I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, but in political terms that's a cop out. To be meaningful you need to set out what you expect government to do by way of response. If it's the same list of "make life miserable for muslims" ideas that one PB'er advanced last night then, whilst you might feel better sitting in your armchair, another bunch of young people will sign up to ISIS's perverted cause and the threat we face simply escalates.
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
FWIW my postal ballot papers in Cambridge arrived today.
Undecided or ... ?
A fair few of us are betting on Cambridge here
FYI - in the past I have stood as a Tory councillor; last time I spoiled my ballot. I vacillated for a while having received some annoying comms from LibDem central, but eventually I chose Huppert (LD) as the best individual candidate.
Boooo!
It's Cambridge, do you want Daniel Zeichner sneaking in ?
Exactly
Exclusive PB Cambridge Exit Poll ....
LibDem GAIN ....
Might not be seeing too much of that on June 8/9th ....
Personally I don't think he will be impeached, but I'm still taking the evens about him going early.
In today's climate I think Trump is what Americans want even with all his baggage, his Muslim immigration ban was far more popular in the rustbelt than the liberal elite would care to admit, impeaching him over sharing information with Putin about ISIS won't wash
It's a question of if/when he loses the Republican base, isn't it? 538 indicates his popularity rating has flattened out at 39%. That's dangerously low, I would have thought, but not necessarily terminal.
I suspect we're in one of those paradoxical situations where the GOP would like to see him gone, but the Dems want him to hang around, at least until the mid-terms.
If Trump is impeached before he's alienated the majority of Republican support, then there will surely be a tremendous backlash from Republican voters against what they will see as a Washington conspiracy against their standard bearer.
It's a bit of a statistical paradox though as people increasing identify IND rather than GOP, when they tire of Trumpton's rank incompetency. So his approvals among the GOP base are something of a mathematical mirage.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You only have to point out that it was foreseeable on an internet chat room for buckets of shit to be poured over you, why would a politician do so when they'd probably get taken out?
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, but in political terms that's a cop out. To be meaningful you need to set out what you expect government to do by way of response. If it's the same list of "make life miserable for muslims" ideas that one PB'er advanced last night then, whilst you might feel better sitting in your armchair, another bunch of young people will sign up to ISIS's perverted cause and the threat we face simply escalates.
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
Why wouldn't they be optimistic about the future of Britain? Mass immmigration and differential birth rates mean that they will play an ever larger role in Britain's future.
Something like 1 in 10 children under 5 are Muslim. Mohammed will be the most popular baby boy's name for the rest of all our lives.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
Good people of all kinds are scared shitless to speak out. That's what happens when a society is hamstrung by political correctness.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
@isam We've had incidents of violence, but that doesn't equal that the country is in a civil war. For the most part post war and 21st century life has been one of peace, not of frequent violence all the time. Most people have been able to get on with their lives.
Post war doesn't matter - oh how convenient, of course post war matters, it's when the commonwealth immigrants that you take issue came to the country.
Enoch Powell predicted some kind of chaotic, violent, unstable society - THAT has not happened. The remarkable success story of this country is integration of people of many different people.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Well she should not have said it but it does help the government in power at the time normally.However I do remember back in 2005 many blaming 7/7 on Blair and Iraq.
The stupidity of the comment is that, aside from politicizing the tragedy, she does so in a way that implicitly says, "I know my side is crap on something as important as this"
This site is a nasty caricature of itself, whenever there is a terrorist attack.
In other matters, the campaign should not stop beyond today, nor the election be cancelled.
What is worth considering is that election campaigns do appear to attract these psychos. First Jo Cox, and now this. I wonder whether extra security is needed during campaigns? Or just a coincidence?
I suspect that "these psychos" would commit their crimes at some point anyway. Elections may have a timing effect, but it's just that, nothing more
The general election campaign could be suspended until at least Friday, senior campaign sources in the major political parties have told BuzzFeed News, as the country comes to terms with the Manchester terror attack.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, but in political terms that's a cop out. To be meaningful you need to set out what you expect government to do by way of response. If it's the same list of "make life miserable for muslims" ideas that one PB'er advanced last night then, whilst you might feel better sitting in your armchair, another bunch of young people will sign up to ISIS's perverted cause and the threat we face simply escalates.
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
Why wouldn't they be optimistic about the future of Britain? Mass immmigration and differential birth rates mean that they will play an ever larger role in Britain's future.
Something like 1 in 10 children under 5 are Muslim. Mohammed will be the most popular baby boy's name for the rest of all our lives.
In which case it is time we started to face up to some adult responses to the situation, rather than living in denial playing about with all this UKIP-SeanT w*nkery?
I thought a bit of light relief was the right way to lead into a serious comment about the ignorance and stupidity of the nonsense you post up here once the cork has come out of the bottle.
The problem is it all comes across as a bit handwringy. What I read between the lines is that its all a bit nasty and unfortunate, but we need to be good chaps play by the rules, and hope the other side are good chaps as well, but at all costs we must stop the silly proles from getting ansy and voting for any of those nasty populists with their simplistic solutions. Not sure it resonates with the voters
We aren't aggressive enough with our liberalism.
We dont have any significant liberal parties. We have three statist parties and a collection of hangers on. At the first sniff of gunsmoke the first instinct of all the major parties is more laws, more regulations and more control by the state.
Personally I don't think he will be impeached, but I'm still taking the evens about him going early.
In today's climate I think Trump is what Americans want even with all his baggage, his Muslim immigration ban was far more popular in the rustbelt than the liberal elite would care to admit, impeaching him over sharing information with Putin about ISIS won't wash
It's a question of if/when he loses the Republican base, isn't it? 538 indicates his popularity rating has flattened out at 39%. That's dangerously low, I would have thought, but not necessarily terminal.
I suspect we're in one of those paradoxical situations where the GOP would like to see him gone, but the Dems want him to hang around, at least until the mid-terms.
If Trump is impeached before he's alienated the majority of Republican support, then there will surely be a tremendous backlash from Republican voters against what they will see as a Washington conspiracy against their standard bearer.
It's a bit of a statistical paradox though as people increasing identify IND rather than GOP, when they tire of Trumpton's rank incompetency. So his approvals among the GOP base are something of a mathematical mirage.
Yes, this point has been made on this Site before.
I have no idea how Nate Silver copes with it in his figures and can only report the 39.1% approval score from his Site.
Here's an examply of the mentality of a Corbyn apologist (borrowed from facebook) -
'The timing of this attack was perfect, I do not believe this was anything to do with terrorists. They will probably find that whoever did it had Labour posters in their house and Corbyn will be blamed. Nothing would surprise me with this election, it was just so fine with the timing, I just cannot see it any other way. Frau May can now LOOK like she is strong.'
Here's an examply of the mentality of a Corbyn apologist (borrowed from facebook) -
'The timing of this attack was perfect, I do not believe this was anything to do with terrorists. They will probably find that whoever did it had Labour posters in their house and Corbyn will be blamed. Nothing would surprise me with this election, it was just so fine with the timing, I just cannot see it any other way. Frau May can now LOOK like she is strong.'
Where do they find these people?
When Jo Cox was murdered, it looked like curtains for the side of the debate I supported, and also looked like costing me several thousand pounds, but not for a minute did I think that REMAIN had organised it.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
Good people of all kinds are scared shitless to speak out. That's what happens when a society is hamstrung by political correctness.
Bollocks. Both good and bad people have been spouting off about this all day. No evidence of self censorship at all.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
I don't think the statement about Irish teenagers thirty years ago is actually correct, if you mean Irish teenagers living in the UK.
No doubt you have some evidence to bring to the table for your assertion?
I thought a bit of light relief was the right way to lead into a serious comment about the ignorance and stupidity of the nonsense you post up here once the cork has come out of the bottle.
The problem is it all comes across as a bit handwringy. What I read between the lines is that its all a bit nasty and unfortunate, but we need to be good chaps play by the rules, and hope the other side are good chaps as well, but at all costs we must stop the silly proles from getting ansy and voting for any of those nasty populists with their simplistic solutions. Not sure it resonates with the voters
We aren't aggressive enough with our liberalism.
We dont have any significant liberal parties. We have three statist parties and a collection of hangers on. At the first sniff of gunsmoke the first instinct of all the major parties is more laws, more regulations and more control by the state.
I know, it is tragic. Throughout history people turn to the simplistic solutions offered by the extremes when things get difficult, and it never turns out well. The centre does itself no favours being so timid.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You only have to point out that it was foreseeable on an internet chat room for buckets of shit to be poured over you, why would a politician do so when they'd probably get taken out?
True but sadly we do not have politicians with the intellect of Enoch Powell and Tony Benn both from differing sides of politics to speak out.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Could we praps judge ideas on their merits rather than their history? Are misogyny and gay-hating ok for muslims now, as long as we can be confident they will have knocked it off in another half-century?
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed us. It's not just politicians like Corbyn and Abbott who have the blood of innocents on his hands; it's the entire lot of you. You were warned this would happen, you were told. Yet you stood by and did nothing. Thanks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Even 50 years ago, religious tolerance was pretty uncontentious.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
The general election campaign could be suspended until at least Friday, senior campaign sources in the major political parties have told BuzzFeed News, as the country comes to terms with the Manchester terror attack.
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
It was a mistranslation.
What he really said was "winding up the accountants"
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
Barnier is fine - he's a pragmatic and serious guy who has plenty of experience (including of course in overseeing financial regulation, so he's well aware of the importance of the City to the whole of the EU). If the negotiations were entirely in his hands, I don't think there'd be a problem; he'll be a tough negotiator, certainly, but he's someone we can do business with.
The issue is more whether he'll be able to take the EU27- who have the final say - with him.
I thought a bit of light relief was the right way to lead into a serious comment about the ignorance and stupidity of the nonsense you post up here once the cork has come out of the bottle.
The problem is it all comes across as a bit handwringy. What I read between the lines is that its all a bit nasty and unfortunate, but we need to be good chaps play by the rules, and hope the other side are good chaps as well, but at all costs we must stop the silly proles from getting ansy and voting for any of those nasty populists with their simplistic solutions. Not sure it resonates with the voters
We aren't aggressive enough with our liberalism.
We dont have any significant liberal parties. We have three statist parties and a collection of hangers on. At the first sniff of gunsmoke the first instinct of all the major parties is more laws, more regulations and more control by the state.
I know, it is tragic. Throughout history people turn to the simplistic solutions offered by the extremes when things get difficult, and it never turns out well. The centre does itself no favours being so timid.
Its not about extremism. Blair was as centrist as they come, and called himself a liberal, and yet his terms in office were one big long parade of illiberal statist laws and pettyfogging bureaucracy and jobsworthiness.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
There is fairly strong herding around 1.7bn from the more reliable looking google sources. What do you think is the right number?
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
Discussions are not served by deliberately misrepresenting what others say. Sean clearly said x 'springs from' y. Obviously from his formulation, Sean is very clear that x and y are not the same.
The general election campaign could be suspended until at least Friday, senior campaign sources in the major political parties have told BuzzFeed News, as the country comes to terms with the Manchester terror attack.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed l.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Even 50 years ago, religious tolerance was pretty uncontentious.
Attitudes to homosexuality, women or mixed marriges were not very different. Indeed such socially conservative veiws would have been seen as very British over most of the last century.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
There is fairly strong herding around 1.7bn from the more reliable looking google sources. What do you think is the right number?
Muslims are not Islamists, as commonly defined. I was using the term in the context of In Western media usage the term tends to refer to groups who aim to establish a sharia-based Islamic state, often with implication of violent tactics and human rights violations, and has acquired connotations of political extremism.
The general election campaign could be suspended until at least Friday, senior campaign sources in the major political parties have told BuzzFeed News, as the country comes to terms with the Manchester terror attack.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
ks to your appeasement of Islam we are where we are and 22 young girls and boys are dead. Fuck all you politicians. Fuck you all.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Could we praps judge ideas on their merits rather than their history? Are misogyny and gay-hating ok for muslims now, as long as we can be confident they will have knocked it off in another half-century?
Their learning curve will have to be a lot sharper than our was.
Homosexuality was a crime in this country until about 50 years ago.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed l.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Even 50 years ago, religious tolerance was pretty uncontentious.
Attitudes to homosexuality, women or mixed marriges were not very different. Indeed such socially conservative veiws would have been seen as very British over most of the last century.
Seeing as most people think it is a good thing that we are less socially conservative, why is it a good thing to introduce a mass of people who are 50 years behind the times?
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
Barnier is fine - he's a pragmatic and serious guy who has plenty of experience (including of course in overseeing financial regulation, so he's well aware of the importance of the City to the whole of the EU). If the negotiations were entirely in his hands, I don't think there'd be a problem; he'll be a tough negotiator, certainly, but he's someone we can do business with.
The issue is more whether he'll be able to take the EU27- who have the final say - with him.
This 'now is not the time to talk politics' bollocks is exactly why people have such a low regard for politicians. If the slaughter of innocent children is not worth politics what is?
The reason that people say that is because they know that if people talked politics now then folk would reach conclusions that the political class don't want us to reach. It why had these 22 been murdered by a gunman in the US they'd be talking politics about gun-control but when a muslim blows up 22 young people we aren't supposed to talk about it.
Our political class have failed l.
Your sadness and rage are understandable, .
The principles are simple (the execution may not be):
Muslims (and anyone else) who wants to live in the UK must sign up to our values. If not, then they can leave and live elsewhere.
I wouldn't make that list of values exhaustive, but they include basic things such as freedom of religion (and the right to change or abandon your beliefs without consequence), equal treatment of women, etc.
Muslims in Britain are more likely to identify as British, and more optomistic about the future of Britain than non-muslims.
There is certainly a disaffected minority, but chucking out the baby with the bathwater is not wise. To quote the conclusion in the article:
"Politicians of all parties want Muslims to take up British values and show loyalty to Queen and country. But what is more likely to achieve that? Talking of a Muslim "fifth column", as Mr Farage does, or noting that British Muslims, are, well, British?
As Edmund Burke once said: "To make men love their country, their country ought to be lovable.""
Intriguing that you find guaranteeing equal rights for women not "lovable"
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Even 50 years ago, religious tolerance was pretty uncontentious.
Attitudes to homosexuality, women or mixed marriges were not very different. Indeed such socially conservative veiws would have been seen as very British over most of the last century.
Whataboutery.
It sounds to me like you are perfectly happy with the status-quo so long as you have it in writing that everyone will be nice and liberal in 50 years time ?
Don't know about his rUK insights, but Atwal is the guy who thought things weren't going to be quite so bad for SLab in 2015 due to some postal vote data (data=bollocks).
Published Sunday, based on "past three weeks of intensive canvassing", so overtaken by events (dementia - remember when that had saliency?) which have been overtaken by events, which may put us back where we started.
I like the first comment
"What you do expect?
Mr Bigot, Mrs Racist, and Miss Stupid, can I count on you supporting our Labour candidate at the next election?
You should equally have gone down the capitalist route for the state pension. Invested the money, and made sure the individual workers owned their wealth.
Instead you spent it leaving no assets and a 10 trillion pound debt".
On the contrary, I have posted many times on here against the systemic misogyny of orthodox islam. British Muslims profess views that were unremarkeable in Britain just 50 years ago.
Even 50 years ago, religious tolerance was pretty uncontentious.
I would be surprised if the moderate Muslim youths struggling to reconcile their faith with Western values are not influenced in their ultimate decision on which to favour by the proportion of non-moderate Muslims who believe the punishment for apostasy should be death.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
There is fairly strong herding around 1.7bn from the more reliable looking google sources. What do you think is the right number?
Muslims are not Islamists, as commonly defined. I was using the term in the context of In Western media usage the term tends to refer to groups who aim to establish a sharia-based Islamic state, often with implication of violent tactics and human rights violations, and has acquired connotations of political extremism.
SeanT didnt claim they were, you did. He said.
Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world
Don't know about his rUK insights, but Atwal is the guy who thought things weren't going to be quite so bad for SLab in 2015 due to some postal vote data (data=bollocks).
Well his Edinburgh Southwest prediction looks like it'll be miles out to me !
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
Good people of all kinds are scared shitless to speak out. That's what happens when a society is hamstrung by political correctness.
Bollocks. Both good and bad people have been spouting off about this all day. No evidence of self censorship at all.
If you expressed your honest opinion about last night's atrocity, you'd lose your job.
1) That data may well have predated the manifestos and the dementia tax, in which case it may be dangerously out of date.
2) It tells us nothing about seats where the Lib Dems or the Greens are in the mix. Since some of those are in the red zone, that is unfortunate.
3) The regional swing approach gives no value to individual MPs' qualities.
4) I'm very sceptical about the Scottish assumptions.
5) The comments on Wales are nonsensical since they assume that Plaid won't make any gains and then comment that all the swing will be to the Conservatives rather than Plaid.
It's interesting but it's more a point of reference than a tablet of stone. It's most useful when considering the midlands and the north of England.
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
Don't know about his rUK insights, but Atwal is the guy who thought things weren't going to be quite so bad for SLab in 2015 due to some postal vote data (data=bollocks).
Mebbes, He definitely called the UK election last time as a Labour loss after Miliband visited Russell Brand. Which most people didn't believe at the time.
However, I could easily believe he is clueless about Scotland.
The general election campaign could be suspended until at least Friday, senior campaign sources in the major political parties have told BuzzFeed News, as the country comes to terms with the Manchester terror attack.
FWIW my postal ballot papers in Cambridge arrived today.
Undecided or ... ?
A fair few of us are betting on Cambridge here
FYI - in the past I have stood as a Tory councillor; last time I spoiled my ballot. I vacillated for a while having received some annoying comms from LibDem central, but eventually I chose Huppert (LD) as the best individual candidate.
Boooo!
It's Cambridge, do you want Daniel Zeichner sneaking in ?
Exactly
Exclusive PB Cambridge Exit Poll ....
LibDem GAIN ....
Might not be seeing too much of that on June 8/9th ....
80% of the 20% told us where we can stick our lychee ripple (c) David Nobbs
1) That data may well have predated the manifestos and the dementia tax, in which case it may be dangerously out of date.
2) It tells us nothing about seats where the Lib Dems or the Greens are in the mix. Since some of those are in the red zone, that is unfortunate.
3) The regional swing approach gives no value to individual MPs' qualities.
4) I'm very sceptical about the Scottish assumptions.
5) The comments on Wales are nonsensical since they assume that Plaid won't make any gains and then comment that all the swing will be to the Conservatives rather than Plaid.
It's interesting but it's more a point of reference than a tablet of stone. It's most useful when considering the midlands and the north of England.
Don't know about his rUK insights, but Atwal is the guy who thought things weren't going to be quite so bad for SLab in 2015 due to some postal vote data (data=bollocks).
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
That'd be a nightmare to get all 27. With time so limited, the temptation to demand pork will be irresistible, and once one country does that, a dozen will soon after.
If Barnier is taken at his word, then he will be a good, if tough, negotiating counterpart:
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual". "We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
The FT (not a notable supporter of Brexit) has a more nuanced intepretation
“It is in respect of only two aspects of the agreement that, according to the Court, the EU is not endowed with exclusive competence, namely the field of non-direct foreign investment (‘portfolio’ investments made without any intention to influence the management and control of an undertaking) and the regime governing dispute settlement between investors and states,” the court said in a statement.
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
That'd be a nightmare to get all 27. With time so limited, the temptation to demand pork will be irresistible, and once one country does that, a dozen will soon after.
According to Article 50 it does not need the approval of all countries. It only needs a qualified majority. I do not think this necessarily make it straightforward or easy at all but on a simple technicality unanimity is not required.
Don't know about his rUK insights, but Atwal is the guy who thought things weren't going to be quite so bad for SLab in 2015 due to some postal vote data (data=bollocks).
East Ren for Blair !
I dined with two voters in Edinburgh North & Leith last night who had voted Labour in 2015 and were now proposing to vote Conservative this time, as the party best placed to stop the SNP.
I'm not sure whether they're right but that's what they thought and if so Labour aren't going to get the results in Scotland that analysis would suggest.
I was among polite society today, including company directors, and regarding the attack, one guy stated, 'they fucking hate us'.
I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
You could have said the same about a lot of Irish teenagers in the UK thirty or forty years ago. The question is how we get from there to here.
Jesus Jesus Jesus Christ.
Islamism is not like the IRA. Nothing like it. Not remotely comparable. Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world, a fairly large minority of whom actively despise us, and want us punished for unbelief, if not killed.
Their beliefs are nihilistic and extremist and will not yield to reason, there is nothing - like a united Ireland - that we could offer them which will change their views. It is a faith. It is their creed. It fills their souls. And they hate us just for being who we are, just because we are us.
I'm curious. How stupid do you think you are, on a scale of one to ten? I'm thinking about two hundred and thirty seven thousand.
I'll put you at ten, if you think there are 1.4bn islamists in the world.
There is fairly strong herding around 1.7bn from the more reliable looking google sources. What do you think is the right number?
Muslims are not Islamists, as commonly defined. I was using the term in the context of In Western media usage the term tends to refer to groups who aim to establish a sharia-based Islamic state, often with implication of violent tactics and human rights violations, and has acquired connotations of political extremism.
SeanT didnt claim they were, you did. He said.
Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world
And how does seeking to tar 1.4 billion people with SeanT's brush help at all? To what achievable policy proposals can such views ever lead?
Where are the instances of SeanT's "go round up thirty villagers" approach to tackling terrorism ever having stemmed the flow of recruits to armed conflict? It is simply an appeal to a primitive mix of revenge, denial and intellectual laziness, that will result in society becoming more dangerous for the rest of us.
The poignancy. Two stories on the same day. #1 Gentleman dies who was a prominent advocate for a children's charity (UNICEF) #2 LOSER dies while blowing himself up to slaughter children
One really important point in that Atul Hatwal article:
"Tough decisions are needed from Labour HQ and some rationality from Jeremy Corbyn’s team. Seats that have been rock solid Labour redoubts – places where Labour has regularly won more than the other parties put together – are now slipping away.
Matters are complicated because Labour is effectively running three, near autonomous campaigns: the Jeremy Corbyn tour of safe spaces where he meets happy crowds and won’t be heckled, the HQ campaign to save marginal seats and the Momentum campaign to do some work in Labour held marginals and then try win some seats off the Tories.
Salvaging what can be saved means combining these three campaigns into a single, focused effort."
"The risk in these circumstances is always that the defensive party is too optimistic. It does Labour no good to keep the adverse swing down to 6% if the Conservatives only need a 3% swing to take a seat. Meanwhile, if a seat that is safe up to an 8% swing gets a 10% swing, that’s two seats lost where one might have been saved. But it is very hard to tell a sitting MP that he or she is not going to be supported.
The Lib Dems were nearly wiped out in 2015 because they were too optimistic in such circumstances, despite being pretty disciplined about these calculations. This stuff is hard, emotionally but also strategically.
So Labour have some excruciating decisions to make about prioritising. With a membership of hundreds of thousands, they have the troops to mount a campaign but they need to deploy them effectively. This is going to take detached judgement, ruthlessness, discipline, focus and unity. These are not qualities that Labour are currently noted for. I expect Labour will either be far too optimistic or, perhaps more likely, that it will never get as far as drawing up a defensive strategy and leaving every constituency for itself.
My expectation, therefore, is that Labour will probably do significantly worse than uniform national swing suggests, as they fail to keep the seats that they are actively defending and see greater than average swings in some seats that they haven’t actively defended that could have been saved."
If Labour are effectively running multiple conflicting campaigns, that still looks to be true to me.
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
That'd be a nightmare to get all 27. With time so limited, the temptation to demand pork will be irresistible, and once one country does that, a dozen will soon after.
According to Article 50 it does not need the approval of all countries. It only needs a qualified majority. I do not think this necessarily make it straightforward or easy at all but on a simple technicality unanimity is not required.
It depends on to what extent post Brexit trade deal is considered to be part of a Brexit agreement or whether it is considered a new trade deal.
Good to see the European Court standing up for national sovereignty though.
Spend time with today's Muslim schoolkids, as I have, and you'll find they are mostly very aware of the challenge their generation faces of reconciling the 'modern' western ideals they assimilate at school with the more 'traditional' values imported by their parents.
I am not sure why the inverted commas. But there is no challenge or reconciliation required. They just reject the backwards theocratic bigotry because they live in a country that is run by modern western values.
If they choose to reject those instead, that's fine, but they then need to reflect on whether this is the right country in which to live. There are others where the backwards bigotry is welcomed.
And how does seeking to tar 1.4 billion people with SeanT's brush help at all? To what achievable policy proposals can such views ever lead?
Where are the instances of SeanT's "go round up thirty villagers" approach to tackling terrorism ever having stemmed the flow of recruits to armed conflict? It is simply an appeal to a primitive mix of revenge, denial and intellectual laziness, that will result in society becoming more dangerous for the rest of us.
It just as invalid as your approach which appears to be to wring your hands while the world burns. Are you a civil servant by any chance ?
1. say nothing is going to happen 2. say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it. 3. say that maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we *can* do." 4. say maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now."
So Labour have some excruciating decisions to make about prioritising. With a membership of hundreds of thousands, they have the troops to mount a campaign but they need to deploy them effectively. This is going to take detached judgement, ruthlessness, discipline, focus and unity. These are not qualities that Labour are currently noted for. I expect Labour will either be far too optimistic or, perhaps more likely, that it will never get as far as drawing up a defensive strategy and leaving every constituency for itself.
My expectation, therefore, is that Labour will probably do significantly worse than uniform national swing suggests, as they fail to keep the seats that they are actively defending and see greater than average swings in some seats that they haven’t actively defended that could have been saved."
If Labour are effectively running multiple conflicting campaigns, that still looks to be true to me.
Could be. With a recent polling bounce and the dismal showing for the LDs, I, as someone with the spine of a wet biscuit when it comes to predictions, am as guilty as anyone as thinking that if the recent surge is even halfway to reality, many places that were thought vulnerable will in fact be safe, particularly in places like Wales. The worry for a Labour supporter would be that the party is somewhat relying on that to a certain degree, and so may not be prioritising and resourcing as they probably should - in expectation of the worst.
Relying on the brand plus some fired up true believers could save plenty, and as someone seemingly programmed to be optimistic for Labour I'm inclined to think that trend will prevent the worse outcome for them, but it's a hell of thing to assume, and it would be a mistake to do so.
I do struggle with the analysis that they could lose all their SW seats though. It's only 4 for crying out loud, and I know the Tories found themselves exiled from Scotland, but even in the Tory shires of the south that would be remarkable, particularly where Bristol still exists (granted Uncut does suggest they could all win, even if it also says they could all lose as well).
I'm not much of a churchgoer these days, but the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to this atrocity is pathetic. Take a look at his Twitter account. @JustinWelby One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims. Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
A lot of Corbyn cultists think that MI5 were behind the bombing.
They believe the timing of the Westminster attack was suspicious as well.
And indeed somewhat perversely the real culprits have as dimwitted and warped view of reality as these Corbynites. Both are equally cultist equally brainwashed. Sad and frightening in equal measure.
I'm not much of a churchgoer these days, but the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to this atrocity is pathetic. Take a look at his Twitter account. @JustinWelby One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims. Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
I think I've been pretty consistent for about 6 years in saying immigration of Muslims has been an absolute disaster for the uk and would lead to more and more terrorism. If that's wrong I don't wanna be right
I'm not much of a churchgoer these days, but the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to this atrocity is pathetic. Take a look at his Twitter account. @JustinWelby One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims. Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
The supine cowardice of Christianity is just about its worst feature, and it tries to turn it into a selling point. Never stand up to bullies: excellent message.
It does look as if all 27 EU countries will have to seperately ratify the post Brexit deal:
That'd be a nightmare to get all 27. With time so limited, the temptation to demand pork will be irresistible, and once one country does that, a dozen will soon after.
According to Article 50 it does not need the approval of all countries. It only needs a qualified majority. I do not think this necessarily make it straightforward or easy at all but on a simple technicality unanimity is not required.
It depends on to what extent post Brexit trade deal is considered to be part of a Brexit agreement or whether it is considered a new trade deal.
Good to see the European Court standing up for national sovereignty though.
If it is a new trade deal (and strictly trade) then under the Lisbon Treaty it is also QMV. The ECJ ruling on 16th May said that competence lies with the EU and not with the individual countries. The latest ruling only clarifies that to exclude investment deals. There is no need nor even allowance for the individual Parliaments to ratify either the Brexit deal under Article 50 nor any post Brexit trade deal as long as it deals strictly with trade.
I'm not much of a churchgoer these days, but the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to this atrocity is pathetic. Take a look at his Twitter account. @JustinWelby One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims. Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
The supine cowardice of Christianity is just about its worst feature, and it tries to turn it into a selling point. Never stand up to bullies: excellent message.
S4C equivalent to Question Time was due from Bangor last Thursday but was postponed due to Rhodri Morgan's death - now it has been postponed again tonight due to theManchester Attack
G - The man who murdered 22 people and injured 59 others has been named as Salman Ramadan Abedi, a Mancunian of Libyan descent.
Police confirmed the 22-year-old’s identity after officials in the United States passed it to news reporters, apparently against the wishes of the police and security services in the UK.
I think I've been pretty consistent for about 6 years in saying immigration of Muslims has been an absolute disaster for the uk and would lead to more and more terrorism. If that's wrong I don't wanna be right
I'm not much of a churchgoer these days, but the Archbishop of Canterbury's response to this atrocity is pathetic. Take a look at his Twitter account. @JustinWelby One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims. Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
The supine cowardice of Christianity is just about its worst feature, and it tries to turn it into a selling point. Never stand up to bullies: excellent message.
It has clearly been able to be robust and insistent enough to endure, spread and dominate for several thousands of years now. It can show spine. Not being an adherent (except in the cultural sense of living in a christian country), I cannot speak as to the worthiness of the modern church leaders as strong of course.
G - The man who murdered 22 people and injured 59 others has been named as Salman Ramadan Abedi, a Mancunian of Libyan descent.
Police confirmed the 22-year-old’s identity after officials in the United States passed it to news reporters, apparently against the wishes of the police and security services in the UK.
I do hope these ‘US officials’ are bounced out of the respective positions immediately.
Presumably none of the news organisations which have printed the name were criticising Trump for his unauthorised sharing of confidential information with the Russians a few weeks ago.
Colin Forth seeking Italian citizenship over Brexit 'disaster'
Mamma Mia!
Best news this year was this.
Just in time for the tenth anniversary of the Mamma Mia! movie, Universal Pictures is getting a sequel together. And it’s all going to happen rather quickly.
Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again! is going to dig further back into the Abba songbook, and reprise a few songs from the original movie. This time, though, there’s no hit stage musical to base it all on, and thus Ol Parker – who penned The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel – has been hired to put a new screenplay together.
The core cast from Mamma Mia! – Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan, Amanda Seyfried, Colin Firth, Julie Walters, Christine Baranski, Dominic Cooper and Stellan Skarsgard – are all expected back. It’s unclear as of yet whether Phyllida Lloyd will return to direct, though.
My word - the Jeremy Corbyn Facebook page. That is quite something.
"Another false flag attack. How convenient for Theresa May and her Zionist overlords (who most likely instigated it..)"
Mad, bilious, surreal, nasty and comically anti-Semitic, all at once.
I think there will now be a few people who were thinking of voting Labour over the weekend who faced with the prospect of Corbyn and his supporters in government end up ticking the Tory box
The two factor model on which these findings are based for England and Wales is rudimentary and mechanical (agricultural even). But then, so is what is happening to the Labour party.
One way to acknowledge any accusation the model is a bit crude.
Comments
Basically he said what everybody is thinking. Lots of younger Muslims do hate us (white people). We underestimate how much they hate us. And we also underestimate how much tacit approval there is in their communities for outbursts against the West.
I'm hoping the fact this cowardly bastard attacked young children will encourage an internal uprising and good Muslims become less inclined to believe the outrageous propaganda of the Islamists, seeing it for the hate it is. I hope they CRUSH the lazy degenerate bastards who parade under the banner of some perverted superstition and wrestle their 'peaceful' religion back.
But I'm not holding my breath. I think radicalism is on the rise, not decreasing. And i think good Muslims are scared shitless of speaking out.
LibDem GAIN ....
Might not be seeing too much of that on June 8/9th ....
Something like 1 in 10 children under 5 are Muslim. Mohammed will be the most popular baby boy's name for the rest of all our lives.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/the-general-election-campaign-could-be-suspended-until-the?utm_term=.knbnVRnq9o#.neXvAovbVW
I have no idea how Nate Silver copes with it in his figures and can only report the 39.1% approval score from his Site.
'The timing of this attack was perfect, I do not believe this was anything to do with terrorists. They will probably find that whoever did it had Labour posters in their house and Corbyn will be blamed. Nothing would surprise me with this election, it was just so fine with the timing, I just cannot see it any other way. Frau May can now LOOK like she is strong.'
When Jo Cox was murdered, it looked like curtains for the side of the debate I supported, and also looked like costing me several thousand pounds, but not for a minute did I think that REMAIN had organised it.
No doubt you have some evidence to bring to the table for your assertion?
"Mr Barnier told reporters in Brussels that the facts and figures behind Brexit had to be explained objectively, and it would not be "business as usual".
"We just need to be able to wind up the accounts - that's it. It's really a question of trust to build our future relations."
"Asked a second time what he would do if the British walked out of the talks, Mr Barnier said there would be moments of tension but things had to be put in perspective. "The new partnership is what's important. Nobody should lose that perspective," he emphasized."
My fear is that the two parties' starting positions on what figure to attach to 'winding up the accounts' is way too far apart for there to be agreement.
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/05/20/new-poll-analysis-watson-skinner-and-flint-facing-defeat-cooper-miliband-reeves-and-rayner-on-the-edge/
It is a particularly gut-wrenching attack, but I don't think 3 days of political mourning are called for.
What he really said was "winding up the accountants"
The issue is more whether he'll be able to take the EU27- who have the final say - with him.
Or is "could" not used with its correct meaning by these types
Homosexuality was a crime in this country until about 50 years ago.
Of whom a small percentage like to bomb us
It sounds to me like you are perfectly happy with the status-quo so long as you have it in writing that everyone will be nice and liberal in 50 years time ?
I like the first comment
"What you do expect?
Mr Bigot, Mrs Racist, and Miss Stupid, can I count on you supporting our Labour candidate at the next election?
You should equally have gone down the capitalist route for the state pension. Invested the money, and made sure the individual workers owned their wealth.
Instead you spent it leaving no assets and a 10 trillion pound debt".
Islamism springs from an entire and all-encompassing belief system, adhered to by 1.4bn people around the world
2) It tells us nothing about seats where the Lib Dems or the Greens are in the mix. Since some of those are in the red zone, that is unfortunate.
3) The regional swing approach gives no value to individual MPs' qualities.
4) I'm very sceptical about the Scottish assumptions.
5) The comments on Wales are nonsensical since they assume that Plaid won't make any gains and then comment that all the swing will be to the Conservatives rather than Plaid.
It's interesting but it's more a point of reference than a tablet of stone. It's most useful when considering the midlands and the north of England.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-theresa-may-eu-singapore-trade-ruling-european-court-of-justice-disaster-for-britain-a7748996.html
However, I could easily believe he is clueless about Scotland.
“It is in respect of only two aspects of the agreement that, according to the Court, the EU is not endowed with exclusive competence, namely the field of non-direct foreign investment (‘portfolio’ investments made without any intention to influence the management and control of an undertaking) and the regime governing dispute settlement between investors and states,” the court said in a statement.
https://www.ft.com/content/9a0c9d04-9c6d-34f8-a7e2-dba202d29c25
I'm not sure whether they're right but that's what they thought and if so Labour aren't going to get the results in Scotland that analysis would suggest.
Where are the instances of SeanT's "go round up thirty villagers" approach to tackling terrorism ever having stemmed the flow of recruits to armed conflict? It is simply an appeal to a primitive mix of revenge, denial and intellectual laziness, that will result in society becoming more dangerous for the rest of us.
#1 Gentleman dies who was a prominent advocate for a children's charity (UNICEF)
#2 LOSER dies while blowing himself up to slaughter children
"Tough decisions are needed from Labour HQ and some rationality from Jeremy Corbyn’s team. Seats that have been rock solid Labour redoubts – places where Labour has regularly won more than the other parties put together – are now slipping away.
Matters are complicated because Labour is effectively running three, near autonomous campaigns: the Jeremy Corbyn tour of safe spaces where he meets happy crowds and won’t be heckled, the HQ campaign to save marginal seats and the Momentum campaign to do some work in Labour held marginals and then try win some seats off the Tories.
Salvaging what can be saved means combining these three campaigns into a single, focused effort."
This is what I wrote a month ago:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/19/no-one-knows-anything-what-to-do-ifwhen-mrs-may-wins-todays-vote/
"The risk in these circumstances is always that the defensive party is too optimistic. It does Labour no good to keep the adverse swing down to 6% if the Conservatives only need a 3% swing to take a seat. Meanwhile, if a seat that is safe up to an 8% swing gets a 10% swing, that’s two seats lost where one might have been saved. But it is very hard to tell a sitting MP that he or she is not going to be supported.
The Lib Dems were nearly wiped out in 2015 because they were too optimistic in such circumstances, despite being pretty disciplined about these calculations. This stuff is hard, emotionally but also strategically.
So Labour have some excruciating decisions to make about prioritising. With a membership of hundreds of thousands, they have the troops to mount a campaign but they need to deploy them effectively. This is going to take detached judgement, ruthlessness, discipline, focus and unity. These are not qualities that Labour are currently noted for. I expect Labour will either be far too optimistic or, perhaps more likely, that it will never get as far as drawing up a defensive strategy and leaving every constituency for itself.
My expectation, therefore, is that Labour will probably do significantly worse than uniform national swing suggests, as they fail to keep the seats that they are actively defending and see greater than average swings in some seats that they haven’t actively defended that could have been saved."
If Labour are effectively running multiple conflicting campaigns, that still looks to be true to me.
Good to see the European Court standing up for national sovereignty though.
https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/867059513727254528
If they choose to reject those instead, that's fine, but they then need to reflect on whether this is the right country in which to live. There are others where the backwards bigotry is welcomed.
Do they want to reign in hell or serve in heaven?
1. say nothing is going to happen
2. say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.
3. say that maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we *can* do."
4. say maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now."
We seem to be somewhere between 2 and 3
Relying on the brand plus some fired up true believers could save plenty, and as someone seemingly programmed to be optimistic for Labour I'm inclined to think that trend will prevent the worse outcome for them, but it's a hell of thing to assume, and it would be a mistake to do so.
I do struggle with the analysis that they could lose all their SW seats though. It's only 4 for crying out loud, and I know the Tories found themselves exiled from Scotland, but even in the Tory shires of the south that would be remarkable, particularly where Bristol still exists (granted Uncut does suggest they could all win, even if it also says they could all lose as well).
@JustinWelby
One prayer (not his), one 'isn't Manchester strong' and one 'religions unite' and nothing about the victims.
Members of the CofE look to this man for leadership at a time like this, and he's absent.
Police confirmed the 22-year-old’s identity after officials in the United States passed it to news reporters, apparently against the wishes of the police and security services in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/23/manchester-arena-attacker-named-salman-abedi-suicide-attack-ariana-grande
I do hope these ‘US officials’ are bounced out of their respective positions immediately.
Just in time for the tenth anniversary of the Mamma Mia! movie, Universal Pictures is getting a sequel together. And it’s all going to happen rather quickly.
Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again! is going to dig further back into the Abba songbook, and reprise a few songs from the original movie. This time, though, there’s no hit stage musical to base it all on, and thus Ol Parker – who penned The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel – has been hired to put a new screenplay together.
The core cast from Mamma Mia! – Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan, Amanda Seyfried, Colin Firth, Julie Walters, Christine Baranski, Dominic Cooper and Stellan Skarsgard – are all expected back. It’s unclear as of yet whether Phyllida Lloyd will return to direct, though.
http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/mamma-mia/49613/mamma-mia-2-on-the-way-to-be-released-next-year
The two factor model on which these findings are based for England and Wales is rudimentary and mechanical (agricultural even). But then, so is what is happening to the Labour party.
One way to acknowledge any accusation the model is a bit crude.