What ideas are there instead of bombing?

Have you posted on the wrong thread pogs?

POGS is merely answering anniebachs last posting, as ab doesn't think that sending pictures of dead children to people is a problem!

Simon danczuk has also involved the police after receiving a threat. He certainly courts the limelight and irritated many on the left by taking money fom the daily mail or the sun, for writing articles criticising jc. He voted for bombing and set out his reasons for this on his Facebook page. The vitriolic, abusive comments he received were abusive. I don't agree with the way he voted but I don't believe either that, or the newspaper articles justify threats or demands he be deselected.

POGS, the report I heard was photographs of children killed by bombs , did I mention babies? In my opinion if anyone has given careful thought to bombing and voted in favour of it why complain that a photograph of a child killed by a bomb is distressing ? They are saying I support the bombing but have no wish to see the results of bombing , make decisions and accept the results of one's decision , children are killed by bombing . I am strongly against anyone being threatened for voting for bombing but photographs of the results of bombing ? I wouldn't send one but I do not condemn anyone for doing so if their action is to show anyone the results of their decisions

Bombing kills innocent as well as guilty

I notice you haven't addressed the last paragraph of POGS's post, Anniebach.

Did you Ana

Pardon?

I wouldn't send one but I do not condemn anyone for doing so if their action is to show anyone the results of their decisions.

So presumably you would not condemn anyone for sending photos of children raped and slaughtered by ISIS to 'No' voters if the action was to show the ongoing brutality which will continue unchecked as a result of their decision to do nothing.

No MP is responsible for the actions of IS, and I am speaking of MP's , I would not agree with the photographs being sent to those here who supported bombing children, they support it but didn't make the decision

You may think the bombing of children is justified because IS kill children ,I do not, we are sinking to their level

I 've tried and failed to ignore that post Anniebach. What absolute tosh. No one on here, or in the House of Commons 'supported bombing children'. Who, when and where on any of the discussions on this forum has said that 'the bombing of children is justified because IS kill children'.

To repeat, I do not support bombing but I accept the democratic decision reached in the HoC. Living in a democracy sometimes means we have to accept the people we vote in to represent us, don't always reflect our views.

Iam , I said - you may and not you do. I only speak for myself, I think the bombing will result in more killing of more innocent Syrians and bombing will not stop IS from brutality ,it will increase .

The implication was there, as you know very well.

www.liveleak.com/view?i=619_1437121336#sthash.BuwTROBA.uxfszeShLUMhTfFC0fyd.99

Tory MP accused of selling ISIL oil.

Everyone knew that children would be killed by bombing. Nobody can pretend otherwise.
"No hiding place", as Corbyn would say.

I don't see anyone pretending they didn't know that children will die because of the bombing.
I see that Matt Carr of Stop the War is suggesting on their website that Daesh/IS reflects the International Brigade but rather than supporting oppressed working classes, Daesh supports oppressed Muslims.
No hiding place indeed.

dj, you are using the half phrase there, and probably in the wrong context. I am on the other thread with you, where we know that that is at best, a half of a phrase, and was to do with whipping[I think].

soontobe, You do know, don't you, that here "whipping" means an MP receiving the official party message on how he/she is to vote on a specific subject? I ask because you often say that you are unfamiliar with words (which sometimes makes me think that you don't live in the UK at all)

So there is support here for bombing which which will kill innocent adults and children because IS kill innocent adults and children ? There is no sense in this sorry, I know no one here wants innocents killed but they will be and this is why I am so against the bombing, plus so many military experts said there will have to be boots on the ground bombing will not free the world if IS.

Some keep attacking me as a Corbyn supporter, what is so wrong with him questioning who is buying the oil, who is selling the arms, which banks are handling the millions

Jen, thank you for the link, read it after my post on buying oil and banks involved

Elegran, whipping means more than that I always thought.

Yes, Anniebach. Everyone appears to have missed the fact that a Tory MP is selling ISIL oil and is talking about Corbyn again.

Thanks, soon, being a Corbyn and StoptheWar follower, I am aware of what he meant by no hiding place. In fact, I think I was one of the ones who pointed out what he meant and said. I do not need lessons from anyone who thinks war is justified.

X posts, Annie. Does no harm to point the fact out more than once, though.

soontobe What did you think that a politician would mean by whipping?

In the context of the House of Commons and party politics, it means the use of the Parliamentary Whip by an official called the Chief Whip who keeps MPs all pointing in the same direction, like a Master for hounds keeping a pack of hunting dogs all chasing the same quarry. If politicians value their position in a party, they pay attention to the Whip. The media picked up on the "no hiding place" and ignored what they would be hiding from. Typical editing.

Did you think it means that someone will come after them and physically attack them with a whip? There is an expression on the lines of "My Dad can whup your Dad" which is mostly used in the States and means he can beat him in a fight, but I don't believe that JC was using it as a threat to attack anyone.

Or on the other hand, who knows what MPs get up to in the privacy of their offices, Elegran......

With the interns?

I still dont understand what it means by no hiding place from whipping. As reosequartz says on another thread, it can have at least 3 meanings.
So why hasnt JC cleared the matter up?

I think whipping has a bullying part to it.