Stiffkey Blue
@stiffkeyblue.bsky.social
🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸
I support Palestine.Action must be taken.
by 'world police' you mean 'foremost wager of illegal wars'.
December 6, 2025 at 8:28 PM
by 'world police' you mean 'foremost wager of illegal wars'.
Fair enough. Can't blame you for trusting that they'd be an improvement on the Tories.
November 18, 2025 at 11:06 PM
Fair enough. Can't blame you for trusting that they'd be an improvement on the Tories.
You should have realised. The signs were there well before the election.
November 18, 2025 at 10:24 PM
You should have realised. The signs were there well before the election.
'Man up'? What sort of toxic drivel is that?
September 10, 2025 at 7:52 PM
'Man up'? What sort of toxic drivel is that?
Replacing a gap? That's some pretty low expectations.
August 29, 2025 at 6:33 PM
Replacing a gap? That's some pretty low expectations.
All great ideas, and I'm sure that Starmer would be willing.
First problem - what will be the charge?
First problem - what will be the charge?
July 3, 2025 at 7:45 PM
All great ideas, and I'm sure that Starmer would be willing.
First problem - what will be the charge?
First problem - what will be the charge?
It does look similar.
May 28, 2025 at 9:14 PM
It does look similar.
Unfortunately not. It's the flag of Martinique.
May 28, 2025 at 9:11 PM
Unfortunately not. It's the flag of Martinique.
Unfortunately not. It's the flag of Martinique.
May 28, 2025 at 9:10 PM
Unfortunately not. It's the flag of Martinique.
An absolutely ridiculous response.
May 25, 2025 at 9:50 AM
An absolutely ridiculous response.
That might be the reason, but you started by saying that the UK would be 'legally obligated' to invade Israel. The Genocide Convention says no such thing.
You said that I had no grasp of international law but at the same time you're adding your own clauses to the convention.
You said that I had no grasp of international law but at the same time you're adding your own clauses to the convention.
May 20, 2025 at 9:36 PM
That might be the reason, but you started by saying that the UK would be 'legally obligated' to invade Israel. The Genocide Convention says no such thing.
You said that I had no grasp of international law but at the same time you're adding your own clauses to the convention.
You said that I had no grasp of international law but at the same time you're adding your own clauses to the convention.
Sorry, I don't see any mention of invasion there.
I'm not sure whether you're arguing that Israel isn't carrying out a genocide or that Keir Starmer is right not to name it as such, but in either case you're clearly wrong.
I'm not sure whether you're arguing that Israel isn't carrying out a genocide or that Keir Starmer is right not to name it as such, but in either case you're clearly wrong.
May 20, 2025 at 9:26 PM
Sorry, I don't see any mention of invasion there.
I'm not sure whether you're arguing that Israel isn't carrying out a genocide or that Keir Starmer is right not to name it as such, but in either case you're clearly wrong.
I'm not sure whether you're arguing that Israel isn't carrying out a genocide or that Keir Starmer is right not to name it as such, but in either case you're clearly wrong.
That's interesting. Please can you point me to the text that obliges states to invade if another state is suspected of carrying out genocide?
May 20, 2025 at 8:43 PM
That's interesting. Please can you point me to the text that obliges states to invade if another state is suspected of carrying out genocide?
That's a very strange and twisted argument. So we must not call out a genocide, where one is clearly happening, because it would oblige us to take some sort of action?
May 20, 2025 at 8:03 PM
That's a very strange and twisted argument. So we must not call out a genocide, where one is clearly happening, because it would oblige us to take some sort of action?
For a start, he could speak out about a genocide, not scapegoat ethnic minorities, reverse the two-child benefit cap or meet even one of his supposed pledges.
May 19, 2025 at 9:13 PM
For a start, he could speak out about a genocide, not scapegoat ethnic minorities, reverse the two-child benefit cap or meet even one of his supposed pledges.
Those criticising Owen Jones and/or his article might wish to provide their own explanations for Starmer’s net favourability having fallen to -46. It seems to imply that the UK public sees things the same way.
May 19, 2025 at 9:08 PM
Those criticising Owen Jones and/or his article might wish to provide their own explanations for Starmer’s net favourability having fallen to -46. It seems to imply that the UK public sees things the same way.
Lowest *number*
Or just 'fewest' would do.
Or just 'fewest' would do.
May 10, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Lowest *number*
Or just 'fewest' would do.
Or just 'fewest' would do.