Your entire output seems based on whataboutery it's really tiring and not very constructive but to answer your question.. yes they are both vile and should both not be in their position ... next ?
-
-
-
You appear to think their posts have some sort of moral equivalence, which is scary. Correct me if I’m wrong.
-
This media may contain sensitive material. Learn more
-
You’re embarrassing yourself now
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Didn't your precious turdmeister write a bit more than that? # eugenics
-
How’s that Tory blind eye doing?
-
Nowhere near as developed as the Corbyn blind eye
-
Coming from someone who believes they are not an EU citizen.






oh, but you actually are -
I never voted to be a EU citizen I never signed a document giving EU the right to call me EU citizen I am NOT and never will be a EU citizen
-
You are what you are
-
Yes I’m an English citizen. I never voted to be a EU citizen I never signed a document giving EU the right to call me EU citizen I am NOT and never will be a EU citizen
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Had I seen this in 2012, I'd have seen a mix of wealthy oppressing the poor. I guess Corbyn did and/or defended freedom of expression - just as many shouters of antisemitism at Corbyn defended Muhammad cartoons offensive to Muslims. Odd this is now news just before elections?pic.twitter.com/2MuEDXjHq6
-
Odd that racism can be defended on the grounds of free speech

-
First, is the mural in question clearly racist? Secondly, should all offensive items be banned? Thirdly, there seems an inconsistency in supporting the right for offensive cartoons (offensive to some) of Mohammad to be drawn, yet not drawings that are offensive to (some) Jews.
-
Yet we know that Corbyn campaigned against “free speech” in terms of the cartoons that some Muslims found offensive but thinks this one should have been allowed in this case in the name of free speech. It’s that double standard that is curious.
-
Well, if he did do that - and I have no reason to doubt your word - then he was probably inconsistent, just as those who condemn the mural yet support the Muslim cartoons are inconsistent. I guess the latter are a blatant attack, whereas the former is not at all so clear.
-
I think another angle is that the Mohammed cartoons were deliberately drawn to be ‘offensive’ (to those who deem it an offence) whereas the mural was not intended for controversy. The artist clearly makes a point of saying he is trying to start a conversation off the back of it.
-
Yes, good point D-A. I was being conciliatory when I accepted that maybe Corbyn was a bit inconsistent. I can well see how a defender of free expression would be more hesitant re the Mohammad cartoons being around than re the mural that is allegedly antisemitic.
-
Frankly speaking though, I genuinely cannot see what’s not anti Semitic about it. If I saw the mural without the Labour/Corbyn context, perhaps I would not immediately think “anti Semitic” but I would see the anti Jewish narrative (re “Jews run the word” ect) as it’s so blatant.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.