If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
To be fair NATO has been a big sponsor of Islamist terrorism in Central Asia and that is a big reason that Russia and China have had problems. It looks like Cameron's chums from Syria have made their way to Europe again, thanks to Merkel.
Following you logic, it can only be a matter of time before Islamic terrorists wreak revenge for Russian involvement in Syria. Who will you blame then Bobski?
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
I guess that depends whether Conservatives wish to be a party of government or a social club for foaming Europhobes.
It's a very similar choice to the choice that the Labour party had to make when it chose Jeremy Corbyn as leader. Labour has currently decided to be a social club. It would be nice if one of our two main parties decided that it would aspire to be a party of government.
Why is there always a faint rabies reference when people opposed to the EU are being discussed ?
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Indeed.
And I'm not sure that throwing the Baltics to the wolves is a sensible policy response.
Putting NATO's cyber warfare centre in Estonia after the 2007 cyberattacks in that country was idiotic. Doubtless a lot of money is being made from the contracts, though. The US and NATO would get their arses whacked in that sphere of warfare in that theatre.
When the war in the Ukraine started, there was western propaganda about having a strong military presence along the eastern border of the Baltic states. Do you know what that would mean for Kaliningrad? Think Germany crossing the Rhine with its military in 1936.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
On topic: The point surely is this: at the moment, 'banging on about Europe' is perfectly reasonable. We have a referendum coming, and Leavers in particular are passionate about the issue (I don't think many Remainers in the Conservative Party are - there are almost no 'Europhiles' in the government or party as a whole, but there are many pragmatists unconvinced on balance by the Brexit case, for the reasons we have explored many times).
What wouldn't be reasonable would be to keep 'banging on about Europe', in a petulant and destructive way, if on June 24th it turns out that the nation has voted to stay in the EU. That will be the acid test.
Personally, my view is that Alastair, and many others, have misjudged the appetite for civil war once the result is in. It's a mistake to think that the current level of dissent will continue after the referendum. Why should it? The matter will be closed, and almost everyone in the party will recognise the need to re-unite and the counter-productive futility of trying to overturn the referendum result. Prominent Leavers such as Michael Gove, Boris, Chris Grayling, Priti Patel, Zac Goldsmith, Sarah Wollaston, grandees such as Michael Howard, and my own MP Nus Ghani, are not headbanging nutters who regard their Remain-leaning colleagues as Quislings and Europhiles, they are perfectly sensible people who disagree with Cameron and many other colleagues on the balance of whether it's better to stay in or leave the EU. If it turns out that the voters' verdict is to stay, these Leavers will all accept that verdict and work to reunite the party.
Of course there are a few well-known names whose positions more closely match Alastair's portrait. Twas' ever so: every party has its equivalents. But it's a mistake to give too much salience to the current battles. The battlefield will look very different on June 24th.
Surely the current battles are going to leave very deep scars and a lack of trust between opposing factions.
Also, on June 24th won't the battle simply move on from the referendum to the succession? The real problem there, though, is whether the new leader will have any authority. They won't have won an election and whichever side they didn't support in the referendum won't trust them.
And you will still have a majority of 12 and a hostile Lords.
What frustrates me about NATO foreign policy is that we're making things worse. Our interventions into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia - the countries are less stable than before, in cases like Libya there is literally no government left. Our drone campaign terrorises civilians in those countries plus Pakistan, then having killed innocent people and knackered their countries we express surprise that they want revenge.
Nor can we ignore the internal factors (shia vs sunni, mainstream vs radical) or the external factors - supply routes and control of oil and gas to Europe. This is our mess. Its not to excuse acts of murderous barbarism. But we have to accept that we create the conditions which allow the ideology and mindset of these murderers to believe their cause is valid.
@Sean Fear - I think they are perfectly happy to have votes from that 30% of the population but under absolutely no circumstances whatsoever do they want to compromise with their views.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
On topic: The point surely is this: at the moment, 'banging on about Europe' is perfectly reasonable. We have a referendum coming, and Leavers in particular are passionate about the issue (I don't think many Remainers in the Conservative Party are - there are almost no 'Europhiles' in the government or party as a whole, but there are many pragmatists unconvinced on balance by the Brexit case, for the reasons we have explored many times).
What wouldn't be reasonable would be to keep 'banging on about Europe', in a petulant and destructive way, if on June 24th it turns out that the nation has voted to stay in the EU. That will be the acid test.
Personally, my view is that Alastair, and many others, have misjudged the appetite for civil war once the result is in. It's a mistake to think that the current level of dissent will continue after the referendum. Why should it? The matter will be closed, and almost everyone in the party will recognise the need to re-unite and the counter-productive futility of trying to overturn the referendum result. Prominent Leavers such as Michael Gove, Boris, Chris Grayling, Priti Patel, Zac Goldsmith, Sarah Wollaston, grandees such as Michael Howard, and my own MP Nus Ghani, are not headbanging nutters who regard their Remain-leaning colleagues as Quislings and Europhiles, they are perfectly sensible people who disagree with Cameron and many other colleagues on the balance of whether it's better to stay in or leave the EU. If it turns out that the voters' verdict is to stay, these Leavers will all accept that verdict and work to reunite the party.
Of course there are a few well-known names whose positions more closely match Alastair's portrait. Twas' ever so: every party has its equivalents. But it's a mistake to give too much salience to the current battles. The battlefield will look very different on June 24th.
Agree with this. If the hardliners think they can remove Dave after the referendum regardless of the result then they have misjudged the mood within the party. I have seen literally no appetite to remove him at meetings. Osborn, otoh, has a lot of hostility aimed towards him, and from people who previously would have backed him for the leadership.
If Dave wants to unite the party after the referendum, whatever the result, he has to look at removing Osborne and replacing him with Gove.
For once I agree totally with Richard Nabavi, Alastair is obviously a very bright bloke but when it comes to the EU and the Tory party he comes somewhat deranged.
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
I guess that depends whether Conservatives wish to be a party of government or a social club for foaming Europhobes.
Dear Lord. Is IDS foaming? Is Bojo foaming? Hannan? Michael Caine? The EU is an undemocratic monster. A cancer whose only objective is to grow its powers. You seem to be trashing the very notion of a sensible and principled desire for sovereignty. Even Chuka Umunna said we can and would be successful outside the EU on Question Time the other day. If Leave wins we're going to need some sensible and principled foamers running this country.
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
I guess that depends whether Conservatives wish to be a party of government or a social club for foaming Europhobes.
The EU is an undemocratic monster. A cancer whose only objective is to grow its powers.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
To be perfectly honest the analogy brought my mind to the alsations at crufts who were judged to be top standard despite being unable to walk.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
To be perfectly honest the analogy brought my mind to the alsations at crufts who were judged to be top standard despite being unable to walk.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
These dreadful scenes in Brussels - why Brussels? What has Belgium or the Belgians done to deserve this?
They certainly don't deserve it. But be aware that the government of that country belongs to NATO and hosts the NATO headquarters in its capital city, Brussels.
What frustrates me about NATO foreign policy is that we're making things worse. Our interventions into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia - the countries are less stable than before, in cases like Libya there is literally no government left. Our drone campaign terrorises civilians in those countries plus Pakistan, then having killed innocent people and knackered their countries we express surprise that they want revenge.
Nor can we ignore the internal factors (shia vs sunni, mainstream vs radical) or the external factors - supply routes and control of oil and gas to Europe. This is our mess. Its not to excuse acts of murderous barbarism. But we have to accept that we create the conditions which allow the ideology and mindset of these murderers to believe their cause is valid.
Stability came only through suppression of the citizens. Socialists historically have liked that.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
To be fair NATO has been a big sponsor of Islamist terrorism in Central Asia and that is a big reason that Russia and China have had problems. It looks like Cameron's chums from Syria have made their way to Europe again, thanks to Merkel.
I doubt its that. If you are going for areas where people are around you pick the area of the airport that is busiest at that time of day.
At that time there was probably relatively few European flights (one set of desks from memory) and most european travellers are hand luggage only and a lot of inter-continental flights (different set of desks) checking in. I would imagine that those desks were simply busier.
Never assume things are political when there is an easier explanation....
The EU is an undemocratic monster. A cancer whose only objective is to grow its powers. You seem to be trashing the very notion of a sensible and principled desire for sovereignty. Even Chuka Umunna said we can and would be successful outside the EU on Question Time the other day. If Leave wins we're going to need some sensible and principled foamers running this country.
I've described some of the Labour IN camp as "happy clappy" - apparently the EU is wonderful and all we need to do is tell people "what the EU has done for them" and In will win.
Yes Europe has done some marvellous things. Some Godawful things too, and my view is that in recent times the awful outweigh the good. Democracy and accountability is absolutely key - and it fails on both. Selling the status quo is a *very* hard task and that is what IN have to do. The telling question on the referendum is this - if this was an In/Out vote and we weren't a member, how would people choose? Would anyone sane vote to join that?
The real beneficiary of today's events politically will be Donald Trump, of course.
And Le Pen.
Hollande did fine in the Paris aftermath, so not sure about Le Pen. I have no idea who is in charge of Belgium.
It doesn't matter: whoever's in charge is helpless in the presence of those (presumably from the same stock as those angry Molenbeek locals) willing to blow themselves up ...
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
If you read Daesh's magazine called "Dabiq", you will know that they want a truce, basically a "you stay off our patch and we'll stay off yours" agreement.
If for religious-nutcase reasons they want Armageddon (to use a Christian term) to happen anywhere (and the very term "Dabiq" was chosen because of end-of-the-world connotations), it's in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, not in faraway Britain, Belgium, California. Jonathan Powell has supported negotiations and he is right.
It's great psychological warfare to convey an extremely brutal image. The Mongols were good at that too.
These dreadful scenes in Brussels - why Brussels? What has Belgium or the Belgians done to deserve this?
They certainly don't deserve it. But be aware that the government of that country belongs to NATO and hosts the NATO headquarters in its capital city, Brussels.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Yes, there is a hardline form of Islam dedicated to our destruction. Unfortunately our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have been promoting this form of Islam which wants nothing more than to destroy us and our way of life. Our MENA policy is all wrong and as much as I loathe Putin, he has it right.
Surely the current battles are going to leave very deep scars and a lack of trust between opposing factions.
Also, on June 24th won't the battle simply move on from the referendum to the succession? The real problem there, though, is whether the new leader will have any authority. They won't have won an election and whichever side they didn't support in the referendum won't trust them.
And you will still have a majority of 12 and a hostile Lords.
You shouldn't underestimate the capacity of politicians to work amicably together immediately after they've been slagging each other off. Bear in mind that all Conservative MPs - indeed, all party members - will have good friends on the other side of this issue. Many activists will have personally helped with or contributed to the re-election campaigns of MPs both who are prominent Leavers and who are Remainers, and they are not going to go off in a sulk simply because of this issue.
Equally, I don't accept that the new leader will be seen simply through the prism of this referendum. It will be water under the bridge. (That's assuming a Remain result - if it's a Leave result then I do think the new leader will have to be someone who actually wanted to lead us out of the EU - certainly that would be my view).
The small majority and the hostile Lords is certainly a problem, of course.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
If Ken was a sceptic he would be have been the nation's greatest PM.
BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says it is "not a surprise" that this attack has taken place but says it is "shocking it was so successful".
Really Frank.....we have seen how totally clueless the Beligum security services have been looking for one man and how stupid some of their laws are....
These dreadful scenes in Brussels - why Brussels? What has Belgium or the Belgians done to deserve this?
Its unfortunate but a reality that this helps Leave, people see bombs "over there" on the news and react accordingly.
Reaction to the arrests in Molenbeek, and incompetent local security services in disarray. Nothing to do with NATO, though the opportunists in St Petersburg would like you to think otherwise.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Yes, there is a hardline form of Islam dedicated to our destruction. Unfortunately our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have been promoting this form of Islam which wants nothing more than to destroy us and our way of life. Our MENA policy is all wrong and as much as I loathe Putin, he has it right.
I'm not sure Turks have been promoting it but the Saudis for Sunni hardliners (and Iranians for Shia) definitely have. If there were regular terror attacks by hardliner Catholics with the Vatican funding terrorism then I suspect our reaction would be different.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Please don’t stop the Tory infighjting. It’s a great spectator sport.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Yes, there is a hardline form of Islam dedicated to our destruction. Unfortunately our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have been promoting this form of Islam which wants nothing more than to destroy us and our way of life. Our MENA policy is all wrong and as much as I loathe Putin, he has it right.
I'm not sure Turks have been promoting it but the Saudis for Sunni hardliners (and Iranians for Shia) definitely have. If there were regular terror attacks by hardliner Catholics with the Vatican funding terrorism then I suspect our reaction would be different.
There are a lot of dodgy and unexplained links between Erdogan and ISIS.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
If you read Daesh's magazine called "Dabiq", you will know that they want a truce, basically a "you stay off our patch and we'll stay off yours" agreement.
If for religious-nutcase reasons they want Armageddon (to use a Christian term) to happen anywhere (and the very term "Dabiq" was chosen because of end-of-the-world connotations), it's in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, not in faraway Britain, Belgium, California. Jonathan Powell has supported negotiations and he is right.
It's great psychological warfare to convey an extremely brutal image. The Mongols were good at that too.
They want and end to Muslims living anywhere but ISIS controlled territory. Muslims living peacfully in the west destroy the their premise that the west hates Muslims. They want a black and world.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Please don’t stop the Tory infighjting. It’s a great spectator sport.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
I find it cringeworthy, like schoolgirls pulling hair.
FAMILIES who expect their neighbours and fellow parents at the school gates to speak English are not "racist", Labour's Chuka Umunna said today.
Breaking with years of Labour policy, the leading party moderate warned the party had made "mistakes" on immigration in the past and should have done more to tackle the issue..
The Brussels Bombing has just handed another few hundred thousand votes to Leave...
Yep, of course. Because if we left the EU it would mean that there would be no terrorist attacks here.
You don't really understand this politics thing, do you?
Of course it's all the fault of the EU, rather than Islamic extremists or immigration from the third world, or Western involvement in the middle east?
Only a Euro-obsessive would conclude that swing voters will even associate this with the EU, any more than the attacks in Paris, Madrid, London or elsewhere.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
Yes, Belgian intelligence and policing is particularly bad, and the illegal arms trade is strong in Belgium. For example, see this article from last November:
Speaking at a event hosted by Politico Europe three days before the Paris attacks, Jan Jambon, Belgium’s minister for security and home affairs, explained why he thought that his country has struggled to respond groups that plan terrorist attacks or recruit for extremist causes.
Part of the problem, he said, was the complicated structure of the Belgian state and the fragmentation between Flemish-speakers and those who speak French. The capital region of Brussels has six separate police departments and 19 municipalities with 19 different mayors, who often do not communicate with each other or share information.
FAMILIES who expect their neighbours and fellow parents at the school gates to speak English are not "racist", Labour's Chuka Umunna said today.
Breaking with years of Labour policy, the leading party moderate warned the party had made "mistakes" on immigration in the past and should have done more to tackle the issue..
That is just so out of order. Maybe sums up the mentality of some members of UKIP
I can see why they do it, but I feel about it as I did about Cameron claiming that we'd be more at risk outside the EU: I don't think either claim is correct, and we should be wary of making it as it exploits terror for the sake of the issue du jour. Terrorists have grudges against us which they will try to exploit, and they are unlikely to pause to study our relationship with the EU.
Yes, from time to time, nutters of various persuasions will try to create terror. We should do all we reasonably can to prevent it, and to avoid hysterical over-reaction (which is what the terrorists want) if we sometimes fail. It does mean that the balance of arguments on issues like interception of email is affected. But it doesn't mean that everything from EU membership to the price of fish should or can be linked to it.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
Yes, Belgian intelligence and policing is particularly bad, and the illegal arms trade is strong in Belgium. For example, see this article from last November:
Speaking at a event hosted by Politico Europe three days before the Paris attacks, Jan Jambon, Belgium’s minister for security and home affairs, explained why he thought that his country has struggled to respond groups that plan terrorist attacks or recruit for extremist causes.
Part of the problem, he said, was the complicated structure of the Belgian state and the fragmentation between Flemish-speakers and those who speak French. The capital region of Brussels has six separate police departments and 19 municipalities with 19 different mayors, who often do not communicate with each other or share information.
I believe they also have some very strict legislation curbing the powers of the intelligence services, which doesn't help.
The last bit is the most bonkers. I saw reports before that basically said that people of interest could effectively disappear just by moving a few streets.
FAMILIES who expect their neighbours and fellow parents at the school gates to speak English are not "racist", Labour's Chuka Umunna said today.
Breaking with years of Labour policy, the leading party moderate warned the party had made "mistakes" on immigration in the past and should have done more to tackle the issue..
The Brussels Bombing has just handed another few hundred thousand votes to Leave...
Yep, of course. Because if we left the EU it would mean that there would be no terrorist attacks here.
You don't really understand this politics thing, do you?
Of course it's all the fault of the EU, rather than Islamic extremists or immigration from the third world, or Western involvement in the middle east?
Only a Euro-obsessive would conclude that swing voters will even associate this with the EU, any more than the attacks in Paris, Madrid, London or elsewhere.
What a ridiculous post, AFAIK nobody has blamed the EU for the Brussels bombings. But there will undoubtedly be people watching the news that associate terrorism on the continent with a desire to protect our borders. Now you may argue they shouldn't, but they will.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
Yes, Belgian intelligence and policing is particularly bad, and the illegal arms trade is strong in Belgium. For example, see this article from last November:
Speaking at a event hosted by Politico Europe three days before the Paris attacks, Jan Jambon, Belgium’s minister for security and home affairs, explained why he thought that his country has struggled to respond groups that plan terrorist attacks or recruit for extremist causes.
Part of the problem, he said, was the complicated structure of the Belgian state and the fragmentation between Flemish-speakers and those who speak French. The capital region of Brussels has six separate police departments and 19 municipalities with 19 different mayors, who often do not communicate with each other or share information.
I believe they also have some very strict legislation curbing the powers of the intelligence services, which doesn't help.
They also have the twin demands of an ordinary (not particular well off) metropolis and the institutions of various international and pan-European organisations to manage.
If leave advocates use these attacks as a reason to vote to leave, then that will be heard loud and clear across Europe. For this reason and for many others I doubt they will.
What the attacks do argue for is a British withdrawal from NATO. And yes they do. If Belgium has got a crap foreign policy based on alliance with the US, that is no reason for Britain to. Russia and China have also been subjected to terrorist attacks, and that is no reason for Britain to be allied militarily to those countries. Britain's defence policy should first and foremost be about the defence of the British homeland.
Yes it is very telling that the attacks were at the American Airlines desk. Clearly motivated by US foreign policy in the Middle East which we so slavishly and catastrophically follow.
That's what they want us to think.
Personally, I reckon if it wasn't that, they'd find some other excuse
Doesn't make it untrue. If the enemy sends you a message, listen to it.
But don't mistake the message.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Yes, there is a hardline form of Islam dedicated to our destruction. Unfortunately our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have been promoting this form of Islam which wants nothing more than to destroy us and our way of life. Our MENA policy is all wrong and as much as I loathe Putin, he has it right.
I'm not sure Turks have been promoting it but the Saudis for Sunni hardliners (and Iranians for Shia) definitely have. If there were regular terror attacks by hardliner Catholics with the Vatican funding terrorism then I suspect our reaction would be different.
There are a lot of dodgy and unexplained links around Erdogan.
You can ignore the ISIS bit that's probably less than 10% of the dodgy business I've heard about Erdogan and most of my Turkish friends avoid talking about any of it or him for that matter...
The news about the Brussels Bombing is being kept deliberately vague. The authorities are never keen to admit that these explosions are the work of fanatical terrorists. Until, that is, they can no longer keep the news under wraps.
Or is it possible people simply dont yet know, and are busy attending to casualties, and searching for other devices?
Too often (Madrid, Norway) have we seen confident early pronouncements upended by facts....
Ah, but I remember our own London bombings when the BBC insisted for more than 2 hours that those explosions on the tube were simply electrical malfunctions.
Insisted? Really?
Yes insisted is the word. They (BBC and Government) didn't want to believe that a terrorist attack on multiple targets, could actually be happening in dear old London. Especially not from muslims.
What, the religion of peace planting bombs, stop being so wayyyycist.
Utterly off-topic, but if anyone doesn't have a next gen console and is thinking of getting one, I'd strongly advocate waiting.
Both Sony and Microsoft have rumours circulating that updated console versions could come out. Whether this is to take advantage of 4K resolution and/or VR is unclear (may also be souped up in other ways).
If this leads to my PS4 not being able to play as many games, I reserve the right to cast a hex upon Sony. [As an aside, my timing for consoles is lamentable. For about four generations I've bought one and within a year there's either been a massive price drop or a better version come along].
The Brussels Bombing has just handed another few hundred thousand votes to Leave...
Yep, of course. Because if we left the EU it would mean that there would be no terrorist attacks here.
You don't really understand this politics thing, do you?
Of course it's all the fault of the EU, rather than Islamic extremists or immigration from the third world, or Western involvement in the middle east?
Only a Euro-obsessive would conclude that swing voters will even associate this with the EU, any more than the attacks in Paris, Madrid, London or elsewhere.
What a ridiculous post, AFAIK nobody has blamed the EU for the Brussels bombings. But there will undoubtedly be people watching the news that associate terrorism on the continent with a desire to protect our borders. Now you may argue they shouldn't, but they will.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Please don’t stop the Tory infighjting. It’s a great spectator sport.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
Just imagine if/when the Tories unite and turn their firepower exclusively on Corbyn and McDonnell.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Please don’t stop the Tory infighjting. It’s a great spectator sport.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
Odd* how the 'order more popcorn' meme has almost disappeared on PB.
These dreadful scenes in Brussels - why Brussels? What has Belgium or the Belgians done to deserve this?
They certainly don't deserve it. But be aware that the government of that country belongs to NATO and hosts the NATO headquarters in its capital city, Brussels.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
The fact that the city hosts the HQ of the most influential US-led military alliance must have been a factor in the choice of target, yes. Brussels may seem innocuous to you, as it did to the Monty Python crew and Quentin Hogg, but that's not how it looks to everyone.
The coming British referendum may also have been a factor. Britain is quite an important country and the effect of these attacks on Britain (and France, and Germany) will have been considered. Neither al-Qaeda nor Daesh are led by idiots who fail to keep up with policies and divisions in the west. Witness how the former has made propaganda moves relating to US presidential elections.
Utterly off-topic, but if anyone doesn't have a next gen console and is thinking of getting one, I'd strongly advocate waiting.
Both Sony and Microsoft have rumours circulating that updated console versions could come out. Whether this is to take advantage of 4K resolution and/or VR is unclear (may also be souped up in other ways).
If this leads to my PS4 not being able to play as many games, I reserve the right to cast a hex upon Sony. [As an aside, my timing for consoles is lamentable. For about four generations I've bought one and within a year there's either been a massive price drop or a better version come along].
It's never going to happen. What is being talked about from the PS4 side is to integrate the VR processing box into the unit's main hardware at some point, it would only be accessible to games that make use of the VR headset. That way they can pass the cost of it on to all consumers and make the VR headset cheaper to drive adoption.
Sounds like he'd be perfect for a guest piece here.
No need. We can read these views from TSE and Meeks on a regular basis.
I must admit I'm wishing I'd come up with the Alsatian analogy.
Me too.
Nick Soames has forced us to raise our game
You see, this is what pisses me off. It's not ok for Brexiters to vent their spleen when they feel the Government is stacking the deck, or being disingenuous, but it's fine for the likes of Nicholas Soames to do the same because you agree with him?
Redwood/Jenkins and Soames/Baroness Altman are as bad as each other.
And if you are going to pretend to really make this about quietening down Tory tensions at least keep such views to yourself.
I wasn't agreeing with Soames.
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
So you think all Brexiters should be kicked hard in the balls?
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
Nobody in the Tory party should be kicked hard in the balls*. I'm urging pax vobiscum to all my fellow Tories.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Please don’t stop the Tory infighjting. It’s a great spectator sport.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
Odd* how the 'order more popcorn' meme has almost disappeared on PB.
*Not odd at all.
Ahem bottom of this thread header by me on Sunday.
Mmmmh are you suggesting they are attacking NATO? I can't fathom why Brussels, an innocuous place (EU parliament aside) is getting it. I'd have thought London would be the main target, perhaps our intelligence is better, who knows.
Yes, Belgian intelligence and policing is particularly bad, and the illegal arms trade is strong in Belgium. For example, see this article from last November:
Speaking at a event hosted by Politico Europe three days before the Paris attacks, Jan Jambon, Belgium’s minister for security and home affairs, explained why he thought that his country has struggled to respond groups that plan terrorist attacks or recruit for extremist causes.
Part of the problem, he said, was the complicated structure of the Belgian state and the fragmentation between Flemish-speakers and those who speak French. The capital region of Brussels has six separate police departments and 19 municipalities with 19 different mayors, who often do not communicate with each other or share information.
I believe they also have some very strict legislation curbing the powers of the intelligence services, which doesn't help.
That legislation is presumably what that politician dude was asked to promote the reversal of. What languages local bobbies speak doesn't strike me as likely to have much importance to Belgium's security.
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
Nonsense. The Tory party elected Cameron despite disagreeing with him on various stances because it recognised that he represented the best route to power. In hindsight, that decision was probably right. And he will continue to be supported, if not loved, as long as it remains so.
You overestimate how important Europe is to the majority of the party. Most people on both sides will get on happily with those on the other after the result is in, and whatever it is. And most of those who are obsessive about it have other obsessions that would still cause them to rebel on this, that or t'other.
That legislation is presumably what that politician dude was asked to promote the reversal of. What languages local bobbies speak doesn't strike me as likely to have much importance to Belgium's security.
The Flemish/Walloon divide is hardly just about 'what languages local bobbies speak'.
That legislation is presumably what that politician dude was asked to promote the reversal of. What languages local bobbies speak doesn't strike me as likely to have much importance to Belgium's security.
The Flemish/Walloon divide is hardly just about 'what languages local bobbies speak'.
I think it's the implied organisational divide that's the problem. You can feel it on the ground in Belgium. It's a complication that just makes things more difficult for the stretched police.
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
I guess that depends whether Conservatives wish to be a party of government or a social club for foaming Europhobes.
The EU is an undemocratic monster. A cancer whose only objective is to grow its powers.
Tony Blair has warned against "flabby liberalism" and says there needs to be a tougher centre ground approach to issues such as tackling extremism and responding to the refugee crisis.
The former UK prime minister is planning a global project to prevent extremism through education.
"The centre has become flabby and unwilling to take people on. We concede far too much. There's this idea that you're part of an elite if you think in terms of respectful tolerance towards other people. It's ridiculous,
'The Brussels Bombing has just handed another few hundred thousand votes to Leave...'
So much for the safer IN guff.
Yes, but we haven't had the "this is nothing to do with islam" speeches from Obama and Cameron yet.
That's accurate, its get nothing to do with Islam.... It's however probably got a lot to do with mentally disturbed / brainwashed people with inaccurate ideas of what Islam means and preaches
Who is to say that this is inaccurate.
After all, the bombers tend to be extremely pious and ordinary muslims who aren't bombers tend not to be overly religious.
I think Mr Meeks is being a bit unfair in part. I remember as a student thinking it was odd that the Tories ran the Save the Pound campaign in 2001 when Labour seemed to have neutered the issue with a promise of a referendum. But let's not forget that joining the Euro was a serious possibility and backed by the then Prime Minister. I also think it is fair to say that were we now a part of the Eurozone it would not be considered an insignificant issue.
I'd agree there. What the recent behaviour of Osborne and Cameron has done is to drain away my desire to actively help.
Being repeatedly name called by fellow Tories who should know a lot better isn't helping either. Neither side is without blame, that's no excuse for acting like 14yr olds.
I'll continue to support the Party, but not go out of my way for Cameron or Osborne unless in extremis.
This is tosh. The sceptics are right. What is insane is the Tory party electing itself a leader who does not instinctively feel the way his party does and then expecting that there can be peace. Dave should have pushed hard for a Leave.
Nonsense. The Tory party elected Cameron despite disagreeing with him on various stances because it recognised that he represented the best route to power. In hindsight, that decision was probably right. And he will continue to be supported, if not loved, as long as it remains so.
You overestimate how important Europe is to the majority of the party. Most people on both sides will get on happily with those on the other after the result is in, and whatever it is. And most of those who are obsessive about it have other obsessions that would still cause them to rebel on this, that or t'other.
On the question of whether being in the EU makes any difference to our ability to protect ourselves from terrorism, I agree with Richard T and Nick P (now there's an interesting Venn diagram!) that there doesn't seem to be any reason why it should make any difference one way or the other.
However, I was struck by Theresa May's statement coming out in favour of staying in the EU for precisely that reason. I understand from an MP who knows her well that this is absolutely her genuine view based on her experiences as Home Sec, and that she would otherwise have been in the Leave camp. I can't see it myself, but I'm conscious that she knows a hell of a lot more about these matters than I do. I'd be very interested to hear more from her on what exactly is the issue.
Surely the current battles are going to leave very deep scars and a lack of trust between opposing factions.
Also, on June 24th won't the battle simply move on from the referendum to the succession? The real problem there, though, is whether the new leader will have any authority. They won't have won an election and whichever side they didn't support in the referendum won't trust them.
And you will still have a majority of 12 and a hostile Lords.
You shouldn't underestimate the capacity of politicians to work amicably together immediately after they've been slagging each other off. Bear in mind that all Conservative MPs - indeed, all party members - will have good friends on the other side of this issue. Many activists will have personally helped with or contributed to the re-election campaigns of MPs both who are prominent Leavers and who are Remainers, and they are not going to go off in a sulk simply because of this issue.
Equally, I don't accept that the new leader will be seen simply through the prism of this referendum. It will be water under the bridge. (That's assuming a Remain result - if it's a Leave result then I do think the new leader will have to be someone who actually wanted to lead us out of the EU - certainly that would be my view).
The small majority and the hostile Lords is certainly a problem, of course.
You have far more knowledge of the inner workings of the Conservative Party than I do but I have to say that I am sceptical about this predicted burying of hatchets. I don't see anything in the history of the last 25 years to suggest that a Remain result will end the war. If it's Leave, maybe, not sure. A Leave win will present another challenge though - agreement on what comes next.
New details of the Paris attacks carried out last November reveal that it was the consistent use of prepaid burner phones, not encryption, that helped keep the terrorists off the radar of the intelligence services.
As an article in The New York Times reports: "the three teams in Paris were comparatively disciplined. They used only new phones that they would then discard, including several activated minutes before the attacks, or phones seized from their victims."
The article goes on to give more details of how some phones were used only very briefly in the hours leading up to the attacks. For example: "Security camera footage showed Bilal Hadfi, the youngest of the assailants, as he paced outside the stadium, talking on a cellphone. The phone was activated less than an hour before he detonated his vest." The information come from a 55-page report compiled by the French antiterrorism police for France’s Interior Ministry.
Outside the Bataclan theatre venue, the investigators found a Samsung phone in a dustbin: "It had a Belgian SIM card that had been in use only since the day before the attack. The phone had called just one other number—belonging to an unidentified user in Belgium."
As police pieced together the movements of the attackers, they found yet more burner phones: "Everywhere they went, the attackers left behind their throwaway phones, including in Bobigny, at a villa rented in the name of Ibrahim Abdeslam. When the brigade charged with sweeping the location arrived, it found two unused cellphones still inside their boxes." At another location used by one of the terrorists, the police found dozens of unused burner phones "still in their wrappers."
I think it's the implied organisational divide that's the problem. You can feel it on the ground in Belgium. It's a complication that just makes things more difficult for the stretched police.
Yes, exactly. It's actually a very poisonous divide. I have some French-speaking relatives who live in a Flemish area of Brussels and they are finding the local administration very hostile.
On the question of whether being in the EU makes any difference to our ability to protect ourselves from terrorism, I agree with Richard T and Nick P (now there's an interesting Venn diagram!) that there doesn't seem to be any reason why it should make any difference one way or the other.
However, I was struck by Theresa May's statement coming out in favour of staying in the EU for precisely that reason. I understand from an MP who knows her well that this is absolutely her genuine view based on her experiences as Home Sec, and that she would otherwise have been in the Leave camp. I can't see it myself, but I'm conscious that she knows a hell of a lot more about it than I do. I'd be very interested to hear more from her on what exactly is the issue.
The fact is that Western Europe's policy is failing, and failing badly. Every few months, innocent people are being slaughtered on the streets of its cities. Its becoming commonplace.
Whether its the EU or Britain, the policy of people who lead us is wrong, it has been wrong for decades, and must be replaced.
New details of the Paris attacks carried out last November reveal that it was the consistent use of prepaid burner phones, not encryption, that helped keep the terrorists off the radar of the intelligence services.
As an article in The New York Times reports: "the three teams in Paris were comparatively disciplined. They used only new phones that they would then discard, including several activated minutes before the attacks, or phones seized from their victims."
The article goes on to give more details of how some phones were used only very briefly in the hours leading up to the attacks. For example: "Security camera footage showed Bilal Hadfi, the youngest of the assailants, as he paced outside the stadium, talking on a cellphone. The phone was activated less than an hour before he detonated his vest." The information come from a 55-page report compiled by the French antiterrorism police for France’s Interior Ministry.
Outside the Bataclan theatre venue, the investigators found a Samsung phone in a dustbin: "It had a Belgian SIM card that had been in use only since the day before the attack. The phone had called just one other number—belonging to an unidentified user in Belgium."
As police pieced together the movements of the attackers, they found yet more burner phones: "Everywhere they went, the attackers left behind their throwaway phones, including in Bobigny, at a villa rented in the name of Ibrahim Abdeslam. When the brigade charged with sweeping the location arrived, it found two unused cellphones still inside their boxes." At another location used by one of the terrorists, the police found dozens of unused burner phones "still in their wrappers."
On the question of whether being in the EU makes any difference to our ability to protect ourselves from terrorism, I agree with Richard T and Nick P (now there's an interesting Venn diagram!) that there doesn't seem to be any reason why it should make any difference one way or the other.
However, I was struck by Theresa May's statement coming out in favour of staying in the EU for precisely that reason. I understand from an MP who knows her well that this is absolutely her genuine view based on her experiences as Home Sec, and that she would otherwise have been in the Leave camp. I can't see it myself, but I'm conscious that she knows a hell of a lot more about it than I do. I'd be very interested to hear more from her on what exactly is the issue.
The fact is that Western Europe's policy is failing, and failing badly. Every few months, innocent people are being slaughtered on the streets of its cities. Its becoming commonplace.
Whether its the EU or Britain, the policy of people who lead us is wrong, it has been wrong for decades, and must be replaced.
I think it's the implied organisational divide that's the problem. You can feel it on the ground in Belgium. It's a complication that just makes things more difficult for the stretched police.
Yes, exactly. It's actually a very poisonous divide. I have some French-speaking relatives who live in a Flemish area of Brussels and they are finding the local administration very hostile.
I lived in a French speaking part of Brussels - but got much further in English when I wandered into Flemish speaking parts......the hostility - even to an outsider - was striking.....
The fact is that Western Europe's policy is failing, and failing badly. Every few months, innocent people are being slaughtered on the streets of its cities. Its becoming commonplace.
Whether its the EU or Britain, the policy of people who lead us is wrong, it has been wrong for decades, and must be replaced.
I think it's the implied organisational divide that's the problem. You can feel it on the ground in Belgium. It's a complication that just makes things more difficult for the stretched police.
Yes, exactly. It's actually a very poisonous divide. I have some French-speaking relatives who live in a Flemish area of Brussels and they are finding the local administration very hostile.
I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years the Flemish half decides to to have an independence referendum or a referendum on joining the Netherlands.
On the question of whether being in the EU makes any difference to our ability to protect ourselves from terrorism, I agree with Richard T and Nick P (now there's an interesting Venn diagram!) that there doesn't seem to be any reason why it should make any difference one way or the other.
However, I was struck by Theresa May's statement coming out in favour of staying in the EU for precisely that reason. I understand from an MP who knows her well that this is absolutely her genuine view based on her experiences as Home Sec, and that she would otherwise have been in the Leave camp. I can't see it myself, but I'm conscious that she knows a hell of a lot more about these matters than I do. I'd be very interested to hear more from her on what exactly is the issue.
The issue is what I discussed down thread. Unlike our relationship with the US all police and intelligence co-operation within the EU is based upon EU institutions. She was clearly persuaded that it was in our interests to be a part of that which is why she opted in to some of the Justice and Home Affairs arrangements which we previously had an opt out on.
Could we remain a part of such arrangements outwith the EU? I really don't see why not although I don't think any of the EFTA countries currently are. We are in a position to give them material they need and visa versa of course. Common sense says an agreement would be reached but she perhaps wants the UK to play a more active role. When you look at the performance and track record of the Belgians one can understand why she may take the view that being on the inside pushing for better performance is important to UK security.
Comments
When the war in the Ukraine started, there was western propaganda about having a strong military presence along the eastern border of the Baltic states. Do you know what that would mean for Kaliningrad? Think Germany crossing the Rhine with its military in 1936.
French interior minister on Sky now
When you write threads, you're always striving to come up with a memorable phrase that sums up your piece.
Soames achieved that in spades.
Also, on June 24th won't the battle simply move on from the referendum to the succession? The real problem there, though, is whether the new leader will have any authority. They won't have won an election and whichever side they didn't support in the referendum won't trust them.
And you will still have a majority of 12 and a hostile Lords.
Nor can we ignore the internal factors (shia vs sunni, mainstream vs radical) or the external factors - supply routes and control of oil and gas to Europe. This is our mess. Its not to excuse acts of murderous barbarism. But we have to accept that we create the conditions which allow the ideology and mindset of these murderers to believe their cause is valid.
If he wants to be a berk, well that's up to him. I find him boorish.
We've extra at Heathrow, Gatwick and other key transport locations. No specific threats currently.
They hate us and want to destroy us. It's nothing to do with whether or not we intervene in Syria, Iraq, or Libya
Its unfortunate but a reality that this helps Leave, people see bombs "over there" on the news and react accordingly.
Thing is TSE I know you don't really think that, and your anger is purely directed at the handful of Tory miscreants trying to destabilise Dave, but repeating posts like that, which ostensibly target all Brexiters, whilst heavily criticising those on the other side who do the same only serve to accentuate internal divisions within the party. Particularly when you are known to be close to CCHQ.
Please don't play along with that game. (For my part, I am trying to stop too)
At that time there was probably relatively few European flights (one set of desks from memory) and most european travellers are hand luggage only and a lot of inter-continental flights (different set of desks) checking in. I would imagine that those desks were simply busier.
Never assume things are political when there is an easier explanation....
Yes Europe has done some marvellous things. Some Godawful things too, and my view is that in recent times the awful outweigh the good. Democracy and accountability is absolutely key - and it fails on both. Selling the status quo is a *very* hard task and that is what IN have to do. The telling question on the referendum is this - if this was an In/Out vote and we weren't a member, how would people choose? Would anyone sane vote to join that?
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.107728324
Zac Goldsmith well ahead on terror vs Sadiq
If for religious-nutcase reasons they want Armageddon (to use a Christian term) to happen anywhere (and the very term "Dabiq" was chosen because of end-of-the-world connotations), it's in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, not in faraway Britain, Belgium, California. Jonathan Powell has supported negotiations and he is right.
It's great psychological warfare to convey an extremely brutal image. The Mongols were good at that too.
My closeness to CCHQ doesn't stop me from criticising Dave and George.
*Except those that call me and Ken Clarke TINOs
Equally, I don't accept that the new leader will be seen simply through the prism of this referendum. It will be water under the bridge. (That's assuming a Remain result - if it's a Leave result then I do think the new leader will have to be someone who actually wanted to lead us out of the EU - certainly that would be my view).
The small majority and the hostile Lords is certainly a problem, of course.
Just hilarious
Really Frank.....we have seen how totally clueless the Beligum security services have been looking for one man and how stupid some of their laws are....
Right lets raid this building.
Can't lads, law says only in daytime
-----------------
Ok, lets go go go
Boss shall I look in the wardrobe
No don't bother
------------
Whose that coming out the building
Oh nobody
Wait, is that the bloke we are looking for
Could be
Shit he is getting away
Alistair Meeks' prejudices.
(Rephrase, it’s great entertainment for the onlookers!)
https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665337881351729152?s=09
Only a Euro-obsessive would conclude that swing voters will even associate this with the EU, any more than the attacks in Paris, Madrid, London or elsewhere.
Speaking at a event hosted by Politico Europe three days before the Paris attacks, Jan Jambon, Belgium’s minister for security and home affairs, explained why he thought that his country has struggled to respond groups that plan terrorist attacks or recruit for extremist causes.
Part of the problem, he said, was the complicated structure of the Belgian state and the fragmentation between Flemish-speakers and those who speak French. The capital region of Brussels has six separate police departments and 19 municipalities with 19 different mayors, who often do not communicate with each other or share information.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/15/world/europe/belgium-terrorism-suspects.html
I believe they also have some very strict legislation curbing the powers of the intelligence services, which doesn't help.
That's going to go down well in North Wales.
Yes, from time to time, nutters of various persuasions will try to create terror. We should do all we reasonably can to prevent it, and to avoid hysterical over-reaction (which is what the terrorists want) if we sometimes fail. It does mean that the balance of arguments on issues like interception of email is affected. But it doesn't mean that everything from EU membership to the price of fish should or can be linked to it.
Nothing golly about it just a meaningless platitude along the lines of Brown's British Jobs for British Workers.
Quite why posters who were spectacularly wrong in May 2015 think we should listen to them, or bet based on their recommendations, escapes me.
http://smartraveller.gov.au/countries/belgium
Both Sony and Microsoft have rumours circulating that updated console versions could come out. Whether this is to take advantage of 4K resolution and/or VR is unclear (may also be souped up in other ways).
If this leads to my PS4 not being able to play as many games, I reserve the right to cast a hex upon Sony. [As an aside, my timing for consoles is lamentable. For about four generations I've bought one and within a year there's either been a massive price drop or a better version come along].
A grim hostage to fortune no one wanted.
That will be great entertainment
Odd* how the 'order more popcorn' meme has almost disappeared on PB.
*Not odd at all.
The coming British referendum may also have been a factor. Britain is quite an important country and the effect of these attacks on Britain (and France, and Germany) will have been considered. Neither al-Qaeda nor Daesh are led by idiots who fail to keep up with policies and divisions in the west. Witness how the former has made propaganda moves relating to US presidential elections.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/03/20/the-osborne-legacy/
What is your next question with a really obvious answer?
You overestimate how important Europe is to the majority of the party. Most people on both sides will get on happily with those on the other after the result is in, and whatever it is. And most of those who are obsessive about it have other obsessions that would still cause them to rebel on this, that or t'other.
The former UK prime minister is planning a global project to prevent extremism through education.
"The centre has become flabby and unwilling to take people on. We concede far too much. There's this idea that you're part of an elite if you think in terms of respectful tolerance towards other people. It's ridiculous,
http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35862598
After all, the bombers tend to be extremely pious and ordinary muslims who aren't bombers tend not to be overly religious.
Being repeatedly name called by fellow Tories who should know a lot better isn't helping either. Neither side is without blame, that's no excuse for acting like 14yr olds.
I'll continue to support the Party, but not go out of my way for Cameron or Osborne unless in extremis.
However, I was struck by Theresa May's statement coming out in favour of staying in the EU for precisely that reason. I understand from an MP who knows her well that this is absolutely her genuine view based on her experiences as Home Sec, and that she would otherwise have been in the Leave camp. I can't see it myself, but I'm conscious that she knows a hell of a lot more about these matters than I do. I'd be very interested to hear more from her on what exactly is the issue.
http://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2016/03/interview-nicholas-soames-compares-brexiteers-to-an-alsatian-that-must-be-kicked-really-hard-in-the-balls.html
Sometimes the media click bait headlines are just that. But we fall for them every time.
As an article in The New York Times reports: "the three teams in Paris were comparatively disciplined. They used only new phones that they would then discard, including several activated minutes before the attacks, or phones seized from their victims."
The article goes on to give more details of how some phones were used only very briefly in the hours leading up to the attacks. For example: "Security camera footage showed Bilal Hadfi, the youngest of the assailants, as he paced outside the stadium, talking on a cellphone. The phone was activated less than an hour before he detonated his vest." The information come from a 55-page report compiled by the French antiterrorism police for France’s Interior Ministry.
Outside the Bataclan theatre venue, the investigators found a Samsung phone in a dustbin: "It had a Belgian SIM card that had been in use only since the day before the attack. The phone had called just one other number—belonging to an unidentified user in Belgium."
As police pieced together the movements of the attackers, they found yet more burner phones: "Everywhere they went, the attackers left behind their throwaway phones, including in Bobigny, at a villa rented in the name of Ibrahim Abdeslam. When the brigade charged with sweeping the location arrived, it found two unused cellphones still inside their boxes." At another location used by one of the terrorists, the police found dozens of unused burner phones "still in their wrappers."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/paris-terrorist-attacks-burner-phones-not-encryption/
Somebody watched The Wire....
.
Trump after Brussels attacks: "Do you all remember how beautiful and safe a place Brussels was. Not anymore!" https://t.co/VBRtVRctXA
Whether its the EU or Britain, the policy of people who lead us is wrong, it has been wrong for decades, and must be replaced.
And Leave.
And AfD.
And Geert Wilders
https://www.statista.com/chart/4093/people-killed-by-terrorist-attacks-in-western-europe-since-1970/
Could we remain a part of such arrangements outwith the EU? I really don't see why not although I don't think any of the EFTA countries currently are. We are in a position to give them material they need and visa versa of course. Common sense says an agreement would be reached but she perhaps wants the UK to play a more active role. When you look at the performance and track record of the Belgians one can understand why she may take the view that being on the inside pushing for better performance is important to UK security.