@alexmassie 25 secs26 seconds ago Incidentally, I hope those Tories who paid their £3 to vote for Corbyn are feeling pretty stupid now. They should be ashamed.
As I said earlier, I didn't but it's a silly point to make since JC was overwhelmingly elected by ordinary Labour party members - their choice and their responsibility. As it happens the result confirms my view that this party is wholly unsuitable to govern - so in that sense a good result all round.
I almost feel sorry for Jez. He's in a right pickle. Either he takes his position as the leader of the opposition and prospective next PM seriously, so fully embracing the monarchy, the nuclear capability, the army and our intelligence services but comes across as inauthentic, opportunistic, disingenuous and shallow, or he stays true to his beardy, lettuce eating, pacifist, republican, student protests positions he has held all his life and is ridiculed.
Whichever course he takes he is doomed of course, so it is probably better for him to stay true to himself and wait for the knife in his back that will surely come. Tom Watson is the fella that will do it- he has Machiavellian, scheming, kingmaker written into his DNA.
Obviously but he does seem like a decent human being which makes you wonder why so many of the attacks are personal.
Nothing decent at all about refusing to take actions to defend people being gunned down by terrorists, when that is your most important job as Prime Minister.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing."
Based on what I saw and heard Corbyn say yesterday (and not Nick Palmer's laughably Panglossian interpretation of it) I'm not prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt re his decency - or his honesty, come to that. There are plenty of examples of him being less than frank about his associations with terrorists. His claim that he will speak to anyone is, for one thing, wholly untrue.
"Like the pacifist whose only concern is keeping his own hands free of blood, the liberal only concerned with his own reputation for tolerance ends up complicit in the crimes he ignores."
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders.
Correct, and because it doesn't affect us we shouldn't worry about it. There is a reason that borders have been shut, its nothing to do with convenience.
This is what Nick and his mates voted to associate Labour with when they voted for Corbyn.
This is why I will never vote Labour while Corbyn and his crew run Labour. And it's why millions of others won't consider it either.
I hope and pray Labour loses in Oldham. Constant and humiliating defeat is what it needs and deserves until members develop the intelligence to see what they are doing to a party they profess to care about. They have abandoned the British mainstream. They are contemptible.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
I can easily drive from home to Essen in a day. Dover, Calais, Belgium, Holland and into Germany. The only delay is at Dover to get on the shuttle. If there were borders (and I remember some horrendous queues in the distant past), then it would add about 3 hours to the journey.
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
Another-day: Another moronic post. Take up head-banging and learn summinck....
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
On the American election, I cannot for the life of me understand why GOP are not picking Rubio- he is quite simply head and shoulders better than the rest.
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
Ummmmm
We can see, hear and sense it out here in the sticks.
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
So Corbyn is cast as a suicidal Pied Piper, leading the Parliamentary Lemming Party off a cliff.
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
But my twitter feed still says Corbyn is awesome....He farts and it smells of roses...he wants to hug a Jahadi, it just shows what a decent principled man he is...etc etc etc
"When this finally shakes out, it may be that some of the worst excesses of the Schengen system - and the fears of many about unrestricted access into Europe and the subsequent ability of those to travel unhindered within the EU's borders - will have fallen away. An EU that takes the security of its borders - and the borders of its member nations - more seriously will be a less troubling beast for many currently torn between STAY and LEAVE."
I don't really understand this idea of secure borders from a security point of view. Possibly keeping track on people working illegally but anyone with a passport can get into (almost) any country in the world and stay for a reasonable length of time legally. Only very few passports won't get you into the UK for a visit and we're not members of Shengen
I agree with you they can enter on passports but to do so they are checked and verified by a border control officer. It's not perfect of course but it is another line of defence against those who would wish us harm and would be more than happy to pass freely without the risk of such checks. API is another verification method as is finger print verification on arrival USA , visa requirements etc.
Alternatively you would be getting on a plane with no security verifications or verification of passengers alongside you? It's why other targets are selected now and planes are rarely hit . The Russian plane was targeted due to lax security barriers at departure point. It was made easier than say Heathrow for example.
Just a thought, and I appreciate its not a popular one on here, but I have some sympathy for Corbyn. Most of us have seen people promoted or projected to positions out of their depth, its painful to witness. I don't agree with Corbyn's politics but as a person there are far more deserving of the stick he's receiving. The spite should be aimed at those silly enough to elect him, not the bumbling oaf himself.
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
So Corbyn is cast as a suicidal Pied Piper, leading the Parliamentary Lemming Party off a cliff.
Excellent..... in political terms... a disaster for the country as a whole.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
It appears that most of the attackers were French nationals.
I suggest you reread rcs1000's post. The idea that France is going to recreate the Maginot line is fanciful.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
I can easily drive from home to Essen in a day. Dover, Calais, Belgium, Holland and into Germany. The only delay is at Dover to get on the shuttle. If there were borders (and I remember some horrendous queues in the distant past), then it would add about 3 hours to the journey.
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
How realistic is it to expect proper and effective border security at a load of Greek islands where there is one policeman and a dog and which can be accessed by anyone with a boat?
A strong border is only as strong as at its weakest point. This talk of an effective border for the Schengen area is balls, frankly.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?
None of this is new. Many of the people who failed the Rushdie test failed the Charlie Hebdo test a quarter of a century later. It should not surprise us that they are failing the Paris test too. This is who they are. This is who Jeremy Corbyn is.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
It appears that most of the attackers were French nationals.
I suggest you reread rcs1000's post. The idea that France is going to recreate the Maginot line is fanciful.
Fortunately for us we have a nice convienient bit of water, "The Channel" that does the trick.
Come on Roger- politics is a personal, bruising business- if you cannot take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
That was always the line thrown at Ed- he was a decent bloke. Well he stabbed his highly electable brother, and continued to lead his party when all the polls were telling him he was a major drag causing Labour to lose an eminently winnable election. Ed, Mr Decent bloke, has consigned the country to most probably a decade of Tory rule- how decent is that for all the poor, vulnerable, disabled, young people who were relying on a Labour victory?
Corbyn is unelectable- the longer he hangs around and brings the Labour party into disrepute, the greater will be my own personal antipathy against him. If I was in Oldham I'd vote UKIP- no questions ask- come on Oldham, you know you can help bring Labour to its senses. Vote UKIP.
Come on Roger- politics is a personal, bruising business- if you cannot take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
That was always the line thrown at Ed- he was a decent bloke. Well he stabbed his highly electable brother, and continued to lead his party when all the polls were telling him he was a major drag causing Labour to lose an eminently winnable election. Ed, Mr Decent bloke, has consigned the country to most probably a decade of Tory rule- how decent is that for all the poor, vulnerable, disabled, young people who were relying on a Labour victory?
Corbyn is unelectable- the longer he hangs around and brings the Labour party into disrepute, the greater will be my own personal antipathy against him. If I was in Oldham I'd vote UKIP- no questions ask- come on Oldham, you know you can help bring Labour to its senses. Vote UKIP.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
I can easily drive from home to Essen in a day. Dover, Calais, Belgium, Holland and into Germany. The only delay is at Dover to get on the shuttle. If there were borders (and I remember some horrendous queues in the distant past), then it would add about 3 hours to the journey.
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
How realistic is it to expect proper and effective border security at a load of Greek islands where there is one policeman and a dog and which can be accessed by anyone with a boat?
A strong border is only as strong as at its weakest point. This talk of an effective border for the Schengen area is balls, frankly.
Mainland Europeans need to accept, that as things stand, a Paris style attack will not be unique. The same open border policy that allows good and services to pass freely, also permits the transfer of terrorists and weapons between countries unhindered. I wonder when that will change, or whether it will simply be acknowledged with a shrug of the shoulders?
"Nothing decent at all about refusing to take actions to defend people being gunned down by terrorists, when that is your most important job as Prime Minister.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing.""
I sometimes wonder if all our leaders were female we'd resort to a violent response so quickly. My daughter's headmistress said of her all girls school that in a boy's school when there is a problem the boys fight. Girls sort out there problems in much more subtle ways
Just a thought, and I appreciate its not a popular one on here, but I have some sympathy for Corbyn. Most of us have seen people promoted or projected to positions out of their depth, its painful to witness. I don't agree with Corbyn's politics but as a person there are far more deserving of the stick he's receiving. The spite should be aimed at those silly enough to elect him, not the bumbling oaf himself.
He was not promoted without his consent. He put himself forward. He went round campaigning. He's an adult. He's certainly old enough. If he feels out of his depth, he can do what that Labour Education Secretary did and resign because she did not feel up to it.
Or he can accept the consequences of his actions like other grown ups.
I think he is arrogant and dogmatic enough to think that he is right, always has been, that his election proves that his time and that of the Leftist strand he represents has come, that he will simply ignore those criticising him because they are wrong and not even bother debating with them because they are wrong and that's all there is to it.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?
No, just walk through the fields if you wish to avoid checkpoints. That's always the difficulty of border protection unless you do a Mexico / USA style scenarios. Not practical with Europe the distances are far too long it would never work All you can do is use protection at known targets even that is weak but it's something.
Doesn't solve the original problem though. Which leaves either direct action at the source of the problem or just accept atrocities will happen, nothing can be done about it and just hope it's not your children or family at the selected venue when it occurs.
Mr. Roger, The three most famous British female leaders in history were Elizabeth I, Victoria and Thatcher. None of them are renowned for being limp-wristed pacifists.
That's utterly disgraceful. It'll be invaluable propaganda for ISIS, as they use it in evidence to address Muslims in the West - 'they think we're vermin'.
Corbyn is not a bumbling oaf. He is a square peg in a round hole. Corbyn is a dignified, principled protest politician- which we need in this in this country. We need a spectrum of uncompromised political thinking- not always simply playing to the galleries.
But making Jezza leader of the opposition was akin to sending out Jimmy Anderton to open the batting. It is just wrong. Wrong and wrong.
Just a thought, and I appreciate its not a popular one on here, but I have some sympathy for Corbyn. Most of us have seen people promoted or projected to positions out of their depth, its painful to witness. I don't agree with Corbyn's politics but as a person there are far more deserving of the stick he's receiving. The spite should be aimed at those silly enough to elect him, not the bumbling oaf himself.
The predictable vitriol against Jeremy Corbyn from the usual suspects notwithstanding, there are two elements within Corbyn's response.
The first is the assertion that as a State operating within and believing in judicial process and the rule of law, that process needs to be paramount rather than the arbitrary execution of those we deem to have wronged us. Ordinarily, I would accept this however..
The second is that in some way IS is an entity with whom we can reason - the blunt fact is they aren't. The only comparison I can make is with the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s. IS are a nihilistic group impervious to the constraints under which almost every other group has operated. Even the IRA had a political agenda which gave us something with which to work.
IS aren't the first group to indulge in mass murder, casual brutality or the ruthless extermination of those not prepared to "convert" but, unlike the Khmer Rouge, who perpetuated genocide within their own borders and ignored the rest of the world, IS have effectively declared war on the rest of humanity. They may even want the wrath of humanity to descend upon them, I don't know - it's not a mindset into which I can go.
There will be those who claim the innocent will be caught up in the retribution to be meted out on IS and that may well be true and that is regrettable but the sophistication of modern weapons systems enables a more efficient and effective cleansing process than the blanket bombing of past times.
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
Corbyn misunderstands the existential savagery of IS. He tries to reason with the reasonable and use principle where he is dealing with the unprincipled. I respect those who abhor violence - I do too - but when you are dealing with those whose very modus operandi is violence, fear and terror and whose aim is to destroy your way of life, there can only be the firmest of responses.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?
No, just walk through the fields if you wish to avoid checkpoints. That's always the difficulty of border protection unless you do a Mexico / USA style scenarios. Not practical with Europe the distances are far too long it would never work All you can do is use protection at known targets even that is weak but it's something.
Doesn't solve the original problem though. Which leaves either direct action at the source of the problem or just accept atrocities will happen, nothing can be done about it and just hope it's not your children or family at the selected venue when it occurs.
"Nothing decent at all about refusing to take actions to defend people being gunned down by terrorists, when that is your most important job as Prime Minister.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing.""
I sometimes wonder if all our leaders were female we'd resort to a violent response so quickly. My daughter's headmistress said of her all girls school that in a boy's school when there is a problem the boys fight. Girls sort out there problems in much more subtle ways
If you think women don't have steel think again. We may not fight physically but we can be - and are - deadly.
"When this finally shakes out, it may be that some of the worst excesses of the Schengen system - and the fears of many about unrestricted access into Europe and the subsequent ability of those to travel unhindered within the EU's borders - will have fallen away. An EU that takes the security of its borders - and the borders of its member nations - more seriously will be a less troubling beast for many currently torn between STAY and LEAVE."
I don't really understand this idea of secure borders from a security point of view. Possibly keeping track on people working illegally but anyone with a passport can get into (almost) any country in the world and stay for a reasonable length of time legally. Only very few passports won't get you into the UK for a visit and we're not members of Shengen
The other thing I don't get about this is once we're assuming terrorists can get into Schengen, it's not really obvious that there's much of a security gain, let alone one worth the vast expense, from stopping them moving around. Say for the sake of argument that there had been an impenetrable terrorist-proof barrier between France and Belgium. Would we have been that much better off if instead of blowing up or shooting up six locations in Paris, they'd done four locations in Paris and two in Brussels?
"Nothing decent at all about refusing to take actions to defend people being gunned down by terrorists, when that is your most important job as Prime Minister.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing.""
I sometimes wonder if all our leaders were female we'd resort to a violent response so quickly. My daughter's headmistress said of her all girls school that in a boy's school when there is a problem the boys fight. Girls sort out there problems in much more subtle ways
Are you hoping Marine le Pen gets elected and pining for Maggie?
Criticise Antifrank and post removed. So "stupid" comments cannot be challenged?
Maybe if the team that manage this site could 'person-up' and challenge the criticism made; then business would improve (punting-wise). Me: Not-holding-breathe.
On reflection my sympathy for Corbyn was misplaced, I don't know what came over me, I'll return forthwith to being a swivel eyed xenophobic little Englander.
''That's utterly disgraceful. It'll be invaluable propaganda for ISIS, as they use it in evidence to address Muslims in the West - 'they think we're vermin'.''
I think that is completely wrong.
Any moderate muslim will realise they are not treated like vermin in the west. They have a perfectly decent life that most people on the planet would envy.
''He calls terrorists friends and refuses to meet with people he dislikes.''
Agreed. It isn;t misunderstanding, it is emnity. Corbyn is sympathetic to violence when it is perpetrated against the UK, as we have seen with the IRA.
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important * Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all * Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
''That's utterly disgraceful. It'll be invaluable propaganda for ISIS, as they use it in evidence to address Muslims in the West - 'they think we're vermin'.''
I think that is completely wrong.
Any moderate muslim will realise they are not treated like vermin in the west. They have a perfectly decent life that most people on the planet would envy.
Yes, one would hope so. But my point is that it certainly helpfully (from ISIS's point of view) confirms their narrative.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
I can easily drive from home to Essen in a day. Dover, Calais, Belgium, Holland and into Germany. The only delay is at Dover to get on the shuttle. If there were borders (and I remember some horrendous queues in the distant past), then it would add about 3 hours to the journey.
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
How realistic is it to expect proper and effective border security at a load of Greek islands where there is one policeman and a dog and which can be accessed by anyone with a boat?
A strong border is only as strong as at its weakest point. This talk of an effective border for the Schengen area is balls, frankly.
One of the great myths about Britain today is that our island nation status somehow prevents the country being successfully infiltrated on a large scale.
Sadly, the Royal Navy has virtually no capacity to successfully patrol our maritime borders. Wasteful spending on a useless Blue Water Navy while completely ignoring the need for an effective patrol fleet has left the British coast as wide open as any land border in Europe.
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?
No, just walk through the fields if you wish to avoid checkpoints. That's always the difficulty of border protection unless you do a Mexico / USA style scenarios. Not practical with Europe the distances are far too long it would never work All you can do is use protection at known targets even that is weak but it's something.
Doesn't solve the original problem though. Which leaves either direct action at the source of the problem or just accept atrocities will happen, nothing can be done about it and just hope it's not your children or family at the selected venue when it occurs.
Mr. Roger, The three most famous British female leaders in history were Elizabeth I, Victoria and Thatcher. None of them are renowned for being limp-wristed pacifists.
On the American election, I cannot for the life of me understand why GOP are not picking Rubio- he is quite simply head and shoulders better than the rest.
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
------------------
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
"Criticise Antifrank and post removed. So "stupid" comments cannot be challenged?"
Your stupid comment was challenged and removed. Like so much that you write it wasn't even in a language anyone could recognize. It was jibberish and whoever removed it did you a favour
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important * Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all * Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.
If you missed the Nick Cohen piece, well worth 5 mins of your time - this point made me stop and think.
According to my colleague Shiraz Maher, there are now more British Muslims fighting for Islamic State than serving in the British Army. According to the government's Prevent programme, more than 30 per cent of people convicted for al-Qaeda-associated terrorist offences in the UK between 1999 and 2009 attended university or a higher education institution.
On topic, admittedly it's getting gradually less improbable that he'll make it but: 1) Polling at this point in the cycle isn't very predictive. 2) Non-politicians generally aren't as good at politics as politicians.
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important * Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all * Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate at where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.
"Criticise Antifrank and post removed. So "stupid" comments cannot be challenged?"
Your stupid comment was removed. Like so much that you write it wasn't even in a language anyone could recognize. It was jibberish and whoever removed it did you a favour
So please explain how we 'need' to "recreate" the Maginot-line? An advertising campaign perchance...?
On the American election, I cannot for the life of me understand why GOP are not picking Rubio- he is quite simply head and shoulders better than the rest.
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
------------------
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
You two are braver than me, Cruz looks like a pickable option; and he is almost level in the polls with Rubio... meanwhile Carson and especially Trump are a mile out in front.
Carson could well be 2015s Herman Cain, but there are others.
Is Rubio REALLY 5-2 for the nomination.
I'm very hedged (And green). My latest move was to reback the Donald though...
That is truly f*cking appalling. Goebbels would have been proud. For once, comparison to the behaviour of the Nazis is bang on the money.
There was a recent stushie about Mac being on R4 and using the word 'coloured'. At the time I thought it was a bit overblown (older generation, silly old fool etc), now I'm not so sure.
Rubio combines the winning characteristics of Reagan , Bill Clinton and Obama ...he'll crush Hillary !
If he gets the nod, he is a very decent shot for president. But his battle to get the nod is tougher than beating Hilary methinks. Also he's not a cert vs Hilary, probably Evens the pair.
Corbyn is not a bumbling oaf. He is a square peg in a round hole. Corbyn is a dignified, principled protest politician- which we need in this in this country. We need a spectrum of uncompromised political thinking- not always simply playing to the galleries.
But making Jezza leader of the opposition was akin to sending out Jimmy Anderton to open the batting. It is just wrong. Wrong and wrong.
Just a thought, and I appreciate its not a popular one on here, but I have some sympathy for Corbyn. Most of us have seen people promoted or projected to positions out of their depth, its painful to witness. I don't agree with Corbyn's politics but as a person there are far more deserving of the stick he's receiving. The spite should be aimed at those silly enough to elect him, not the bumbling oaf himself.
I also blame Burnham, Cooper and the other one for this mess. If they had not sat on the fence every time a difficult question was asked we would not be where we are now. Corbyn won because of his consistency and frankly the others were lying.
Also for an opposition to support the governments welfare cuts 4 1/2 years from the next election is frankly laughable. Lack of political judgement.
The key early battleground polls pretty much mirror the national polling:
To an extent that is true, but 'early' is a relative term. Afer the first four in February, things really hot up in early March, and that includes states like Texas (a whopping 155 delegates) where the latest poll had Cruz tied with Trump.
Rubio combines the winning characteristics of Reagan , Bill Clinton and Obama ...he'll crush Hillary !
If he gets the nod, he is a very decent shot for president. But his battle to get the nod is tougher than beating Hilary methinks. Also he's not a cert vs Hilary, probably Evens the pair.
I'd agree with that. Rubio needs a good win in Iowa or New Hampshire and he's way behind Trump in the polls in both states
'more than 30 per cent of people convicted for al-Qaeda-associated terrorist offences in the UK between 1999 and 2009 attended university or a higher education institution'
I thought education was supposed to turn everyone into liberal, tolerant free-thinkers. How puzzling.
'more than 30 per cent of people convicted for al-Qaeda-associated terrorist offences in the UK between 1999 and 2009 attended university or a higher education institution'
I thought education was supposed to turn everyone into liberal, tolerant free-thinkers. How puzzling.
Given their average age (c. 25?) that strikes me as a little lower than the probable equivalent non-terrorist demographic.
Comments
Whichever course he takes he is doomed of course, so it is probably better for him to stay true to himself and wait for the knife in his back that will surely come. Tom Watson is the fella that will do it- he has Machiavellian, scheming, kingmaker written into his DNA.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing."
Based on what I saw and heard Corbyn say yesterday (and not Nick Palmer's laughably Panglossian interpretation of it) I'm not prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt re his decency - or his honesty, come to that. There are plenty of examples of him being less than frank about his associations with terrorists. His claim that he will speak to anyone is, for one thing, wholly untrue.
"Like the pacifist whose only concern is keeping his own hands free of blood, the liberal only concerned with his own reputation for tolerance ends up complicit in the crimes he ignores."
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders.
Correct, and because it doesn't affect us we shouldn't worry about it. There is a reason that borders have been shut, its nothing to do with convenience.
Take here for instance:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4329023,4.9311608,3a,75y,25.9h,91.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtVbmGlDR0MOgT2Tysp0ig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
He might for example acknowledge their grievances and possibly commend their fight against imperialism.
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
We can see, hear and sense it out here in the sticks.
Alternatively you would be getting on a plane with no security verifications or verification of passengers alongside you? It's why other targets are selected now and planes are rarely hit . The Russian plane was targeted due to lax security barriers at departure point. It was made easier than say Heathrow for example.
Entirely right to criticise the deficient idiots in the PLP who didn't want him as leader but backed his nomination to 'broaden the debate'.
I suggest you reread rcs1000's post. The idea that France is going to recreate the Maginot line is fanciful.
A strong border is only as strong as at its weakest point. This talk of an effective border for the Schengen area is balls, frankly.
King Cole, the Germans never had any issues
Edited extra bit: Miss Cyclefree, quite so. Not to mention Greece is not exactly flush with cash to organise such an undertaking.
That was always the line thrown at Ed- he was a decent bloke. Well he stabbed his highly electable brother, and continued to lead his party when all the polls were telling him he was a major drag causing Labour to lose an eminently winnable election. Ed, Mr Decent bloke, has consigned the country to most probably a decade of Tory rule- how decent is that for all the poor, vulnerable, disabled, young people who were relying on a Labour victory?
Corbyn is unelectable- the longer he hangs around and brings the Labour party into disrepute, the greater will be my own personal antipathy against him. If I was in Oldham I'd vote UKIP- no questions ask- come on Oldham, you know you can help bring Labour to its senses. Vote UKIP.
http://order-order.com/2015/11/17/tories-fundraise-off-back-of-security-fears/
https://twitter.com/RobPreeceOnline/status/666556794093850624
"Nothing decent at all about refusing to take actions to defend people being gunned down by terrorists, when that is your most important job as Prime Minister.
"For evil to triumph, all it takes is for good persons to do nothing.""
I sometimes wonder if all our leaders were female we'd resort to a violent response so quickly. My daughter's headmistress said of her all girls school that in a boy's school when there is a problem the boys fight. Girls sort out there problems in much more subtle ways
Yes - it isn't serious, nor I suspect is it really intended to be. It's just rhetoric.
Prescient, though.
Or he can accept the consequences of his actions like other grown ups.
I think he is arrogant and dogmatic enough to think that he is right, always has been, that his election proves that his time and that of the Leftist strand he represents has come, that he will simply ignore those criticising him because they are wrong and not even bother debating with them because they are wrong and that's all there is to it.
Doesn't solve the original problem though. Which leaves either direct action at the source of the problem or just accept atrocities will happen, nothing can be done about it and just hope it's not your children or family at the selected venue when it occurs.
On the kindness and subtlety of women, I advert the site to this piece I wrote on some female leaders during the Diadochi era:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/macedonian-she-wolves.html
But making Jezza leader of the opposition was akin to sending out Jimmy Anderton to open the batting. It is just wrong. Wrong and wrong.
The predictable vitriol against Jeremy Corbyn from the usual suspects notwithstanding, there are two elements within Corbyn's response.
The first is the assertion that as a State operating within and believing in judicial process and the rule of law, that process needs to be paramount rather than the arbitrary execution of those we deem to have wronged us. Ordinarily, I would accept this however..
The second is that in some way IS is an entity with whom we can reason - the blunt fact is they aren't. The only comparison I can make is with the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s. IS are a nihilistic group impervious to the constraints under which almost every other group has operated. Even the IRA had a political agenda which gave us something with which to work.
IS aren't the first group to indulge in mass murder, casual brutality or the ruthless extermination of those not prepared to "convert" but, unlike the Khmer Rouge, who perpetuated genocide within their own borders and ignored the rest of the world, IS have effectively declared war on the rest of humanity. They may even want the wrath of humanity to descend upon them, I don't know - it's not a mindset into which I can go.
There will be those who claim the innocent will be caught up in the retribution to be meted out on IS and that may well be true and that is regrettable but the sophistication of modern weapons systems enables a more efficient and effective cleansing process than the blanket bombing of past times.
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
Corbyn misunderstands the existential savagery of IS. He tries to reason with the reasonable and use principle where he is dealing with the unprincipled. I respect those who abhor violence - I do too - but when you are dealing with those whose very modus operandi is violence, fear and terror and whose aim is to destroy your way of life, there can only be the firmest of responses.
"Hurrah for the Blackshirts!"
At least they're consistent
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/blackshirts-460x206.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BVQTKHuCMAEos6j.jpg
He calls terrorists friends and refuses to meet with people he dislikes
Criticise Antifrank and post removed. So "stupid" comments cannot be challenged?
Maybe if the team that manage this site could 'person-up' and challenge the criticism made; then business would improve (punting-wise). Me: Not-holding-breathe.
:bite-me:
I think that is completely wrong.
Any moderate muslim will realise they are not treated like vermin in the west. They have a perfectly decent life that most people on the planet would envy.
"Are you hoping Marine le Pen gets elected and pining for Maggie?"
Women trying to compete in a man's world
Agreed. It isn;t misunderstanding, it is emnity. Corbyn is sympathetic to violence when it is perpetrated against the UK, as we have seen with the IRA.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
Sadly, the Royal Navy has virtually no capacity to successfully patrol our maritime borders. Wasteful spending on a useless Blue Water Navy while completely ignoring the need for an effective patrol fleet has left the British coast as wide open as any land border in Europe.
There is definitely a role after an atrocity for someone to say "careful now". The leader of the opposition is ideally placed to deliver that message.
But by his lack of political finesse, his form and some plain wrong headedness he undermines that critical role.
Grrrr.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/two-airport-workers-arrested-over-6845754?ICID=FB_mirror_main
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man
I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity
The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump
Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
The point on the feminine touch being just as warlike as a masculine approach stands.
"Criticise Antifrank and post removed. So "stupid" comments cannot be challenged?"
Your stupid comment was challenged and removed. Like so much that you write it wasn't even in a language anyone could recognize. It was jibberish and whoever removed it did you a favour
Neither point is particularly surprising.
For some reason certain universities allow in hate preachers and accept segregated audiences.
1) Polling at this point in the cycle isn't very predictive.
2) Non-politicians generally aren't as good at politics as politicians.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_presidential_primary-4151.html
The key early battleground polls pretty much mirror the national polling:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maginot_line_1.jpg
:wodger-comprehension-is-disfunctional:
PS: I think my post was deleted because I mentioned Antifrank's fore-name. Three guesses how I know it...?
Carson could well be 2015s Herman Cain, but there are others.
Is Rubio REALLY 5-2 for the nomination.
I'm very hedged (And green). My latest move was to reback the Donald though...
Also for an opposition to support the governments welfare cuts 4 1/2 years from the next election is frankly laughable. Lack of political judgement.
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece
I thought education was supposed to turn everyone into liberal, tolerant free-thinkers. How puzzling.