word "truth" with regards to the original comment. Presumably you're one of the "intelligent" people who aren't able to remember the difference between the Iraq war and the invasion of Afghanistan. One was a country harbouring a terrorist who had just committed a heinous act of terrorism. One was war of dubious legality committed without any UN support. Guess which one the comment refers to.. Alan_1976
  • Score: 4

3:16pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

The Poet Servicemen of the Great War wrote often about the futility of the loss of life and the savagery of it, often resulting in great criticism of betrayal. A little while after the War ended, servicemen, without jobs to come back to and seriously injured veterans, were left unsupported by the very same Parliament that sent them to their fate and then began to question their actions and patriotism. I often thought at the height of the Iraqi and Afghanistan 'wars without real enemies' that in a little while after the troops are finally withdrawn, those mentally and physically scared will begin to also raise issues as to what it was all about.

Blair has long gone as has Brown and the many Labour and Conservative MP's that supported it. These wars have achieved nothing in those regions long term as event the Afghan President placed in power by the West is now saying it was pointless and that he will negotiate with the Taliban anyhow.

Blair meanwhile laughable tours the World as a 'peace envoy' topping up his tan, having feathered the nest for his kids with million plus pound 'starter homes'. The we have the odious Cherie Blair, let's not go there at this time.

The best thing that Stella Creasey could do rather than reinforce Blair's actions is to vote with her feet as Campbell was as bad as him.
The Poet Servicemen of the Great War wrote often about the futility of the loss of life and the savagery of it, often resulting in great criticism of betrayal. A little while after the War ended, servicemen, without jobs to come back to and seriously injured veterans, were left unsupported by the very same Parliament that sent them to their fate and then began to question their actions and patriotism. I often thought at the height of the Iraqi and Afghanistan 'wars without real enemies' that in a little while after the troops are finally withdrawn, those mentally and physically scared will begin to also raise issues as to what it was all about. Blair has long gone as has Brown and the many Labour and Conservative MP's that supported it. These wars have achieved nothing in those regions long term as event the Afghan President placed in power by the West is now saying it was pointless and that he will negotiate with the Taliban anyhow. Blair meanwhile laughable tours the World as a 'peace envoy' topping up his tan, having feathered the nest for his kids with million plus pound 'starter homes'. The we have the odious Cherie Blair, let's not go there at this time. The best thing that Stella Creasey could do rather than reinforce Blair's actions is to vote with her feet as Campbell was as bad as him. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 0

3:25pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

mdj wrote:
'The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. '

We are entitled to judge the likelihood of what someone claims they would have done by referring to the record of what they actually have done, wouldn't you say?
SC says she would have voted against the war;
SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip to favour her own cause;
SC has never voted against her own party Whip.

Do you see a pattern here?

I agree 100% on your last point; one could make the same point about almost all MPs with respect to their municipalities, sadly, so it might be unfair to single her out.
The correct version to infer a pattern should be.

"SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip where they disagree with their Whip"
"SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails. You are arguing that she would have voted with the party whip in the face of her beliefs if the issue had been presented to her so evidence of her doing that is what is needed.
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: 'The clear implication of what you are saying here is that she WOULD have voted for the war. ' We are entitled to judge the likelihood of what someone claims they would have done by referring to the record of what they actually have done, wouldn't you say? SC says she would have voted against the war; SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip to favour her own cause; SC has never voted against her own party Whip. Do you see a pattern here? I agree 100% on your last point; one could make the same point about almost all MPs with respect to their municipalities, sadly, so it might be unfair to single her out.[/p][/quote]The correct version to infer a pattern should be. "SC calls on Tories to vote against their party Whip where they disagree with their Whip" "SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails. You are arguing that she would have voted with the party whip in the face of her beliefs if the issue had been presented to her so evidence of her doing that is what is needed. Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

3:51pm Wed 26 Feb 14

mdj says...

Wrong again:
She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right.
She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity.

As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:'

if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.
Wrong again: She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right. She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity. As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:' if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on. mdj
  • Score: -9

4:08pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

mdj wrote:
Wrong again:
She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right.
She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity.

As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:'

if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.
Mdj,

How am I wrong?

My argument is simple. List a case where she has voted with the party against her public stated principles.

You said earlier "I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it;"

So if she agreed with the principle of her parties position why would she vote against it? What was the opportunity to vote against her parties position.

You claim hundreds. So you are saying there were hundreds of cases where she could vote

"She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave"

So according to you (your words again) there were hundreds of opportunities for "her to vote against the Whip to support a cause she personally feels is right".

That involves a case where the Whip conflicts with what she feels is right. So for there to be hundreds of opportunities as you claim that means there must have been hundreds of times the party Whip conflicted with what she feels is right.

You only need to name one.
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: Wrong again: She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right. She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity. As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:' if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.[/p][/quote]Mdj, How am I wrong? My argument is simple. List a case where she has voted with the party against her public stated principles. You said earlier "I'm not urghng her to rebel on anything for the sake of it;" So if she agreed with the principle of her parties position why would she vote against it? What was the opportunity to vote against her parties position. You claim hundreds. So you are saying there were hundreds of cases where she could vote "She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave" So according to you (your words again) there were hundreds of opportunities for "her to vote against the Whip to support a cause she personally feels is right". That involves a case where the Whip conflicts with what she feels is right. So for there to be hundreds of opportunities as you claim that means there must have been hundreds of times the party Whip conflicted with what she feels is right. You only need to name one. Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

4:20pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

mdj wrote:
Wrong again:
She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right.
She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity.

As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:'

if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.
Give up MDJ, like arguing with a brick wall, he would be murder playing snooker with as he would insist the black ball was white. He has a hair splitting machine that could produce enough hair from a single strand to cover the heads of both Telly Savalas and Yul Brynner. We all know where you are coming from.
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: Wrong again: She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right. She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity. As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:' if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.[/p][/quote]Give up MDJ, like arguing with a brick wall, he would be murder playing snooker with as he would insist the black ball was white. He has a hair splitting machine that could produce enough hair from a single strand to cover the heads of both Telly Savalas and Yul Brynner. We all know where you are coming from. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -13

4:30pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Ah Cornbeefur. Nothing to contribute other than ironically an Ad hominem
Ah Cornbeefur. Nothing to contribute other than ironically an Ad hominem Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

4:42pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
Ah Cornbeefur. Nothing to contribute other than ironically an Ad hominem
My contributions are there above and if Stella Creasey 'would have voted against the war' she can do retrospectively in principle by not attending the curry jolly up with that odious man Campbell who has the same amount of blood on his hands as Tony Blair.

Trouble with typical old labour hierarchy, they light the touch paper, run and then plead ignorance, a bit like Harman and Co. With the P.I.E. Currently very topical.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: Ah Cornbeefur. Nothing to contribute other than ironically an Ad hominem[/p][/quote]My contributions are there above and if Stella Creasey 'would have voted against the war' she can do retrospectively in principle by not attending the curry jolly up with that odious man Campbell who has the same amount of blood on his hands as Tony Blair. Trouble with typical old labour hierarchy, they light the touch paper, run and then plead ignorance, a bit like Harman and Co. With the P.I.E. Currently very topical. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -4

5:05pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Mdj,

As you want to talk in probabilities.

Votes against the Iraq war.

139 Labour MPs
15 Tory MPs
53 Liberal Democrat MPs

Including all London Labour MPs.

So on the balance of probability you were more likely to vote against the Iraq war if you were a Labour MP than a Tory or if you were a London Labour MP you were 100% likely to "defy" the party whip.

See a "pattern" here
Mdj, As you want to talk in probabilities. Votes against the Iraq war. 139 Labour MPs 15 Tory MPs 53 Liberal Democrat MPs Including all London Labour MPs. So on the balance of probability you were more likely to vote against the Iraq war if you were a Labour MP than a Tory or if you were a London Labour MP you were 100% likely to "defy" the party whip. See a "pattern" here Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

5:26pm Wed 26 Feb 14

snacker says...

mdj wrote:
Wrong again:
She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right.
She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity.

As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:'

if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.
All that proves is she hasn't voted against the Whip. Not that she has done so against her own personal beliefs or values. Where is there any indication of any other assumption ?
[quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: Wrong again: She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right. She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity. As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:' if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.[/p][/quote]All that proves is she hasn't voted against the Whip. Not that she has done so against her own personal beliefs or values. Where is there any indication of any other assumption ? snacker
  • Score: 1

5:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

snacker wrote:
mdj wrote:
Wrong again:
She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right.
She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity.

As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it"

The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:'

if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.
All that proves is she hasn't voted against the Whip. Not that she has done so against her own personal beliefs or values. Where is there any indication of any other assumption ?
My point exactly.

I have always accepted my morning coffee from the shop where I purchase it and have never attempted to claim a refund. I have bought hundreds of them

That does not then follow that I would never claim a refund where I to be given a coffee that was foul in taste.

I say that I would claim a refund.

By the logic of Mdj's argument my hundred's of times not claiming refunds means that I would never do so.

The existence of the bad coffee/good coffee is apparently an irrelevance in assessing my future behaviour.
[quote][p][bold]snacker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mdj[/bold] wrote: Wrong again: She asked Tories to vote against their Whip to support a cause which she personally feels is right. She has never, despite hundreds of opportunities to do so, shown by example that is the way for MPs to behave, so one is entitled, without needing to ask more, to doubt her consistency, and possibly sincerity. As for this:'SC has voted with her party Whip where she disagreed with it" The second is not something there is evidence for so the reasoning fails:' if you want to set up your own arguments in order to knock them down again, this is not a conversation that requires my involvement, but feel free to carry on.[/p][/quote]All that proves is she hasn't voted against the Whip. Not that she has done so against her own personal beliefs or values. Where is there any indication of any other assumption ?[/p][/quote]My point exactly. I have always accepted my morning coffee from the shop where I purchase it and have never attempted to claim a refund. I have bought hundreds of them That does not then follow that I would never claim a refund where I to be given a coffee that was foul in taste. I say that I would claim a refund. By the logic of Mdj's argument my hundred's of times not claiming refunds means that I would never do so. The existence of the bad coffee/good coffee is apparently an irrelevance in assessing my future behaviour. Alan_1976
  • Score: 3

5:46pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Techno3 says...

For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC.

Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity.

Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.
For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC. Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity. Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party. Techno3
  • Score: 0

6:01pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Techno3 wrote:
For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC.

Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity.

Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.
Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight.

Shame they are in coalition with the Tories

http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/uk_politics/5
108584.stm
[quote][p][bold]Techno3[/bold] wrote: For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC. Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity. Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.[/p][/quote]Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight. Shame they are in coalition with the Tories http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/uk_politics/5 108584.stm Alan_1976
  • Score: 0

6:08pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Techno3 says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
Techno3 wrote:
For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC.

Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity.

Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.
Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight.

Shame they are in coalition with the Tories

http://news.bbc.co.u

k/1/hi/uk_politics/5

108584.stm
There were millions of us of all polticial persuasions who were against the war. This nasty man ignored us and told lies to promote it.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Techno3[/bold] wrote: For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC. Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity. Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.[/p][/quote]Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight. Shame they are in coalition with the Tories http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/uk_politics/5 108584.stm[/p][/quote]There were millions of us of all polticial persuasions who were against the war. This nasty man ignored us and told lies to promote it. Techno3
  • Score: 3

7:22pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Techno3 wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
Techno3 wrote:
For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC.

Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity.

Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.
Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight.

Shame they are in coalition with the Tories

http://news.bbc.co.u


k/1/hi/uk_politics/5


108584.stm
There were millions of us of all polticial persuasions who were against the war. This nasty man ignored us and told lies to promote it.
I don't disagree with you about the lies. He along with the majority of MPs ignored public opinion. If it hadn't been for the block support of the Tory party the debate would have been lost due to the votes against by the entire lib dem party and those who voted against from Labour.

Using the Iraq war as an example of support in favour of any party (other than the lib dems) has always struck me as odd.
[quote][p][bold]Techno3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Techno3[/bold] wrote: For once I find myself in complete agreement with the lefties in TUSC. Alisdair Campell has serious blood on his hands and should have left public life hanging his head in shame, making amends for the deaths caused (and many other injustices and abuses of power by the dreadful government he shilled, bullied and lied for) by spending the remainder of his lifetime performing private and humble acts of charity. Instead he is unapologetically raising funds and spinning the same old lies on behalf of a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt poltical party.[/p][/quote]Thank goodness we now have a party in power that was against the Iraq war at the time and indeed in hindsight. Shame they are in coalition with the Tories http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/uk_politics/5 108584.stm[/p][/quote]There were millions of us of all polticial persuasions who were against the war. This nasty man ignored us and told lies to promote it.[/p][/quote]I don't disagree with you about the lies. He along with the majority of MPs ignored public opinion. If it hadn't been for the block support of the Tory party the debate would have been lost due to the votes against by the entire lib dem party and those who voted against from Labour. Using the Iraq war as an example of support in favour of any party (other than the lib dems) has always struck me as odd. Alan_1976
  • Score: 4

8:41am Thu 27 Feb 14

hursthill says...

It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning.

Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture.

Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points.
It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning. Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture. Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points. hursthill
  • Score: 4

10:00am Thu 27 Feb 14

Techno3 says...

hursthill wrote:
It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning.

Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture.

Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points.
Hursthill, you are correct only to the extent that you forget that we are not discussing the merits of hussain and Assad but the honesty of Campbell and shamelessness and greed of the Labour Party. Moral relativism is never attractive. Saddam Hussian was a monster. He used the capabilities and weapons sold to him by the Germans, Americans and others and turned them on his own people.

Back to the debate in question however, Alisdair Campbell was quite happy doing business with Hussain until geopolitics caused a change in policy. He then lied through his teeth to our MPs and the national as a whole to get us into a war in which many many more than the 5000 kurds you mention were killed.

As for Assad, sad as it is to say this, Syria is is none of our business. The UK has never been a friend of his regime, nor is there any British interest in the place. This is a war I am happy we have (almost) stayed out of, despite the attempts that have been made to nudge, press emotional buttons and spin us into this one as well using notes from the Campell play book of lies and deceit.
[quote][p][bold]hursthill[/bold] wrote: It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning. Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture. Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points.[/p][/quote]Hursthill, you are correct only to the extent that you forget that we are not discussing the merits of hussain and Assad but the honesty of Campbell and shamelessness and greed of the Labour Party. Moral relativism is never attractive. Saddam Hussian was a monster. He used the capabilities and weapons sold to him by the Germans, Americans and others and turned them on his own people. Back to the debate in question however, Alisdair Campbell was quite happy doing business with Hussain until geopolitics caused a change in policy. He then lied through his teeth to our MPs and the national as a whole to get us into a war in which many many more than the 5000 kurds you mention were killed. As for Assad, sad as it is to say this, Syria is is none of our business. The UK has never been a friend of his regime, nor is there any British interest in the place. This is a war I am happy we have (almost) stayed out of, despite the attempts that have been made to nudge, press emotional buttons and spin us into this one as well using notes from the Campell play book of lies and deceit. Techno3
  • Score: 1

10:59am Thu 27 Feb 14

Alan_1976 says...

Techno3 wrote:
hursthill wrote:
It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning.

Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture.

Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points.
Hursthill, you are correct only to the extent that you forget that we are not discussing the merits of hussain and Assad but the honesty of Campbell and shamelessness and greed of the Labour Party. Moral relativism is never attractive. Saddam Hussian was a monster. He used the capabilities and weapons sold to him by the Germans, Americans and others and turned them on his own people.

Back to the debate in question however, Alisdair Campbell was quite happy doing business with Hussain until geopolitics caused a change in policy. He then lied through his teeth to our MPs and the national as a whole to get us into a war in which many many more than the 5000 kurds you mention were killed.

As for Assad, sad as it is to say this, Syria is is none of our business. The UK has never been a friend of his regime, nor is there any British interest in the place. This is a war I am happy we have (almost) stayed out of, despite the attempts that have been made to nudge, press emotional buttons and spin us into this one as well using notes from the Campell play book of lies and deceit.
"Quite happy doing business with Hussain".

What business are you referring to that he was happy doing? There were sanctions in place against Iraq since 1991 which only began to be lifted after the war. I am genuinely interested.
[quote][p][bold]Techno3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hursthill[/bold] wrote: It is a jolly good thing that Saddam Hussain was removed. He dropped chemical weapons on defensless Kurds, killing over 5,000 1 morning. Not as bad though as Assad in Syria, who has killed 150,000 + to date, some with chemicals, others by old fashioned torture. Strange how all the self-oppinionated & self-righteous comentators above make any mention of these points.[/p][/quote]Hursthill, you are correct only to the extent that you forget that we are not discussing the merits of hussain and Assad but the honesty of Campbell and shamelessness and greed of the Labour Party. Moral relativism is never attractive. Saddam Hussian was a monster. He used the capabilities and weapons sold to him by the Germans, Americans and others and turned them on his own people. Back to the debate in question however, Alisdair Campbell was quite happy doing business with Hussain until geopolitics caused a change in policy. He then lied through his teeth to our MPs and the national as a whole to get us into a war in which many many more than the 5000 kurds you mention were killed. As for Assad, sad as it is to say this, Syria is is none of our business. The UK has never been a friend of his regime, nor is there any British interest in the place. This is a war I am happy we have (almost) stayed out of, despite the attempts that have been made to nudge, press emotional buttons and spin us into this one as well using notes from the Campell play book of lies and deceit.[/p][/quote]"Quite happy doing business with Hussain". What business are you referring to that he was happy doing? There were sanctions in place against Iraq since 1991 which only began to be lifted after the war. I am genuinely interested. Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

11:10am Fri 28 Feb 14

bob marley quotes99 says...

amazing and wonderfully inspiring piece of information, I had come to know about your blog from my friend shruthi, mumbai.i have read atleast eleven posts of yours by now, and let me tell you, your website gives the best and the most interesting information. This is just the kind of information that i had been looking for, i'm already your rss reader now and i would regularly watch out for the new posts, once again hats off to you! Thanks a lot once again, Regards, bob marley quotes
amazing and wonderfully inspiring piece of information, I had come to know about your blog from my friend shruthi, mumbai.i have read atleast eleven posts of yours by now, and let me tell you, your website gives the best and the most interesting information. This is just the kind of information that i had been looking for, i'm already your rss reader now and i would regularly watch out for the new posts, once again hats off to you! Thanks a lot once again, Regards, bob marley quotes bob marley quotes99
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree