POLL: ‘Terrorist Sympathisers’ – was David Cameron right? | Next Ballot Box

Please feel free to visit and cast your vote.

When This Writer did so, the poll showed more than 97 per cent of respondents believe he was wrong.

Today MPs will debate and vote on whether or not the UK should use air-strikes on Syria to try and defeat ISIS. However, the strikes will cause deaths to many innocent civilians. Yesterday David Cameron very controversially described those who are against air-strikes as “terrorist sympathisers.” But was the Prime Minister right to say this? Have your say

Source: POLL: ‘Terrorist Sympathisers’ – was David Cameron right? | Next Ballot Box

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


11 thoughts on “POLL: ‘Terrorist Sympathisers’ – was David Cameron right? | Next Ballot Box

  1. Dez

    Thxs for access to poll. I guess Camoron is heading towards a lucrative retirement and can take the heat as he has nothing politically to lose.

  2. Jon Effemey

    Er Bomb what? Well the oil fields didn’t seemed to get bombed. Haven’t the Russians just started doing that? Why was nothing done about that and an all out effort to cut off the money supply? From what I have read Isis have become very good at hiding when there is bombing, more civilians and more children will die.
    You have the US, the Russians, the French now I read of a Chinese aircraft carrier ready to start attacking.
    Just what is the strategy post all of this? Yes defeat Isis and then what?
    Turkey v the Kurds and supporting the Turkoman. The US supporting the Kurds. Iran (Shia) is in an indirect war with the Saudis (wannabe Sunnis). Iran, Russia and Iran support Assad. The West wants him out. I read somewhere that the Turks hanker after a return of the Ottoman Empire, Russia is worried about its southern regions.
    From all of this a coalition is suppose to form?What about the origins of Isis and who supported them to start with? Oh 70,000 what?
    Well done Anonymous taking out all those Twitter accounts and the people sticking ducks on people’s heads on Isis web sites. I suppose there has been a lot of covert action going on, but this group seem to be using the web and social media as a means of recruitment and propaganda, far more sophisticated that Al Qaeda? Where did that all come from?
    Just too many questions, and rhetoric and cartoon bubble replies from politicians. I am no way an expert, but just looking at a few of the variables out there soon shows up what a total mess it all is…so bomb what and then what?

      1. Jon Effemey

        Got in a muddle….where is Iraq in all of this where is iraq for that matter…I thought it was Iran China and Russia supporting Assad, but you would need a Phd to start to work all this out…thanks for your reply
        Probably meant China….

  3. iwgmoncrieff

    Cameron has the intellect of an earthworm. He learned to lie, avoid arguments he couldn’t win and support money junkies when he was head fag at the charity known as Eton.
    He has never had a real job (PR is not a real job- but suited his propensity to lie). ISIS is the end result of US disastrous foreign policy in the region since the 90s. Our joining the bombing of innocent civilians will not make a jot of difference. History has taught the west
    nothing. You cannot defeat terrorism from the air. Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc show that Might, Shock and Awe do not win the hearts and minds of those being bombed.

  4. John

    I think his remarks were downright disgraceful. He will, more than likely win the vote tonight, but TBH, as other poster above has stated, Camoron probably doesn’t care what people think. He’s ‘retiring’ in 4 years anyway. He doesn’t give a toss.

  5. Tim

    This is Cameron all over. I remember the prat backing the idea to evict whole families from Council Houses if one member of said family, living in said accommodation, participated in the London riots irrespective of the fact that every other member of the family was law abiding and innocent. When my girlfriend heard this she said only two words: “Vengeful Prince”. When Cameron’s blood is up he just wants to inflict harm on those who have earned his wrath, oblivious to how much hurt and misery ends up being done to the blameless and the harmless. The man is no statesman and has no class. Bombing ISIL where dozens of innocents end up killed and maimed for every terrorist thug sent to Allah for judgement seems more like some sort of Mephistophelian pact more worthy of Faust than an agreement or memorandum signed by any British Prime Minister in respect to the use of deadly force in the field of conflict.

  6. Tim

    I think she was thinking more along the lines of Cameron being a spiteful and petty Satanic Prince of Lies than insinuating membership of some kind of nobility of some kind – or whatever!

Comments are closed.