FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The Right wing smear campaign against Sir Keir Starmer
The Right wing smear campaign against Sir Keir Starmer
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *bernath OP Couple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
After another solid performance by Sir Keir Starmer at PMQ’s the tories are now beginning to realise that the new Labour leader is surgical and precise and can hold Boris to account, far more than Jeremy Corbyn.
They are starting to fear him, therefore three tory scumbag MP’s have started to begin to smear him by spreading false rumours by posting far right content on their twitter feeds.
The recent yougov poll has started to show an upward trend in approval for Keir’s supportive and critical approach to the current crisis.
Are the tories starting to run scared, what are ypur thoughts? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"After another solid performance by Sir Keir Starmer at PMQ’s the tories are now beginning to realise that the new Labour leader is surgical and precise and can hold Boris to account, far more than Jeremy Corbyn.
They are starting to fear him, therefore three tory scumbag MP’s have started to begin to smear him by spreading false rumours by posting far right content on their twitter feeds.
The recent yougov poll has started to show an upward trend in approval for Keir’s supportive and critical approach to the current crisis.
Are the tories starting to run scared, what are ypur thoughts?"
Apparently dorries was one and she deleted it.
Probally not a great idea to defame a QC.
Nothing about when cuddly boris said that time spent on investigating historical sex cases was 'spaffing money up the wall? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Was a matter of time. Starmer is making Boris look ridiculous and the Tories know it. Rees Mogg is trying to rally MPs back to parliament in order to drown out Starmer and give Boris a bit of shielding.....he must dread PMQ'S |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Watching Chief prosecutor Keir take Borris apart has been a silver lining (if that phase is appropriate) in all of this. They didn't teach that at Eton debate club.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ornLordMan
over a year ago
Wiltshire and London |
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest"
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)?"
?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think starmer will gain wide spread respect as time goes on, if he continues to make boris look like the blundering fool he is then the attacks on starmer will get nastier. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think starmer will gain wide spread respect as time goes on, if he continues to make boris look like the blundering fool he is then the attacks on starmer will get nastier."
They'll get more professional too. That was ridiculous this morning and discredited within minutes of it being tweeted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The relentless coordinated smear campaign against Corbyn was done because he wanted to challenge not just the political establishment, but he wanted to question the role of government. He was suggesting that it should be there to serve the people, instead of just the interests of the super rich and bog corporations.
Starmer, as competent as he is, will not be offering any real change. Only slight incremental improvements.
So the establishment are not as concerned about him in the same way. Hence I don't think we will see anything like the smears that Corbyn did. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The relentless coordinated smear campaign against Corbyn was done because he wanted to challenge not just the political establishment, but he wanted to question the role of government. He was suggesting that it should be there to serve the people, instead of just the interests of the super rich and bog corporations.
Starmer, as competent as he is, will not be offering any real change. Only slight incremental improvements.
So the establishment are not as concerned about him in the same way. Hence I don't think we will see anything like the smears that Corbyn did. "
I was so excited that I forgot to correct my spelling mistake. Of course I mean "big corporations". And not Armitage Shanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The relentless coordinated smear campaign against Corbyn was done because he wanted to challenge not just the political establishment, but he wanted to question the role of government. He was suggesting that it should be there to serve the people, instead of just the interests of the super rich and bog corporations.
Starmer, as competent as he is, will not be offering any real change. Only slight incremental improvements.
So the establishment are not as concerned about him in the same way. Hence I don't think we will see anything like the smears that Corbyn did. "
To be fair there is less scope to smear Starmer than there was with JC, unless he has some seriously dodgy skeletons in his cupboard  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Why wouldn't there be one? It's what they do.
Not a single member of the current Cabinet could lay a glove on Starmer in an argument based on facts and logic.
Luckily for them, UK politics has sunk so low that they don't have to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think starmer will gain wide spread respect as time goes on, if he continues to make boris look like the blundering fool he is then the attacks on starmer will get nastier.
They'll get more professional too. That was ridiculous this morning and discredited within minutes of it being tweeted."
Yet none of them are willing to apologise  I’d have a lot more respect for people who admit to their failings - asif that will happen... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adetMan
over a year ago
Ipswich |
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
Early days yet.He needs to unite 2 very different groups."
If he wants to be taken seriously he'll need to occupy the centre left in the way that Blair did |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn "
He's more electable from Corbyn because he doesn't offer much meaningful change.
In my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
Early days yet.He needs to unite 2 very different groups.
If he wants to be taken seriously he'll need to occupy the centre left in the way that Blair did "
Blair was no where centre left.
Blair damaged the party for decades..if he has any sense he wont follow that path. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adetMan
over a year ago
Ipswich |
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
Early days yet.He needs to unite 2 very different groups.
If he wants to be taken seriously he'll need to occupy the centre left in the way that Blair did
Blair was no where centre left.
Blair damaged the party for decades..if he has any sense he wont follow that path."
I agree on your second point. Blair's legacy will be the introduction of faith schools. Denominating children by the religion of their parents. Can't wait to see how that turns out |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wouldn’t be the first time people have retweeted something, only to later find out it was fake."
Indeed. there was the time in the GE campaign where Matt Hancock's SPAD told the press that he had been "punched" by a leftie agitator.
I heard a podcast that interviewed people who spread fake news for a living (it didn't ask how they slept). They said that fake news only worked on the right, as progressives normally checked their sources before sharing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
Early days yet.He needs to unite 2 very different groups.
If he wants to be taken seriously he'll need to occupy the centre left in the way that Blair did
Blair was no where centre left.
Blair damaged the party for decades..if he has any sense he wont follow that path.
I agree on your second point. Blair's legacy will be the introduction of faith schools. Denominating children by the religion of their parents. Can't wait to see how that turns out "
Blair's only legacy is lying to invade Iraq. The end. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wouldn’t be the first time people have retweeted something, only to later find out it was fake.
Indeed. there was the time in the GE campaign where Matt Hancock's SPAD told the press that he had been "punched" by a leftie agitator.
I heard a podcast that interviewed people who spread fake news for a living (it didn't ask how they slept). They said that fake news only worked on the right, as progressives normally checked their sources before sharing."
Laura Kunisberg tweeted that without checking her facts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)?"
Disagree 100% and if we are going t defeat it we need to take politics out of it,the new tone of labour is very encouraging.
It is pointless to go back through the years and say we where unprepaired,well how can you be prepaired for something that does not exist?That is really stupid talk |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)?Disagree 100% and if we are going t defeat it we need to take politics out of it,the new tone of labour is very encouraging.
It is pointless to go back through the years and say we where unprepaired,well how can you be prepaired for something that does not exist?That is really stupid talk"
what a load of bollocks you plan ahead for all sorts of scenarios on a regular basis be they weather war famine or a pandemic .you test wether your plans are robust enough to stand up company's do it police army have emergency services do it on a regular basis again to test the plans update & modify as required no matter how far fetched the scenario. could anybody have seen the Falklands or gulf wars coming no but we had contingency plans in place ready to go . we last ran a test of our plans for a pandemic response tree years ago they failed miserabley so what did THIS govt do reform and re set no we shelved the report pretended it wast there and ignored it and now we are paying the price for this government's ineptitude but dont worry will be everybody but the Tory parties fault |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
Early days yet.He needs to unite 2 very different groups."
I personally think he is going to have to work really hard to rebuild that red wall, especially when his Brexit position was what broke it in the first place, for this reason alone I think lisa nandy would have been a better choice of candidate, far more likely to appeal to labour's northern heartlands, well in my opinion that is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Blair's only legacy is lying to invade Iraq. The end.
Not quite. Unless he's not to blame for the massive fuck up that was PPI."
I think that was brown but the tories have had a decade to reverse it . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Blair's only legacy is lying to invade Iraq. The end.
Not quite. Unless he's not to blame for the massive fuck up that was PPI."
I thought the lack of PPE dates back to Henry the 8th?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
Sir Kier is impressive so far so good.
At the moment I'm not sure what his policies are mainly due to the virus dominating.
I noticed what little I saw of the Labour leadership contest no one really criticised Jeremy Cornyn's policies. It will be interesting to see if he moves away bit by bit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)?Disagree 100% and if we are going t defeat it we need to take politics out of it,the new tone of labour is very encouraging.
It is pointless to go back through the years and say we where unprepaired,well how can you be prepaired for something that does not exist?That is really stupid talkwhat a load of bollocks you plan ahead for all sorts of scenarios on a regular basis be they weather war famine or a pandemic .you test wether your plans are robust enough to stand up company's do it police army have emergency services do it on a regular basis again to test the plans update & modify as required no matter how far fetched the scenario. could anybody have seen the Falklands or gulf wars coming no but we had contingency plans in place ready to go . we last ran a test of our plans for a pandemic response tree years ago they failed miserabley so what did THIS govt do reform and re set no we shelved the report pretended it wast there and ignored it and now we are paying the price for this government's ineptitude but dont worry will be everybody but the Tory parties fault "
Who are you Nostradamus,nt a country on this planet was ready for this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Starmer is good very good but this pandemic is not a political matter.
It is all political title tatle and is irrevilent.Plls are irrevilent we are 5 years from any election.
I hope that the parties may begin to work together at this time and they maybe more than we know because so many thrive on the crap.
Thy probably are more united at this time than they can say to be honest
The handling of this pandemic certainly is a political matter; who ignored Operation Cygnus while trying to dismantle the NHS, sowing the seeds of this almighty mess (I was going to say shitshow but that would have been something of a mixed metaphor)?Disagree 100% and if we are going t defeat it we need to take politics out of it,the new tone of labour is very encouraging.
It is pointless to go back through the years and say we where unprepaired,well how can you be prepaired for something that does not exist?That is really stupid talkwhat a load of bollocks you plan ahead for all sorts of scenarios on a regular basis be they weather war famine or a pandemic .you test wether your plans are robust enough to stand up company's do it police army have emergency services do it on a regular basis again to test the plans update & modify as required no matter how far fetched the scenario. could anybody have seen the Falklands or gulf wars coming no but we had contingency plans in place ready to go . we last ran a test of our plans for a pandemic response tree years ago they failed miserabley so what did THIS govt do reform and re set no we shelved the report pretended it wast there and ignored it and now we are paying the price for this government's ineptitude but dont worry will be everybody but the Tory parties fault Who are you Nostradamus,nt a country on this planet was ready for this"
True, but being 2nd worst could have been avoided... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. "
Maybe he's more concerned about fulfilling the role of opposition in parliament. Holding the government to scrutiny. Rather than trying to win some kind of popularity contest?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him.
Maybe he's more concerned about fulfilling the role of opposition in parliament. Holding the government to scrutiny. Rather than trying to win some kind of popularity contest?
"
So people are dying and the economy is crashing but as long as he wins PMQs he doing a great job, stop the point scoring and help the county. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm still unsure about Starmer but he's proving effective in keeping Johnson on his toes which is a good thing.
I think it's a very sobering experience for the Tory party when they see the two go head to head. If MPs feel the need to smear, it's clear that they feel Johnson is out of his depth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him.
Maybe he's more concerned about fulfilling the role of opposition in parliament. Holding the government to scrutiny. Rather than trying to win some kind of popularity contest?
So people are dying and the economy is crashing but as long as he wins PMQs he doing a great job, stop the point scoring and help the county. "
I think you're confused about the role of opposition in government. No one is "point scoring" here.
As I said, it's about scrutinising the government. Over 30,000 people have died already. How many people need to die before you would deep it appropriate for the opposition party to start asking questions? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him.
Maybe he's more concerned about fulfilling the role of opposition in parliament. Holding the government to scrutiny. Rather than trying to win some kind of popularity contest?
So people are dying and the economy is crashing but as long as he wins PMQs he doing a great job, stop the point scoring and help the county. "
At last a conservative who admits johnson is a loser. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
There are plenty of Conservatives, like myself, that aren't convinced about Boris Johnson.
I wasn't happy with his posturings on the back benches, he comes with too much baggage, and his Etonian ways are a distraction in the 21st Century.
I would much prefer a younger, modernist, articulate Leader. In that respect, SKS has plenty to go at in the next four years. I wish him well.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. "
QC 's do tend to be quite dense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
I have very much enjoyed watching Starmer pull apart Johnsons lies piece by piece. This is very much needed. Corbyn did much the same, but the newspapers told everyone to hate him and so they did. Will the same befall Starmer?
As great a job as he is doing in PMQs, the rest of the country are still happily reading The Sun and blathering on about whatever half-arsed nonsense they've been fed.
We've learned (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) that at the end of the day populism is currently winning, and truth, justice and even logic don't really come into it.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I have very much enjoyed watching Starmer pull apart Johnsons lies piece by piece. This is very much needed. Corbyn did much the same, but the newspapers told everyone to hate him and so they did. Will the same befall Starmer?
As great a job as he is doing in PMQs, the rest of the country are still happily reading The Sun and blathering on about whatever half-arsed nonsense they've been fed.
We've learned (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) that at the end of the day populism is currently winning, and truth, justice and even logic don't really come into it.
-Matt"
Corbyn did not pull either May or Johnson to bite he just peached left wing crap he was a joke and deserved zero respect however Starmer is very clever and can argue is point without it being all about political dogma.A man who commands respect |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have very much enjoyed watching Starmer pull apart Johnsons lies piece by piece. This is very much needed. Corbyn did much the same, but the newspapers told everyone to hate him and so they did. Will the same befall Starmer?
As great a job as he is doing in PMQs, the rest of the country are still happily reading The Sun and blathering on about whatever half-arsed nonsense they've been fed.
We've learned (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) that at the end of the day populism is currently winning, and truth, justice and even logic don't really come into it.
-MattCorbyn did not pull either May or Johnson to bite he just peached left wing crap he was a joke and deserved zero respect however Starmer is very clever and can argue is point without it being all about political dogma.A man who commands respect"
Increasing minimum wage and pulling people out of poverty=left wing crap. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have very much enjoyed watching Starmer pull apart Johnsons lies piece by piece. This is very much needed. Corbyn did much the same, but the newspapers told everyone to hate him and so they did. Will the same befall Starmer?
As great a job as he is doing in PMQs, the rest of the country are still happily reading The Sun and blathering on about whatever half-arsed nonsense they've been fed.
We've learned (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) that at the end of the day populism is currently winning, and truth, justice and even logic don't really come into it.
-MattCorbyn did not pull either May or Johnson to bite he just peached left wing crap he was a joke and deserved zero respect however Starmer is very clever and can argue is point without it being all about political dogma.A man who commands respect
Increasing minimum wage and pulling people out of poverty=left wing crap."
I know right?
The smears are real! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"I have very much enjoyed watching Starmer pull apart Johnsons lies piece by piece. This is very much needed. Corbyn did much the same, but the newspapers told everyone to hate him and so they did. Will the same befall Starmer?
As great a job as he is doing in PMQs, the rest of the country are still happily reading The Sun and blathering on about whatever half-arsed nonsense they've been fed.
We've learned (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) that at the end of the day populism is currently winning, and truth, justice and even logic don't really come into it.
-MattCorbyn did not pull either May or Johnson to bite he just peached left wing crap he was a joke and deserved zero respect however Starmer is very clever and can argue is point without it being all about political dogma.A man who commands respect"
It’s ok, you don’t need to prove my point.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. "
Starmer....thick as shit? I guess you’re up for debating that with him are you? I have a pretty good idea who would win that argument and I dont think it would take him very long! Genuinely all the tories are crapping themselves about Starmers forensic abilities because Boris Just cannot hack it against SKS in PMQs.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
Anyone else laugh at the mails attempt to take down starmer today....
They are basically having a go at kier for buying a plot of land at the back of his late mums house so she could take care of rescue donkeys |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Anyone else laugh at the mails attempt to take down starmer today....
They are basically having a go at kier for buying a plot of land at the back of his late mums house so she could take care of rescue donkeys"
And claiming it could be worth £10m if developed. Ignoring the facts that it doesn't have planning permission (and has never had a planning application anyway), and is on green belt land so can't be built on.
Meanwhile, in a tax haven near you...The owner of the Daily Mail & MoS, Viscount Rothermere, owns 4,700 acres in Dorset & Wiltshire, some of it via offshore firms based in tax havens. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. "
It is perfectly reasonable in times like this for the opposition to question the Government. KS is not being divisive or difficult, he is asking the difficult questions that need asking. Like why are there 10,000+ unexplained deaths in Care Homes over and above the norm and Covid 19 deaths? Surely we all want answers to this? At what level of death do you say it is time to question the approach the Government has taken? Is it 10,001, 50,000, 1,000,000. Surely any death should be questioned? The fact that BJ either doesn’t know the answer, or is choosing to deliberately hide the real desth rate is fair game for questioning.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Anyone else laugh at the mails attempt to take down starmer today....
They are basically having a go at kier for buying a plot of land at the back of his late mums house so she could take care of rescue donkeys
And claiming it could be worth £10m if developed. Ignoring the facts that it doesn't have planning permission (and has never had a planning application anyway), and is on green belt land so can't be built on.
Meanwhile, in a tax haven near you...The owner of the Daily Mail & MoS, Viscount Rothermere, owns 4,700 acres in Dorset & Wiltshire, some of it via offshore firms based in tax havens."
Its pathetic really but this is the type of journalism the daily fail will now be serving on a regular basis and as we now know there are gullible people who fall for this mush. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
He's more electable from Corbyn because he doesn't offer much meaningful change.
In my opinion."
He’s more electable because he’s likely to push a centre left agenda whereas Corbyn’s vision was way too extreme, as well-intentioned as it may have been.
The hard Socialism some of Corbyn’s supporters wanted just doesn’t work; they need a dose of reality. It was an outdated shitshow in the 70s, it would an unmitigated disaster now.
Groups like Momentum just need to crawl off into a corner and stay there; let Starmer get on with it unimpeded by idealistic bullshit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million "
Or just own a field & not be Tory like and pack it full of crap houses!? Fields do not come with planning permission, many fields just don’t get built on & some people don’t just do things for money - maybe go and look at what Jacob Rees Mogg does with his money instead. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Will KS be able to pull the Labour Party together ??? He’s facing a government with a huge majority from an electorate that decided labour leadership was quite rightly chronic and split in own ranks. Totally unelectable... will KS change all that ???????? Very very much doubt that ... .. ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million "
"Self made man rises to the top of his profession and earns enough to buy the land next to his mum's house for her donkeys" isn't quite the same story is it? But those are the facts.
Why are we talking about nonexistant hypothetical future property deals? Is it so that we temporarily forget that the government have declared war on teachers this week? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Anyone else laugh at the mails attempt to take down starmer today....
They are basically having a go at kier for buying a plot of land at the back of his late mums house so she could take care of rescue donkeys"
This is a newspaper who is so twisted by bigotry and hated it accused ed millibands father of hating England.
This was a Jewish refugee who served in the royal navy.
It's worse than the rag. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
He's more electable from Corbyn because he doesn't offer much meaningful change.
In my opinion.
He’s more electable because he’s likely to push a centre left agenda whereas Corbyn’s vision was way too extreme, as well-intentioned as it may have been.
The hard Socialism some of Corbyn’s supporters wanted just doesn’t work; they need a dose of reality. It was an outdated shitshow in the 70s, it would an unmitigated disaster now.
Groups like Momentum just need to crawl off into a corner and stay there; let Starmer get on with it unimpeded by idealistic bullshit. "
We live in a country where wanting the minimum wage to be raised as 'extreme' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million "
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernath OP Couple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
"Will KS be able to pull the Labour Party together ??? He’s facing a government with a huge majority from an electorate that decided labour leadership was quite rightly chronic and split in own ranks. Totally unelectable... will KS change all that ???????? Very very much doubt that ... .. ... "
Time will tell, they said the same thing about Blair many years ago and he got three terms. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernath OP Couple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
"Self made man rises to the top of his profession and earns enough to buy the land next to his mum's house for her donkeys" isn't quite the same story is it? But those are the facts.
Why are we talking about nonexistant hypothetical future property deals? Is it so that we temporarily forget that the government have declared war on teachers this week?"
This is the way the turd rag plays its game, creates the smoking gun article. The unenlightened get rabid. Every time and they will be gullible to fall for it time and time again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer"
. It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
"Self made man rises to the top of his profession and earns enough to buy the land next to his mum's house for her donkeys" isn't quite the same story is it? But those are the facts.
Why are we talking about nonexistant hypothetical future property deals? Is it so that we temporarily forget that the government have declared war on teachers this week?
This is the way the turd rag plays its game, creates the smoking gun article. The unenlightened get rabid. Every time and they will be gullible to fall for it time and time again."
Or more likely the truth hurts . Are you saying that any points in the article are false. ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published "
Patrick as some one who fell hook line and sinker for the daily fail lies that there would be a technological solution to the border in ireland can we now assume that reading the daily fail a lot starts to turn your brain to mush. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Yes, if the law changed and he sought planning permission he could profit. The law hasn't changed though and he isn't seeking planning permission So what's the agenda?
"Man who bought field for his mum's donkeys was playing the long (26 years) game so he can coin it in when he's PM"
Meanwhile, Rothermere owns 4,700 acres in Dorset.
4,700 x "£1.5 million per acre" = £7 BILLION that he didn't pay tax on.
Note, land in Dorset with planning permission can be worth over £2.5 million per acre. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Dunno why people are even threating the story with any seriousness.
I mean it's not like he was sacked twice for lying,or made borderline racial comments,or had allegations of sexual misconduct raised,or had the police visit his house due to domestic disturbance,or presided over an electoral campaign based on lies,or couldnt be arsed attending cobra meetings in the middle of one of The biggest health crises the country has ever seen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
He's more electable from Corbyn because he doesn't offer much meaningful change.
In my opinion.
He’s more electable because he’s likely to push a centre left agenda whereas Corbyn’s vision was way too extreme, as well-intentioned as it may have been.
The hard Socialism some of Corbyn’s supporters wanted just doesn’t work; they need a dose of reality. It was an outdated shitshow in the 70s, it would an unmitigated disaster now.
Groups like Momentum just need to crawl off into a corner and stay there; let Starmer get on with it unimpeded by idealistic bullshit.
We live in a country where wanting the minimum wage to be raised as 'extreme'"
It's a testament to the right wing media. Not only do working class people vote themselves into more austerity and poverty, but they actually argue and fight with people who want everyone to have better opportunities in life, regardless of the situation you're born into. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I detect a glimmer of hope for the left in Starmer. Its still very very early days but he's certainly far more electable than Corbyn
He's more electable from Corbyn because he doesn't offer much meaningful change.
In my opinion.
He’s more electable because he’s likely to push a centre left agenda whereas Corbyn’s vision was way too extreme, as well-intentioned as it may have been.
The hard Socialism some of Corbyn’s supporters wanted just doesn’t work; they need a dose of reality. It was an outdated shitshow in the 70s, it would an unmitigated disaster now.
Groups like Momentum just need to crawl off into a corner and stay there; let Starmer get on with it unimpeded by idealistic bullshit.
We live in a country where wanting the minimum wage to be raised as 'extreme'
It's a testament to the right wing media. Not only do working class people vote themselves into more austerity and poverty, but they actually argue and fight with people who want everyone to have better opportunities in life, regardless of the situation you're born into."
I think it's a testament that people will swallow whatever bullshit they are fed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rumalexMan
over a year ago
Birmingham |
The smear campaigns were always going to start, seeing how useless BJ is against Starmer without his usual back up in the commons has alarmed them to the point the smears have started early, added to their crap handling of the whole covid situation has made it worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The smear campaigns were always going to start, seeing how useless BJ is against Starmer without his usual back up in the commons has alarmed them to the point the smears have started early, added to their crap handling of the whole covid situation has made it worse. "
Starmer may be a threat to Johnson, but he's not a threat to the system. He's not proposing any really change. So there isn't too much for the establishment to worry about.
In my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
"Self made man rises to the top of his profession and earns enough to buy the land next to his mum's house for her donkeys" isn't quite the same story is it? But those are the facts.
Why are we talking about nonexistant hypothetical future property deals? Is it so that we temporarily forget that the government have declared war on teachers this week?
This is the way the turd rag plays its game, creates the smoking gun article. The unenlightened get rabid. Every time and they will be gullible to fall for it time and time again. Or more likely the truth hurts . Are you saying that any points in the article are false. ? "
Sounds like you’re having to resort to hypothetical arguments because you just cant admit to being misguided!
Which public school did you go to by the way? I only ask because you seem to be so lacking in empathy to the common people Patrick |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
"Self made man rises to the top of his profession and earns enough to buy the land next to his mum's house for her donkeys" isn't quite the same story is it? But those are the facts.
Why are we talking about nonexistant hypothetical future property deals? Is it so that we temporarily forget that the government have declared war on teachers this week?
This is the way the turd rag plays its game, creates the smoking gun article. The unenlightened get rabid. Every time and they will be gullible to fall for it time and time again. Or more likely the truth hurts . Are you saying that any points in the article are false. ?
Sounds like you’re having to resort to hypothetical arguments because you just cant admit to being misguided!
Which public school did you go to by the way? I only ask because you seem to be so lacking in empathy to the common people Patrick "
Yes I believe Patrick may be a public school boy, but perhaps not a top school, otherwise why would you support a tax dodging lord with 5000 acres who enjoys fox hunting ? We can assume true British people would support a man from humble beginnings who saves a few pounds to buy a patch of land close to his mother so she can care for abused animals, what a wonderful gesture. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Abernath, When you foam at the mouth, does the spittle flow from the left? Just asking!
What an unpleasant and idiotic thing to say 
Sorry, are you called Abernath? "
Are you suggesting that empathy doesn't exist? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Starmer is as thick as shit, the tories are playing him. He stands up in parliament digging at the government, like all the rest people are sick of it. Now if he had a brain he would work with the government and stand out as a statsman, we need that while this is going on not point scoring. This is like a war so we need to pull together till its over,or people will never forgive him. "
At a certain point you start to spin yourself.
A QC and former Director of Public Prosecutions is "as thick as shit" based on what criteria?
How are the Tories "playing him" by posting false tweets and newspaper articles about donkey sanctuaries bought for his mum before she died?
The leader of the opposition supports and questions where appropriate.
It's the government which seems to be in need of forgiveness at this stage. They are actually in control and making the decisions. Bad ones. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Abernath, When you foam at the mouth, does the spittle flow from the left? Just asking!
What an unpleasant and idiotic thing to say
Sorry, are you called Abernath? "
No....not when I last checked....why, are you called Bernard Manning? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published "
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece"
Patrick wont even admit that he supports a border in the irish sea. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece"
However he denied being a millionaire despite owning a house worth in excess of a million pounds. He claims to be a man of the people yet is in a very privileged position in life with assets potentially worth ten million pounds.
The article clearly presented the facts? Has Starmer made any attempt to deny them.
No one resents his success. It is however insulting for him to claim to be a man of the people considered both hid wealth and the fact that he calls himself Sir.
Let's wait and see if the newspaper concerned is requested to retract any of the information as published. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece However he denied being a millionaire despite owning a house worth in excess of a million pounds. He claims to be a man of the people yet is in a very privileged position in life with assets potentially worth ten million pounds.
The article clearly presented the facts? Has Starmer made any attempt to deny them.
No one resents his success. It is however insulting for him to claim to be a man of the people considered both hid wealth and the fact that he calls himself Sir.
Let's wait and see if the newspaper concerned is requested to retract any of the information as published. "
When did he say he was a,man of the people.?
He is a qc.
I thought all tories loved normal people who make it good? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published "
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece However he denied being a millionaire despite owning a house worth in excess of a million pounds. He claims to be a man of the people yet is in a very privileged position in life with assets potentially worth ten million pounds.
The article clearly presented the facts? Has Starmer made any attempt to deny them.
No one resents his success. It is however insulting for him to claim to be a man of the people considered both hid wealth and the fact that he calls himself Sir.
Let's wait and see if the newspaper concerned is requested to retract any of the information as published. "
Desperate....you must be really worried Pat |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"
It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
it is "disengenious" at best pat for a few reason....
1) it would be like someone alledging me and my sis being millionaire because we inherited my mums house, that went up in value more than 5 times what she bought it at the day after the olympics was announced, because of where it was situated
2) all that gumpf about how much the land would be worth if built upon... which is interesting because that was not the reason why he bought the land (remember the rescue donkeys) and there has never been a planning application made on that land......
look pat... just admit it was an attempted pitiful hit piece However he denied being a millionaire despite owning a house worth in excess of a million pounds. He claims to be a man of the people yet is in a very privileged position in life with assets potentially worth ten million pounds.
The article clearly presented the facts? Has Starmer made any attempt to deny them.
No one resents his success. It is however insulting for him to claim to be a man of the people considered both hid wealth and the fact that he calls himself Sir.
Let's wait and see if the newspaper concerned is requested to retract any of the information as published. "
When has he denied being a millionaire Pat?
When has he said that he was a "man of the people"?
What is his background Pat? Is it from great wealth? Does it matter? Does he have to be poor to be leader of the Labour Party?
He doesn't "call himself Sir" does he? He was knighted, so that is his title.
Do you call yourself 'Mister'?
Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage and Donald Trump have apparently been variously fighting "the establishment" and the "deep state" and "draining the swamp" despite being born in to privilege. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo?"
Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. "
The general gist of this half truth guff from the Sunday Mail. (Is the Sunday Mail any less shit than the daily mail?), Is that he might have a few quid.
Isn't that what they champion about the Tories, they have more cash than the rest of us so we should do as we're told by them?
Strange times.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
The general gist of this half truth guff from the Sunday Mail. (Is the Sunday Mail any less shit than the daily mail?), Is that he might have a few quid.
Isn't that what they champion about the Tories, they have more cash than the rest of us so we should do as we're told by them?
Strange times.
"
What....a working class lad who pulled himself up by his bootstraps is smeared by the tory press and the saddos who support this criminally incompetent government....who would have guessed it? Perhaps Pat is genuinely scared that he might have to analyse the news instead of parroting the words of his lords and masters? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. "
Lets see if any actual readers of this propaganda consider any aspect of the article to be biased and undemocratic! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. "
The Sunday mail will have undertaken checks before publishing.
Thank you for making me laugh on a pretty shitty day.
Cheered me up that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour can hardly claim to be a man of the people. The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .
Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds . He also ommitted the value of his late parents house which he has inherited and is valued at £480, 000. With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million
It's worth noting that this statement is just gibberish from patrick, it's just a field with no planning and worth very little, I think we can all admire and support someone from a humble background now earning a good wage, well done mr. Starmer . It would be interesting to know if you read the actual article .
As Sir Kier Starman is a lawyer , we can safely assume that he would commence legal action if any aspect of the published article were untrue ( in addition to making a complaint to the press complaints commission ).
It is a simple am exercise to verify every detail in the article as published
What are the facts Pat?
The property was bought by Keir Starmer.
No planning permission for anything has been sought.
Any sales value quoted is hypothetical.
The land was bought before his mother's death and donkeys were moved to it.
Nothing illegal or in any way untoward or disreputable took place.
Is any of this untrue?
Are there any additional "facts"?
What was the purpose of the article Pat?
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. "
The headline read:
"Man of the people? New Labour leader Sir Keir owns seven acres of land in Surrey worth up to £10m"
What was the purpose of the initial question "Man of the people?"
How was this informative Pat?
What does the hypothetical value of a property tell the reader Pat? That something may or may not be of value? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
"
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair. "
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
""A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour"....."
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
""...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people." "
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
""The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes"....... "
but have not stated where!
"".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land .""
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
""Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........""
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
""....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........""
two month ago
"......and is valued at £480, 000.""
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
""With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million""
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........"
Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. "
So just to confirm he doesn’t own a piece of land worth more than £10m, nor is such a piece of land in his Mum’s Estate? This was and is a non story. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So just to confirm he doesn’t own a piece of land worth more than £10m, nor is such a piece of land in his Mum’s Estate? This was and is a non story. "
He owns land with a potential development value of up to £10 million pounds. The article appears to indicate that he purchased the field in his own name. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So just to confirm he doesn’t own a piece of land worth more than £10m, nor is such a piece of land in his Mum’s Estate? This was and is a non story. He owns land with a potential development value of up to £10 million pounds. The article appears to indicate that he purchased the field in his own name. "
Post Covid 19, it has a potential worth of £0.20. You and the Mail just make this up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. "
"Most socialists"=3
Yes ed milliband that left wing radical.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. "
So none of the information that Fabio added was untrue, but it would have provided Mail readers with relevant information. That information was not included.
Tony Benn is irrelevant to a discussion about Kier Starmer.
Your back garden could be worth millions of they discover oil and can get planning permission to drill for it.
What a hypocrite you are |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. "
So I guess you must be really bothered that this man of the people has potentially made a good investment by buying a house that is now worth more than a million quid because property values in islington have risen? Its his home where he lives and as far as any of us know he plans to carry on living there for the rest of his days. Whats wrong with that? Are you jealous? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So none of the information that Fabio added was untrue, but it would have provided Mail readers with relevant information. That information was not included.
Tony Benn is irrelevant to a discussion about Kier Starmer.
Your back garden could be worth millions of they discover oil and can get planning permission to drill for it.
What a hypocrite you are "
. As far as I am aware non one has claimed that any of the information as published is untrue. What the readers would be interested in is Starmers potential wealth, not how long ago or why he required assets.
I would have thought that both Tony Benn and the Millibrand brothers are both relevant. They all claimed to be men of the people yet organised their own affairs in order to pay as little tax as possible. On a simplistic basis they wanted other people to pay for services but pay as little tax as possible themselves.
It appears that you have avoided commenting on the IHT payable by Starmans mothers estate. It is likely that no IHT is payable but one poster appears to claim otherwise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So none of the information that Fabio added was untrue, but it would have provided Mail readers with relevant information. That information was not included.
Tony Benn is irrelevant to a discussion about Kier Starmer.
Your back garden could be worth millions of they discover oil and can get planning permission to drill for it.
What a hypocrite you are . As far as I am aware non one has claimed that any of the information as published is untrue. What the readers would be interested in is Starmers potential wealth, not how long ago or why he required assets.
I would have thought that both Tony Benn and the Millibrand brothers are both relevant. They all claimed to be men of the people yet organised their own affairs in order to pay as little tax as possible. On a simplistic basis they wanted other people to pay for services but pay as little tax as possible themselves.
It appears that you have avoided commenting on the IHT payable by Starmans mothers estate. It is likely that no IHT is payable but one poster appears to claim otherwise. "
So you're argument is that Starmer, Benn and Miliband are as bad as the Tories? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay. "
lots of waffle in there pat.... one teeny weeny issues...
Spouse's may not pay inheritance tax... put children do!!!
so if the house was left to him by his mother (which is what the mail story says....) and the value of the house is £480,000..... then he is paying 40% of (£480k - £325k)....
40% of 155k... £62,000!!!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So none of the information that Fabio added was untrue, but it would have provided Mail readers with relevant information. That information was not included.
Tony Benn is irrelevant to a discussion about Kier Starmer.
Your back garden could be worth millions of they discover oil and can get planning permission to drill for it.
What a hypocrite you are . As far as I am aware non one has claimed that any of the information as published is untrue. What the readers would be interested in is Starmers potential wealth, not how long ago or why he required assets.
I would have thought that both Tony Benn and the Millibrand brothers are both relevant. They all claimed to be men of the people yet organised their own affairs in order to pay as little tax as possible. On a simplistic basis they wanted other people to pay for services but pay as little tax as possible themselves.
It appears that you have avoided commenting on the IHT payable by Starmans mothers estate. It is likely that no IHT is payable but one poster appears to claim otherwise. "
Define "untrue". Speculation is neither true nor untrue. Neither is it actual information.
Why are Mail readers interested in his potential wealth based on a range of suppositions? Especially if his assets were obtained legitimately and, sadly, from the death of loved ones?
Who has claimed that they are "men of the people" Pat? Can you find a quote? You don't have to be poor to have empathy.
However, Farage and Trump certainly claim to be anti-establishment and supporting ordinary people. As does the current government. Have there been any articles on their actual or speculative wealth? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"pat... tut tut tut for writing the following.....
What useful information was imparted other than the fact that Kier Starmer owns some property next to his parents homeo? Hi. The purpose of the article was to provide Sunday Mail readers with some background information about the leader of the Labour party . Nothing derogatory or untrue was published about Kier Starmer. The Sunday Mail would have undertaken checks before publishing.
If Kier Starmer wants to be in public life, the general public have a right to know as much information about him as possible.
Are you saying that members of the public should be be unaware of a politicians background?
In any event we can be fairly certain that Sunday Mail readers found the article usefull and informative .
These are the readers whose opinion of the article matter. They will either have paid £1.80 for a copy of the newspaper or £27.00 for monthly vouchers.
Lets see if any actual readers of the newspaper consider any aspect of the article to be unfair.
so thats the game we are going to play then pat.....
okay then, lets go back and read the original statement you put up, and lets make a few "additions".....
ahem.....
"A lawyer who can earn up to £420 per hour".....
but doesn't... and has not since 2009 because became head of the CPS and DPP
"...... can hardly claim to be a man of the people."
Mum was a nurse, Dad was a toolmaker, did well enough in the 11+ to go to Grammar School
"The local authority Tandridge District Council has plans for 6056 new homes".......
but have not stated where!
".....and has warned that expansion could come at the expense of previously protected land ."
for which his land was bought 26 yrs ago and used for housing rescue donkeys...
"Starmer has claimed not to be a millionaire even though he conceded that his house in London might be worth a million pounds ........"
but was not worth £1 million pounds when he bought it
"....... He also ommitted the value of his late parents house, which he has inherited........"
two month ago
......and is valued at £480, 000."
of which he would have a hefty inheritance tax bill to pay!
"With planning permission he will own a field worth £10 million"
but has never applied for planning permission because the land was used to house rescue donkeys....
so are any amendments i have made untruthful........ Hi. Apart from the inheritance tax issue everything else is covered in the original article.
Without see a copy of the relevant will it would be impossible to calculate the Inheritance Tax liability.
However the initial. £325,000 is free of inheritance tax . In addition there is the the exemption for the first spouse which is also £325,000 giving a total tax free amount of £650 000. I would be surprised if Kier Star man has to pay any IHT on the estate. As a lawyer I would suspect he is pretty organised in these matters.
It is interesting to note that most socialists are not too keen on paying taxes themselves. They just prefer other people to pay them. Tony Benn organised his estate in such a manner as to minimise his tax liability and the Millibsnd brothers used a deed of variation.
Unless there is an anomaly in the estate I would be surprised if there is any inheritance tax to pay.
So none of the information that Fabio added was untrue, but it would have provided Mail readers with relevant information. That information was not included.
Tony Benn is irrelevant to a discussion about Kier Starmer.
Your back garden could be worth millions of they discover oil and can get planning permission to drill for it.
What a hypocrite you are . As far as I am aware non one has claimed that any of the information as published is untrue. What the readers would be interested in is Starmers potential wealth, not how long ago or why he required assets.
I would have thought that both Tony Benn and the Millibrand brothers are both relevant. They all claimed to be men of the people yet organised their own affairs in order to pay as little tax as possible. On a simplistic basis they wanted other people to pay for services but pay as little tax as possible themselves.
It appears that you have avoided commenting on the IHT payable by Starmans mothers estate. It is likely that no IHT is payable but one poster appears to claim otherwise. "
Kier Starker is the second of four children Pat.
Is that an interesting piece of information too?
What might the implication of that be for your speculation? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Lies lies and more lies Pat....shame on you  "
Hi. Maybe if you think the article is lies you need to contact Kier Starmer. You appear to be claiming to know more than he does. A spokesman for Kier made no attempt to deny any of the content of the article when he was contacted by the Daily Mail. With Kiers legal background we can be certain that the Daily Mail vetted the article carefully before publishing it . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Well said. Unfortunately those who can’t leave decisive politics at the door no matter what (Starmer being the chief point scorer it now seems) will ever agree and stick to grinding their usual axes ad nauseum. I won’t go into the subject of lawyers too much but let’s just say the self important windbags are well versed in presenting any twist on the facts to their advantage, the sheep might be impressed as usual, but it’s pure oratory and just a well practiced game. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Interesting use of the term ‘forensic’ ,this keeps coming up with regard to Starmer. If the term analytical was used, fair enough, as no don’t that’s what they mean. Forensic relates to crime/evidence of e.g forensic anthropology, medicine, entomology etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Well said. Unfortunately those who can’t leave decisive politics at the door no matter what (Starmer being the chief point scorer it now seems) will ever agree and stick to grinding their usual axes ad nauseum. I won’t go into the subject of lawyers too much but let’s just say the self important windbags are well versed in presenting any twist on the facts to their advantage, the sheep might be impressed as usual, but it’s pure oratory and just a well practiced game. "
Perhaps at pmq ks should sit there and say nothing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Lies lies and more lies Pat....shame on you Hi. Maybe if you think the article is lies you need to contact Kier Starmer. You appear to be claiming to know more than he does. A spokesman for Kier made no attempt to deny any of the content of the article when he was contacted by the Daily Mail. With Kiers legal background we can be certain that the Daily Mail vetted the article carefully before publishing it . "
Not really Pat... I am claiming that you are a little confused about research and more than a little misguided in your unabashed worshipping at the altar of the daily mail |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernath OP Couple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
"Lies lies and more lies Pat....shame on you Hi. Maybe if you think the article is lies you need to contact Kier Starmer. You appear to be claiming to know more than he does. A spokesman for Kier made no attempt to deny any of the content of the article when he was contacted by the Daily Mail. With Kiers legal background we can be certain that the Daily Mail vetted the article carefully before publishing it . "
Its been proven time and time again that the Daily Makl or Daily shitbucket has been known to be an unreliable source of information.
It is very dangerous to assume they do their jobs properly.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
The Daily Mash already has the next few articles that will provide Mail readers with "vital" information:
'The Mail's next five smears against Keir Starmer
20th May 2020
THE Mail exposed Keir Starmer for buying a field for his mother to use as a donkey sanctuary, horrifying voters. What devastating smears are next?
Starmer was awkward with girls when he was 14
Forensic and confident? Not in June 1977, when Starmer found himself talking to a girl he fancied but found himself unable to think of anything funny or to ask her out without blushing. So much for being a highly successful barrister.
Starmer once got d*unk at university
In a shameful incident in 1982, Starmer drank seven pints of Carling Black Label at a freshers’ disco and became excessively talkative. The next day he was completely incapacitated until almost 11am, when he took two Anadin. Is he still an alcoholic drug addict? Undoubtedly.
Starmer has never had a pub fight
Could Starmer batter a pissed bloke hassling him in a kebab shop at 1am? The Labour leader remains tight-lipped about this important issue, suggesting he can land only the lightest of punches and does not carry a ‘chib’ should the situation escalate.
Starmer has given up on several TV box sets
Unbelievably, Starmer has still not finished Mad Men, despite being initially enthusiastic about the series. He has since failed to complete The Walking Dead, Ozark and Tales from the Loop. There is only one way to describe such a person – a quitter.
Starmer is too nice
Starmer remembers his wife’s birthday, is polite to people and cares about human rights. You wouldn’t find him having the courage to walk out on his family to shack up with a PR girl half his age. The spineless wanker.' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
