I'm a bit surprised, John, that in so valiantly defending Ed Davey over the Post Office, you don't tell your almost 300,000 followers that you're currently trying to become a Lib Dem MP. How did the hustings for the Hamble Valley seat go last Wednesday? Quite well, I hear.
Isam laid me £100 at 3/1 Starmer to be PM after the GE. No dispute on this.
The proposal is that this be netted against something Isam has going with RCS such that I will collect the £300 from RCS if the bet wins (which looks likely but you never know).
In August last year I suggested we either void it or you sort something out with Robert, and you replied
“Happy whatever, I mean. We can keep it or we can void it. Your suggestion is also fine by me if it's fine by rcs.“
So why would you think, five months later, that I’d think we were still on?? You agreed with both of my suggestions
That is not accurate.
Here's you on a September thread posting about how you've done a 'bad' 3/1 lay of SKS PM post-GE. Why would you do that if you'd got yourself out of it?
The fact is nobody replied to me in August. You didn't. RCS didn't. It was left hanging. There was no agreement to do anything. Hence why I'd like it resolved now. My preference in order is as follows:
1. Our bet stands as we struck it. That's the norm after all. 2. RCS takes the bet from you. But he needs to confirm that. 3. We forget it and I let you off.
If it's (3) I'd be agreeing to cancel a bet that looks almost certain to be a £300 winner. There needs to be a good reason for that.
This is complete madness. You literally said you were happy to void it.
I suggested two options and you said you were happy to do either. I didn’t say anything more because I was leaving it to you and Robert to sort out, you having agreed to what I had suggested
I mentioned it as a self deprecating joke, because I did lay 3/1 Sir Keir to be PM after the GE, and @Peter_the_Punter had been calling me a useless bettor. But you had agreed to either void it or sort it out with Robert
Yes, laid to me!
That isn't at all a reasonable interpretation of where the email exchange left things. You didn't reply to me. RCS made no comment at all. It was left hanging. There was nothing agreed. Hence the need to resolve it now.
Let's assume a misunderstanding (it happens) and start again with the presumption of good faith on all sides.
We did the bet. That's agreed.
You propose it is transferred from you to @rcs1000 (because of some outstandings the two of you have, the details of which I don't have knowledge of).
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
Isn't that the same with postal votes in the UK?
Its the same as all votes. If you put your ballot in the ballot box on election day, then drop dead right there and then, or get hit by a bus after leaving the polling station, they don't fish your ballot back out. Once you've voted, you've voted.
One of my worst canvassing moments was knocking up on polling day, when an elderly lady answered the door remarkably quickly.
"Good afternoon!" I exclaimed cheerily. "Have you and Mr Smith had a chance to pop down to the polling station yet to vote and, if not, might we offer you a lift?"
I didn't notice until a moment too late that I'd basically been followed into the driveway by a black "private ambulance". She'd been waiting for a lift for her husband, alright, but not to the polling station.
"Do you know if he used his postal vote?"
Bloke knocks on a door and a distraught lady appears, tears streaming down her face.
"Is Mr Jones in?"
"He's dead," ... sob ... sob ... "he was alright at breakfast then he just died in front of me" ... sob ... sob.
"Oh, I'm terribly sorry to hear that" ... [Long pause] ... "Did he mention a lawnmower?"
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
Isam laid me £100 at 3/1 Starmer to be PM after the GE. No dispute on this.
The proposal is that this be netted against something Isam has going with RCS such that I will collect the £300 from RCS if the bet wins (which looks likely but you never know).
This is why I don't accept bets here. I know Betfair can be a pain on occasion, but the rules are usually quite clear. Here you're taking pseudonymous posters on trust, and assuming that you're of the same mind on what you've agreed.
Not for me.
That's a pretty shitty view of the people you spend a good amount of your day with.
I trust everyone here. I have had (and lost) a bet with @isam and all was paid and I had no doubt he would have paid had I won.
I've never bet with @kinabalu but have no doubt if we were to bet he would pay me (it goes without saying that I would win whatever bet we struck).
Oh I trust most everyone here - but I also trust them to disagree at pretty well every opportunity, and to be convinced that they are right (as I usually am).
Quibbling over the terms of a bet with no independent arbiter ?
Not for me. YMMV
May I propose, that current intra-PB betting brouhaha, be referred to the brand-new King Fred of Denmark for his royal arbitration?
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
If people vote and then he passes away, a la Horace Greeley, will it be worth it?
Probably NOT for DJT. He being somewhat less public spirited than HG.
Possibly also not for the planet, given his running mate would potentially become POTUS instead and is likely to be someone even madder than he is.
Do we have any markets? His daughter might be a candidate, or Kari Lake.
Rubio endorsed Trump today for no obvious reason. Rubio is a Florida Senator so may also have heard DeSantis will pull out this week. I try not to get involved in betting on VP picks because usually it is someone from left field.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
Isn't that the same with postal votes in the UK?
Its the same as all votes. If you put your ballot in the ballot box on election day, then drop dead right there and then, or get hit by a bus after leaving the polling station, they don't fish your ballot back out. Once you've voted, you've voted.
One of my worst canvassing moments was knocking up on polling day, when an elderly lady answered the door remarkably quickly.
"Good afternoon!" I exclaimed cheerily. "Have you and Mr Smith had a chance to pop down to the polling station yet to vote and, if not, might we offer you a lift?"
I didn't notice until a moment too late that I'd basically been followed into the driveway by a black "private ambulance". She'd been waiting for a lift for her husband, alright, but not to the polling station.
"Do you know if he used his postal vote?"
Bloke knocks on a door and a distraught lady appears, tears streaming down her face.
"Is Mr Jones in?"
"He's dead," ... sob ... sob ... "he was alright at breakfast then he just died in front of me" ... sob ... sob.
"Oh, I'm terribly sorry to hear that" ... [Long pause] ... "Did he mention a lawnmower?"
Are Americans wimps? Some are, some aren't. And many of us are wimps if the weather is not what we became accustomed to, growing up. I grew up on the east side of the Cascades so cold weather is no big deal for me. But I don't do very well in hot and humid places.
And I have good cold weather gear, thanks to cross country skiing.
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
Isn't that the same with postal votes in the UK?
Its the same as all votes. If you put your ballot in the ballot box on election day, then drop dead right there and then, or get hit by a bus after leaving the polling station, they don't fish your ballot back out. Once you've voted, you've voted.
One of my worst canvassing moments was knocking up on polling day, when an elderly lady answered the door remarkably quickly.
"Good afternoon!" I exclaimed cheerily. "Have you and Mr Smith had a chance to pop down to the polling station yet to vote and, if not, might we offer you a lift?"
I didn't notice until a moment too late that I'd basically been followed into the driveway by a black "private ambulance". She'd been waiting for a lift for her husband, alright, but not to the polling station.
"Do you know if he used his postal vote?"
Bloke knocks on a door and a distraught lady appears, tears streaming down her face.
"Is Mr Jones in?"
"He's dead," ... sob ... sob ... "he was alright at breakfast then he just died in front of me" ... sob ... sob.
"Oh, I'm terribly sorry to hear that" ... [Long pause] ... "Did he mention a lawnmower?"
NEW: The Home Secretary retweeted a post by David Bannerman calling on MPs to "show the guts and good sense of Andrea Jenkyns" and send in letters of no confidence in Rishi Sunak. He has since un-retweeted the post
Huge if true, as the saying goes.
Yes, indeed.
Anyone suggesting Jenkyns has good sense clearly has to resign due to lack of mental capacity.
He was great as FS, what a disaster he's been since.
Several politicians have been good ministers in one department then crashed and burned in another. Maybe it's no surprise: foreign affairs is a very different portfolio from home office involving very different skills.
Wouldn't it be nice if senior politicians had technical and subject matter specialisms that meant they remained in a particular department or set of departments throughout their careers and didn't forever get reshuffled or promoted into completely unrelated departments?
Imagine for example someone who spent their whole career with the Education or Health portfolio (or shadow portfolio), and actually knew what they were talking about as a result. And aspired to the top job but that top job being cabinet minister, in the same way a research scientist in pharma aspires to being global head of R&D not CEO. It wouldn't guarantee competence of course but you'd get greater productivity and fewer handovers.
Cameron's government was one of the better we've had in a very long time, in no small part due to his lack of reshuffles. People were allowed time to develop in their posts.
Unfortunately it also meant people who were terrible were not moved on though.
Some of us did try to point out that Theresa May's six years at the Home Office meant only that Cameron hated reshuffles.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The counterargument is that Lee clearly wants the martyrdom, much like Suella did.
But yes, Rishi will look even more pathetic if he doesn't sack him.
Cleverly's high wire act at the Home Office following Suella's suggests even the incumbents think the Home Office's Rwanda plan won't stop the small boats. Rishi's problem might not be sacking a popular Home Secretary but finding a replacement to accept this poisoned chalice.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Dirty tricks on social media? Who'd have thunk it?
It is simply irrelevant
Those of us living in Wales do not need English help in seeing this policy reviewed, and even Drakeford's successors, the local authorities, transport bosses and local communities will see changes that will make the policy work but should have been done from the start
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
> Mareena Dewaard, left [in picture] and Ellison Smith, both 17, helped set up on Monday at the Horizon Events Center, in Clive, Iowa. (The center is home to three caucus precincts.) As they worked, they chatted about sending each other TikTok videos, their dreams the night before and where they would shop for a prom dress later in the day. When asked if they’d return to watch the caucuses, they paused, looked at each other and said no.
SSI - Clive is suburb of Des Moines; precincts referenced are Polk County Clive 1, 3 and 4.
Dirty tricks on social media? Who'd have thunk it?
It is simply irrelevant
Those of us living in Wales do not need English help in seeing this policy reviewed, and even Drakeford's successors, the local authorities, transport bosses and local communities will see changes that will make the policy work but should have been done from the start
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
Sky’s Jon Craig caught Simon Hart and Lee Anderson having a cosy chat on camera just now in Central Lobby… sources suggest senior Tories - including Lee Anderson - have been told they can back amendments without being sacked.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Isam laid me £100 at 3/1 Starmer to be PM after the GE. No dispute on this.
The proposal is that this be netted against something Isam has going with RCS such that I will collect the £300 from RCS if the bet wins (which looks likely but you never know).
In August last year I suggested we either void it or you sort something out with Robert, and you replied
“Happy whatever, I mean. We can keep it or we can void it. Your suggestion is also fine by me if it's fine by rcs.“
So why would you think, five months later, that I’d think we were still on?? You agreed with both of my suggestions
That is not accurate.
Here's you on a September thread posting about how you've done a 'bad' 3/1 lay of SKS PM post-GE. Why would you do that if you'd got yourself out of it?
The fact is nobody replied to me in August. You didn't. RCS didn't. It was left hanging. There was no agreement to do anything. Hence why I'd like it resolved now. My preference in order is as follows:
1. Our bet stands as we struck it. That's the norm after all. 2. RCS takes the bet from you. But he needs to confirm that. 3. We forget it and I let you off.
If it's (3) I'd be agreeing to cancel a bet that looks almost certain to be a £300 winner. There needs to be a good reason for that.
This is complete madness. You literally said you were happy to void it.
I suggested two options and you said you were happy to do either. I didn’t say anything more because I was leaving it to you and Robert to sort out, you having agreed to what I had suggested
I mentioned it as a self deprecating joke, because I did lay 3/1 Sir Keir to be PM after the GE, and @Peter_the_Punter had been calling me a useless bettor. But you had agreed to either void it or sort it out with Robert
Yes, laid to me!
That isn't at all a reasonable interpretation of where the email exchange left things. You didn't reply to me. RCS made no comment at all. It was left hanging. There was nothing agreed. Hence the need to resolve it now.
Let's assume a misunderstanding (it happens) and start again with the presumption of good faith on all sides.
We did the bet. That's agreed.
You propose it is transferred from you to @rcs1000 (because of some outstandings the two of you have, the details of which I don't have knowledge of).
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
We should be careful here, might be dangerous to make any changes too quickly.
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
So in essence, likely outcome is 20mph EXCEPT where residents really do NOT want it. Whereas previously, was 20mph ONLY where residents demanded it.
Which ain't saying you, or the Drake, were right or wrong or in-between. Last time I drove in Wales was 2004!
There's a world of difference between having 20mph at schools and 20mph everywhere.
Oh yes, and how are the children supposed to get home without being run over? You admit schools need 20mph: that means 20mph everywhere in residential areas.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
Guess what, even the worst of humanity deserve legal representation.
But PBers will have noticed your Islamophobia.
How do you sleep at night, working for an organisation that helped prosecute the innocent?
I'm rationally afraid of Islamism
I think that your third line might be the very stupidest collection of words that I've ever seen on this blog
Nah, the stupidest collection of words on this blog were comments going off to Ukraine to fight against the Russians.
That was truly special.
Fair enough, that was pretty stupid of me, but it was beer and desperation talking
What's your excuse?
What possible reason could you have for thinking that Royal Mail posties should be wracked with guilt?
Lawyers are far more to blame than us
Well you seem the blame lawyers for who their clients are, so by that logic I am blaming you for working for an organisation that was in charge when the whole wretched subpostmaster business began.
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
We should be careful here, might be dangerous to make any changes too quickly.
I would just comment that the reviews will take place 6 months after the implementation and is accepted even by those who implemented it
Sky’s Jon Craig caught Simon Hart and Lee Anderson having a cosy chat on camera just now in Central Lobby… sources suggest senior Tories - including Lee Anderson - have been told they can back amendments without being sacked.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
No. No nuance allowed. Either
1) you support slowing all traffic including police, fire service and ambulances to 20mph everywhere, killing everyone in a fire or in an ambulance of about to be murdered.
Or
2) you believe in a mandatory 1.2 x light speed on all roads. Said roads to be paved with small children.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
There has never been a more unpopular measure in Wales and the anger is palpable, so much so Drakeford's successors have promised to review the implementation as have the LA'S
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
And been against a 20mph zone for a particular purpose in a particular area does not mean you cannot think blanket ones are horrendously bad ideas.
There is support for 20mph zones in Wales around schools and elsewhere but simply not the way Drakeford has done it
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
So in essence, likely outcome is 20mph EXCEPT where residents really do NOT want it. Whereas previously, was 20mph ONLY where residents demanded it.
Which ain't saying you, or the Drake, were right or wrong or in-between. Last time I drove in Wales was 2004!
Drakeford's implementation was wrong and has led to the outcry which hopefully will see a revision that irons out some of the anomalies and addresses the anger
I have witnessed long queues behind 20mph drivers with terrible tailgating and even more dangerous overtaking
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
If people vote and then he passes away, a la Horace Greeley, will it be worth it?
Probably NOT for DJT. He being somewhat less public spirited than HG.
Possibly also not for the planet, given his running mate would potentially become POTUS instead and is likely to be someone even madder than he is.
Do we have any markets? His daughter might be a candidate, or Kari Lake.
Rubio endorsed Trump today for no obvious reason. Rubio is a Florida Senator so may also have heard DeSantis will pull out this week. I try not to get involved in betting on VP picks because usually it is someone from left field.
Yesterday. Does anyone - apart from Rubio, and possibly DeSantis - care ?
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
Guess what, even the worst of humanity deserve legal representation.
But PBers will have noticed your Islamophobia.
How do you sleep at night, working for an organisation that helped prosecute the innocent?
I'm rationally afraid of Islamism
I think that your third line might be the very stupidest collection of words that I've ever seen on this blog
Nah, the stupidest collection of words on this blog were comments going off to Ukraine to fight against the Russians.
That was truly special.
Fair enough, that was pretty stupid of me, but it was beer and desperation talking
What's your excuse?
What possible reason could you have for thinking that Royal Mail posties should be wracked with guilt?
Lawyers are far more to blame than us
Well you seem the blame lawyers for who their clients are, so by that logic I am blaming you for working for an organisation that was in charge when the whole wretched subpostmaster business began.
Why does a jew hating American Islamist have a human right to visit the UK?
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I am not supporting anyone, just asking a straightforward question on the limits of free speech and in what way has this group violated them.
Apropos of not much…what examples can PBers give of that policies/ideas that they agree with coming from individuals or groups that you fundamentally disagree with politically?
For me: - Trump on NATO spending. He had a very good point. - Brexiters on the cultural dislocation caused by rapid immigration to a particular area, and the fact that this falls disproportionately on poorer people. - Right-wingers on the need for strong independent defence (this is a relatively new one for me, prompted by Ukraine)
There's a world of difference between having 20mph at schools and 20mph everywhere.
Oh yes, and how are the children supposed to get home without being run over? You admit schools need 20mph: that means 20mph everywhere in residential areas.
No it bloody well does not.
Kids go home plenty of ways. Via their parents picking them up, via buses, walking on footpaths etc
Outside schools however you get hundreds of pupils stepping out at the same time, whether they're walking home or walking to their parents car or bus stop or wherever, which inevitably results in pupils walking on the road rather than the footpath.
Within hundreds of metres from the school, the crowds have dispersed and people can and do walk on the footpath.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I am not supporting anyone, just asking a straightforward question on the limits of free speech and in what way has this group violated them.
I'm very much on the liberal side of the debate as it can be very tricky to know where to draw the line. But, the police seem to think the threshold is things like football shirts with "97 not enough" on them. The police are also looking for the Coventry fans who were nasty to Leicester City on Saturday.
Actually a reasonable summation of election law(s) across USA.
For example, if you are a registered voter in WA State, and return your voted ballot (with required signature) the next day . . . then get run over by a bus the following morning . . . your vote remains valid (provided your signature matches one on file) and your vote will be counted.
Bit of a problem however, IF there is (or rather was?) signature mismatch OR you forgot to sign.
If people vote and then he passes away, a la Horace Greeley, will it be worth it?
Probably NOT for DJT. He being somewhat less public spirited than HG.
Possibly also not for the planet, given his running mate would potentially become POTUS instead and is likely to be someone even madder than he is.
Do we have any markets? His daughter might be a candidate, or Kari Lake.
Rubio endorsed Trump today for no obvious reason. Rubio is a Florida Senator so may also have heard DeSantis will pull out this week. I try not to get involved in betting on VP picks because usually it is someone from left field.
Reason almost certainly to do with internal Florida GOP political infighting.
Apropos of not much…what examples can PBers give of that policies/ideas that they agree with coming from individuals or groups that you fundamentally disagree with politically?
For me: - Trump on NATO spending. He had a very good point. - Brexiters on the cultural dislocation caused by rapid immigration to a particular area, and the fact that this falls disproportionately on poorer people. - Right-wingers on the need for strong independent defence (this is a relatively new one for me, prompted by Ukraine)
Brexit: a referendum was required. Labour Lib Dems: the tax take needs to increase. Labour / Lib Dems: there is no more room for austerity. J94's are useful, though. and finally: Corbyn: manhole covers are fascinating. Even a cricketer's...
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I am not supporting anyone, just asking a straightforward question on the limits of free speech and in what way has this group violated them.
I'm very much on the liberal side of the debate as it can be very tricky to know where to draw the line. But, the police seem to think the threshold is things like football shirts with "97 not enough" on them. The police are also looking for the Coventry fans who were nasty to Leicester City on Saturday.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
Guess what, even the worst of humanity deserve legal representation.
But PBers will have noticed your Islamophobia.
How do you sleep at night, working for an organisation that helped prosecute the innocent?
I'm rationally afraid of Islamism
I think that your third line might be the very stupidest collection of words that I've ever seen on this blog
Nah, the stupidest collection of words on this blog were comments going off to Ukraine to fight against the Russians.
That was truly special.
Fair enough, that was pretty stupid of me, but it was beer and desperation talking
What's your excuse?
What possible reason could you have for thinking that Royal Mail posties should be wracked with guilt?
Lawyers are far more to blame than us
Well you seem the blame lawyers for who their clients are, so by that logic I am blaming you for working for an organisation that was in charge when the whole wretched subpostmaster business began.
Why does a jew hating American Islamist have a human right to visit the UK?
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
Corbynism isn't dead, even in 2019 32% of UK voters voted for him and in their guts most lefties would prefer PM Corbyn to PM Starmer.
Just after Corbyn's heavy defeat in 2019 they realised they had to compromise with the electorate and elect a boring, competent centrist like Starmer as Labour leader
NYT live blog - Dean Soenksen, a member of the Linn County Republican Party central committee, said he had expected a high turnout for the caucuses because of the competitiveness of the candidates. But “the weather has us all wondering,” Mr. Soenksen, 60, a semi-retired truck driver from Cedar Rapids, Iowa, added. “As the weather forecast has gotten colder, some of those numbers were revised down.”
Isam laid me £100 at 3/1 Starmer to be PM after the GE. No dispute on this.
The proposal is that this be netted against something Isam has going with RCS such that I will collect the £300 from RCS if the bet wins (which looks likely but you never know).
In August last year I suggested we either void it or you sort something out with Robert, and you replied
“Happy whatever, I mean. We can keep it or we can void it. Your suggestion is also fine by me if it's fine by rcs.“
So why would you think, five months later, that I’d think we were still on?? You agreed with both of my suggestions
That is not accurate.
Here's you on a September thread posting about how you've done a 'bad' 3/1 lay of SKS PM post-GE. Why would you do that if you'd got yourself out of it?
The fact is nobody replied to me in August. You didn't. RCS didn't. It was left hanging. There was no agreement to do anything. Hence why I'd like it resolved now. My preference in order is as follows:
1. Our bet stands as we struck it. That's the norm after all. 2. RCS takes the bet from you. But he needs to confirm that. 3. We forget it and I let you off.
If it's (3) I'd be agreeing to cancel a bet that looks almost certain to be a £300 winner. There needs to be a good reason for that.
This is complete madness. You literally said you were happy to void it.
I suggested two options and you said you were happy to do either. I didn’t say anything more because I was leaving it to you and Robert to sort out, you having agreed to what I had suggested
I mentioned it as a self deprecating joke, because I did lay 3/1 Sir Keir to be PM after the GE, and @Peter_the_Punter had been calling me a useless bettor. But you had agreed to either void it or sort it out with Robert
Yes, laid to me!
That isn't at all a reasonable interpretation of where the email exchange left things. You didn't reply to me. RCS made no comment at all. It was left hanging. There was nothing agreed. Hence the need to resolve it now.
Let's assume a misunderstanding (it happens) and start again with the presumption of good faith on all sides.
We did the bet. That's agreed.
You propose it is transferred from you to @rcs1000 (because of some outstandings the two of you have, the details of which I don't have knowledge of).
We await his input before continuing.
You said you were happy to void it. What on earth makes you think I wasn’t happy to, seeing as I suggested it? If Sir Keir had dropped dead, or been sacked, do you really think I’d have asked for the £100??!
In fact our situation is similar to that between Robert and myself; I wanted to void that bet because I was banned from the site, outrageously unfairly in my view, and didn’t want to be in the situation of being unable to post, liable for bets and easily able to be knocked. He said our bet stood, and if I refused to pay that was my choice. I said it’s void. We never spoke about it again. As it happens, I will win that bet, but I’m not going to ask for the money, and it’s a lot more than £300, because I understood it to be void, despite Robert never saying ‘Happy to void’ as you did
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Free speech is only okay as long as it agrees with me latest
I want the law followed
Nobody has freedom to incite violence with their speech
That is explicitly prohibited
Hizb ut-Tahrir "views Jihad as an essential aspect of its vision and considers it an imperative duty aimed at combating disbelief until all submit to Islamic rule, making no distinction between the violent and spiritual dimensions of Jihad"
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
Guess what, even the worst of humanity deserve legal representation.
But PBers will have noticed your Islamophobia.
How do you sleep at night, working for an organisation that helped prosecute the innocent?
I'm rationally afraid of Islamism
I think that your third line might be the very stupidest collection of words that I've ever seen on this blog
Nah, the stupidest collection of words on this blog were comments going off to Ukraine to fight against the Russians.
That was truly special.
Fair enough, that was pretty stupid of me, but it was beer and desperation talking
What's your excuse?
What possible reason could you have for thinking that Royal Mail posties should be wracked with guilt?
Lawyers are far more to blame than us
Well you seem the blame lawyers for who their clients are, so by that logic I am blaming you for working for an organisation that was in charge when the whole wretched subpostmaster business began.
Why does a jew hating American Islamist have a human right to visit the UK?
Why does he need a human rights lawyer?
Sir Keir defending the proscribed terrorism group wasn’t due to the cab rank rule apparently. It was in Berlin, & he chose to do so
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I am not supporting anyone, just asking a straightforward question on the limits of free speech and in what way has this group violated them.
What are your definitions?
"Previously Hizb ut-Tahrir, which Tony Blair and David Cameron tried to ban when they were in Downing Street, has made calls to “wipe out that Zionist entity” and referred to “the monstrous Jews”." (2)
"In October, the group’s members attended a rally outside the Egyptian and Turkish embassies in London and called for “Muslim armies” to attack Israel." (2)
I might suggest that HuT are a hideously nasty group that stand against everything you, as a 'lefty', should stand for. But apparently not.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT; Arabic: حزب التحرير, romanized: Ḥizb at-Taḥrīr, lit. 'Party of Liberation') is an international pan-Islamist and Islamic fundamentalist political organization whose stated aim is the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate to unite the Muslim community (called ummah)[3] and implement sharia globally" (1)
AP (via Seattle Times) - ‘The world is counting on Iowa,’ Kari Lake says
FORT DODGE — Dozens of Trump supporters are gathered at the Shiny Top Brewery to get up close and personal with some of the former president’s best-known endorsers, including Reps. Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene, as well as U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake of Arizona.
“I want to tell you how much the world is counting on Iowa tonight,” Lake told the crowd. She added: “What you’re going to do tonight is you’re going to help save this world.”
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
Corbynism isn't dead, even in 2019 32% of UK voters voted for him and in their guts most lefties would prefer PM Corbyn to PM Starmer.
Just after Corbyn's heavy defeat in 2019 they realised they had to compromise with the electorate and elect a boring, competent centrist like Starmer as Labour leader
I see The Absolute Boy has been over the airwaves today criticising Britain and lauding our enemies.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
What does jihad mean to you?
Struggle.
Do you separate the spiritual and violent sides?
The boys down at Hizb ut-Tahrir don't
That's not what they say:
"Hizb ut-Tahrir has a record of over 70 years of following a method of non-violent political activity against despots who rule the Muslim world with the West’s approval. In its work to establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate), Hizb ut-Tahrir has never resorted to any sort of violence or armed struggle."
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
Corbynism isn't dead, even in 2019 32% of UK voters voted for him and in their guts most lefties would prefer PM Corbyn to PM Starmer.
Just after Corbyn's heavy defeat in 2019 they realised they had to compromise with the electorate and elect a boring, competent centrist like Starmer as Labour leader
I see The Absolute Boy has been over the airwaves today criticising Britain and lauding our enemies.
Oh, Jeremy Corbyn.
"With friends like these, who needs Yemenis?" - Boris writing in the FT, 2017.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I am not supporting anyone, just asking a straightforward question on the limits of free speech and in what way has this group violated them.
What are your definitions?
"Previously Hizb ut-Tahrir, which Tony Blair and David Cameron tried to ban when they were in Downing Street, has made calls to “wipe out that Zionist entity” and referred to “the monstrous Jews”." (2)
"In October, the group’s members attended a rally outside the Egyptian and Turkish embassies in London and called for “Muslim armies” to attack Israel." (2)
I might suggest that HuT are a hideously nasty group that stand against everything you, as a 'lefty', should stand for. But apparently not.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT; Arabic: حزب التحرير, romanized: Ḥizb at-Taḥrīr, lit. 'Party of Liberation') is an international pan-Islamist and Islamic fundamentalist political organization whose stated aim is the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate to unite the Muslim community (called ummah)[3] and implement sharia globally" (1)
I am not a supporter of them, obviously! Indeed I oppose pretty much all of their policies.
But I dislike the government deciding what are acceptable beliefs. I don't think we should outlaw people who call for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza (as a number of posters have here) either.
Apropos of not much…what examples can PBers give of that policies/ideas that they agree with coming from individuals or groups that you fundamentally disagree with politically?
For me: - Trump on NATO spending. He had a very good point. - Brexiters on the cultural dislocation caused by rapid immigration to a particular area, and the fact that this falls disproportionately on poorer people. - Right-wingers on the need for strong independent defence (this is a relatively new one for me, prompted by Ukraine)
Right-wingers on defence? Have you not followed my series on four decades of Tory defence cuts?
But to answer your question:-
Liz Truss on the need for growth. (Coincidentally I'm reading Cole & Heale's book about her.) Donald Trump on not starting new Middle East wars (heaven knows they've got enough already) and the threat from China.
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
What does jihad mean to you?
Struggle.
Do you separate the spiritual and violent sides?
The boys down at Hizb ut-Tahrir don't
That's not what they say:
"Hizb ut-Tahrir has a record of over 70 years of following a method of non-violent political activity against despots who rule the Muslim world with the West’s approval. In its work to establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate), Hizb ut-Tahrir has never resorted to any sort of violence or armed struggle."
... thousands of Muslims marched to the Egyptian, Saudi and Syrian embassies in London demanding that Arab armies move to defend Gaza. This was a second weekend of demonstrations organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir/ Britain.
... send their armies ...
The protesters made two demands 1) that the armies in the Muslim countries move to defend their brothers and sisters in Gaza immediately 2) that the treacherous Muslim rulers be removed and replaced by a Khalifah who will release the armies to liberate Palestine. Protesters were told to campaign relentlessly for these demands.
Protesters held banners and chanted slogans including ‘Arab Dictators collude with Israeli terrorism', ‘Muslim Armies must defend Gaza', 'Arab-Muslim rulers are traitors', ‘Only the Khilafah "Caliphate" will liberate Gaza' and ‘Armies end the occupation, Jihad is your obligation'.
Funny definition of peaceful, calling for armies to invade.
That's just one quick Google search, plenty more incitement of violence like that comes up when searching.
If KS had stood in 2015, it's quite possible we'd have him as PM now. What a disgrace it was for me to have voted for Corbyn twice.
Burnham stood in 2015, backed by Starmer and had be beaten Corbyn for the Labour leadership he could well have beaten May at the 2017 general election and won most seats in a hung parliament or even a small Labour majority
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
What does jihad mean to you?
Struggle.
Do you separate the spiritual and violent sides?
The boys down at Hizb ut-Tahrir don't
That's not what they say:
"Hizb ut-Tahrir has a record of over 70 years of following a method of non-violent political activity against despots who rule the Muslim world with the West’s approval. In its work to establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate), Hizb ut-Tahrir has never resorted to any sort of violence or armed struggle."
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
What does jihad mean to you?
Struggle.
Do you separate the spiritual and violent sides?
The boys down at Hizb ut-Tahrir don't
That's not what they say:
"Hizb ut-Tahrir has a record of over 70 years of following a method of non-violent political activity against despots who rule the Muslim world with the West’s approval. In its work to establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate), Hizb ut-Tahrir has never resorted to any sort of violence or armed struggle."
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
The same Hizb ut-Tahrir that was due to be proscribed by the Blair and Cameron governments who announced it but did not follow up.
Sounds like Starmers fault to me.
Funny you should say that, he represented them in court when they were proscribed in Germany
Starmer acted for extremist Islamist group in bid to overturn ban Labour leader applied to European Court of Human Rights to reverse Germany's prohibition of Hizb ut-Tahrir
I guess you ony want representation for people you like/agree with?
I bet you would have argued against representation for the subpostmasters, the Birmingham Six, and Stefan Kizko.
His cab was always conveniently ready to give Islamist groups a lift
Is there a Halal cab queue?
Almost like a top human rights lawyer gets hired in human rights cases.
But are all these 'halal' sic?
Neat how your list concludes by bringing us back to Hizb ut-Tahrir
I appreciate HuT are Islamist, and may well be anti-semitic, but have they ever been involved in terrorism?
Encouraging jihad is their big thing
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
What do you think the limits to free speech should be? And which have they broken?
We're seeing some really odd behaviour from PB lefties on here today. Strong support for Houtis blowing up ships in the Red Sea, and now support for groups that encourage Jihad.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
Corbynism isn't dead, even in 2019 32% of UK voters voted for him and in their guts most lefties would prefer PM Corbyn to PM Starmer.
Just after Corbyn's heavy defeat in 2019 they realised they had to compromise with the electorate and elect a boring, competent centrist like Starmer as Labour leader
Corbynism in its most virulent form likely is. For a time Corbyn gained the support of the generally left-wing and not just the far left. That had arguably already unwound by 2019 - when Brexit and the choice with Johnson kept more onside than otherwise might have been the case. While Labour MPs won't make their 2015 mistake and let someone they think is crackers on the ballot.
I'd note even in the Young Labour elections (a small sample size) - which used to be a Corbynite walkover, the centrists are winning.
There will always be a left though, just an impotent shouty bit that wants to go on marches, and one inside Labour that realises that if it wants left-wing policies in Britain, it needs to find leaders without the deeply flawed worldview that so often led him to look like he wanted to side with those who wanted to do us harm.
AP (via Seattle Times) - ‘The world is counting on Iowa,’ Kari Lake says
FORT DODGE — Dozens of Trump supporters are gathered at the Shiny Top Brewery to get up close and personal with some of the former president’s best-known endorsers, including Reps. Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene, as well as U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake of Arizona.
“I want to tell you how much the world is counting on Iowa tonight,” Lake told the crowd. She added: “What you’re going to do tonight is you’re going to help save this world.”
Comments
That isn't at all a reasonable interpretation of where the email exchange left things. You didn't reply to me. RCS made no comment at all. It was left hanging. There was nothing agreed. Hence the need to resolve it now.
Let's assume a misunderstanding (it happens) and start again with the presumption of good faith on all sides.
We did the bet. That's agreed.
You propose it is transferred from you to @rcs1000 (because of some outstandings the two of you have, the details of which I don't have knowledge of).
We await his input before continuing.
Also, is Deputy Chairman a government position ?
"Is Mr Jones in?"
"He's dead," ... sob ... sob ... "he was alright at breakfast then he just died in front of me" ... sob ... sob.
"Oh, I'm terribly sorry to hear that" ... [Long pause] ... "Did he mention a lawnmower?"
Is there a Halal cab queue?
The truth is a good policy has been badly implemented even resulting in a village completely loosing its bus service
Talk to those of us who live in Wales and interact with our neighbours and acquaintances and you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who supports the blanket reduction from 30mph to 20mph
As his Queen Mary might say, fair dinkum!
But are all these 'halal' sic?
https://youtu.be/ZOHdcnNgR64?si=od3wTll20r82Dw9E
But PBers will have noticed your Islamophobia.
How do you sleep at night, working for an organisation that helped prosecute the innocent?
I think that your third line might be the very stupidest collection of words that I've ever seen on this blog
That was truly special.
Those of us living in Wales do not need English help in seeing this policy reviewed, and even Drakeford's successors, the local authorities, transport bosses and local communities will see changes that will make the policy work but should have been done from the start
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/01/15/us/iowa-caucus-election-news
> Mareena Dewaard, left [in picture] and Ellison Smith, both 17, helped set up on Monday at the Horizon Events Center, in Clive, Iowa. (The center is home to three caucus precincts.) As they worked, they chatted about sending each other TikTok videos, their dreams the night before and where they would shop for a prom dress later in the day. When asked if they’d return to watch the caucuses, they paused, looked at each other and said no.
SSI - Clive is suburb of Des Moines; precincts referenced are Polk County Clive 1, 3 and 4.
Even he is expressing concerns and accepting changes are needed
Sky’s Jon Craig caught Simon Hart and Lee Anderson having a cosy chat on camera just now in Central Lobby… sources suggest senior Tories - including Lee Anderson - have been told they can back amendments without being sacked.
https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1746963606804086900
What's your excuse?
What possible reason could you have for thinking that Royal Mail posties should be wracked with guilt?
Lawyers are far more to blame than us
There's a world of difference between having 20mph at schools and 20mph everywhere.
EXC: SNP ministers are planning to reduce the number of university places for Scottish students to offset budget cuts, documents suggest
Line buried in excel sheet says "additional savings to be made...including from reducing first year university places"
https://twitter.com/KieranPAndrews/status/1746943742936850943
Which ain't saying you, or the Drake, were right or wrong or in-between. Last time I drove in Wales was 2004!
Trouble ahead?
Deputy chair of the Tory party, Lee Anderson, says he's backing amendments to harden up Rishi Sunak's Rwanda bill.
Asked by reporters if whips have told him he can still keep his job, he says: "No, I haven't been told that".
Allies believe he's more likely to jump before he's pushed.
https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/1746968880721822204?s=20
They may not have blown themselves up, but they must share responsibility for many hundreds of terrorist attacks around the globe
1) you support slowing all traffic including police, fire service and ambulances to 20mph everywhere, killing everyone in a fire or in an ambulance of about to be murdered.
Or
2) you believe in a mandatory 1.2 x light speed on all roads. Said roads to be paved with small children.
I guess Corbynism isn't dead...
I have witnessed long queues behind 20mph drivers with terrible tailgating and even more dangerous overtaking
Does anyone - apart from Rubio, and possibly DeSantis - care ?
I don’t think “Little Marco” is going to be VP.
Why does he need a human rights lawyer?
For me:
- Trump on NATO spending. He had a very good point.
- Brexiters on the cultural dislocation caused by rapid immigration to a particular area, and the fact that this falls disproportionately on poorer people.
- Right-wingers on the need for strong independent defence (this is a relatively new one for me, prompted by Ukraine)
https://x.com/themummuslim/status/1746869918983692529
Kids go home plenty of ways. Via their parents picking them up, via buses, walking on footpaths etc
Outside schools however you get hundreds of pupils stepping out at the same time, whether they're walking home or walking to their parents car or bus stop or wherever, which inevitably results in pupils walking on the road rather than the footpath.
Within hundreds of metres from the school, the crowds have dispersed and people can and do walk on the footpath.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/jan/13/police-remove-banners-on-m69-motorway-mocking-srivaddhanaprabha-helicopter-crash-leicester-coventry
Swamp-fest that appalls even the alligators.
Labour Lib Dems: the tax take needs to increase.
Labour / Lib Dems: there is no more room for austerity. J94's are useful, though.
and finally:
Corbyn: manhole covers are fascinating. Even a cricketer's...
Just after Corbyn's heavy defeat in 2019 they realised they had to compromise with the electorate and elect a boring, competent centrist like Starmer as Labour leader
In fact our situation is similar to that between Robert and myself; I wanted to void that bet because I was banned from the site, outrageously unfairly in my view, and didn’t want to be in the situation of being unable to post, liable for bets and easily able to be knocked. He said our bet stood, and if I refused to pay that was my choice. I said it’s void. We never spoke about it again. As it happens, I will win that bet, but I’m not going to ask for the money, and it’s a lot more than £300, because I understood it to be void, despite Robert never saying ‘Happy to void’ as you did
Nobody has freedom to incite violence with their speech
That is explicitly prohibited
Hizb ut-Tahrir "views Jihad as an essential aspect of its vision and considers it an imperative duty aimed at combating disbelief until all submit to Islamic rule, making no distinction between the violent and spiritual dimensions of Jihad"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir
What is it about them them you want to allow?
The Conservative Party does not have a God-given right to your vote. The way some of the newspapers are behaving over this is bizarre.
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/1746955637324398900?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
"Previously Hizb ut-Tahrir, which Tony Blair and David Cameron tried to ban when they were in Downing Street, has made calls to “wipe out that Zionist entity” and referred to “the monstrous Jews”." (2)
"In October, the group’s members attended a rally outside the Egyptian and Turkish embassies in London and called for “Muslim armies” to attack Israel." (2)
I might suggest that HuT are a hideously nasty group that stand against everything you, as a 'lefty', should stand for. But apparently not.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT; Arabic: حزب التحرير, romanized: Ḥizb at-Taḥrīr, lit. 'Party of Liberation') is an international pan-Islamist and Islamic fundamentalist political organization whose stated aim is the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate to unite the Muslim community (called ummah)[3] and implement sharia globally" (1)
(1): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizb_ut-Tahrir
(2): https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/15/islamist-group-hizb-ut-tahrir-to-be-banned-organising-uk
FORT DODGE — Dozens of Trump supporters are gathered at the Shiny Top Brewery to get up close and personal with some of the former president’s best-known endorsers, including Reps. Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene, as well as U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake of Arizona.
“I want to tell you how much the world is counting on Iowa tonight,” Lake told the crowd. She added: “What you’re going to do tonight is you’re going to help save this world.”
The boys down at Hizb ut-Tahrir don't
Oh, Jeremy Corbyn.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir has a record of over 70 years of following a method of non-violent political activity against despots who rule the Muslim world with the West’s approval. In its work to establish the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate), Hizb ut-Tahrir has never resorted to any sort of violence or armed struggle."
https://twitter.com/HizbBritain/status/1746967855537545323?t=iNmYRw1nQRMj5raXu1j8pw&s=19
But I dislike the government deciding what are acceptable beliefs. I don't think we should outlaw people who call for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza (as a number of posters have here) either.
But to answer your question:-
Liz Truss on the need for growth. (Coincidentally I'm reading Cole & Heale's book about her.)
Donald Trump on not starting new Middle East wars (heaven knows they've got enough already) and the threat from China.
... thousands of Muslims marched to the Egyptian, Saudi and Syrian embassies in London demanding that Arab armies move to defend Gaza. This was a second weekend of demonstrations organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir/ Britain.
... send their armies ...
The protesters made two demands 1) that the armies in the Muslim countries move to defend their brothers and sisters in Gaza immediately 2) that the treacherous Muslim rulers be removed and replaced by a Khalifah who will release the armies to liberate Palestine. Protesters were told to campaign relentlessly for these demands.
Protesters held banners and chanted slogans including ‘Arab Dictators collude with Israeli terrorism', ‘Muslim Armies must defend Gaza', 'Arab-Muslim rulers are traitors', ‘Only the Khilafah "Caliphate" will liberate Gaza' and ‘Armies end the occupation, Jihad is your obligation'.
Funny definition of peaceful, calling for armies to invade.
That's just one quick Google search, plenty more incitement of violence like that comes up when searching.
Is "jihad just means struggle" really enough for you from islamists who want global sharia law?
We successfully invaded Iran before and that was for oil as well.
I'd note even in the Young Labour elections (a small sample size) - which used to be a Corbynite walkover, the centrists are winning.
There will always be a left though, just an impotent shouty bit that wants to go on marches, and one inside Labour that realises that if it wants left-wing policies in Britain, it needs to find leaders without the deeply flawed worldview that so often led him to look like he wanted to side with those who wanted to do us harm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Soviet_invasion_of_Iran
Give it back to the princes of Persia.