Is he thick or stupid

[swoop101]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Did you see Dave after meeting with his opposite number, he had the look of a man that had done a lot of talking and knew not a blind bit of notice had been taken, sort of felt bad for him for about millisecond.

But at least he tried, much better than sticking his head in the sand and moaning from a distance.

[alferret]

Originally Posted by Top banana:35645735

Any response to this Arthur, so the headline should have been are labour thick or stupid?

You'll not get any feedback from Arthur regarding this. Arthur reads stuff then turns it into whatever he likes without facts but plenty of fiction. I wonder sometimes if he ever gets through a day without making disparaging remarks about the Torys, be it here or at home.

[Osem]

Is he thick or stupid? Is there a difference?

Like him or not, DC has achieved far more by going to Sri Lanka than by staying at home and it's clear that the govt. there certainly doesn't view his presence as being supportive of what's been going on. Well done to him I say.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

I also think it was better for him to go, particularly as he went to visit the Tamils in the north with the world's press in tow.

BTW DC has a reported IQ of 131 so I suspect he's considerably more intelligent than the OP and certainly not thick or stupid.

Last but one paragraph

[solitaire]

Whilst I would agree with the reason for the visit of DC, I think that in a way it's a waste of time because countries that have these human rights abuses will just carry on as before despite what anyone tells them.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Why do members bring bring Labour into it. What l am trying is that, here is man going into a country. That other countries have boycotted, saying that l will try and solve this problem. He can't. The guy has already say he won't be dictated to.

To me he is wasting his time.

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Why do members bring bring Labour into it. What l am trying is that, here is man going into a country. That other countries have boycotted, saying that l will try and solve this problem. He can't. The guy has already say he won't be dictated to.

To me he is wasting his time.

To counterpoint your obvious anti Tory obsession?

---------- Post added at 17:29 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

They guy WON'T change anything in a country that doesn't give a monkey's about human rights.

Thats why people go missing, and why many government leaders won't go there, don't you read the news.

You certainly look at a lot of news - but I don't think you READ it.

[idiosyncratic]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

You certainly look at a lot of news - but I don't think you READ it.

Agreed - the news is in the small writing, not just in the headline!!!

[Osem]

Well, that's how rags like the Sun and the Mirror get 'readers' isn't it. They rely on people who can see no further than the ends of their noses.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Why do members bring bring Labour into it. What l am trying is that, here is man going into a country. That other countries have boycotted, saying that l will try and solve this problem. He can't. The guy has already say he won't be dictated to.

To me he is wasting his time.

The reason for bringing Labour in to it is that they agreed to the visit back in 2009.

Cameron only went as it was arranged by the last government. Wether DC thinks he will make a difference is neither here nor there. He probably knows it won't make a blind bit of difference.