I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or...Brexit was secured by hectoring, smug, superior arses, thinking that the argument for the EU was so fucking obvious that it made itself - but we'll gratuitously insult the intellects of the voters by the by.
These hand-wringers could have a) formulated the reasons why staying in the EU was full off benefits, even for the dumbest fucks in society b) made that case to them in measured terms c) got out to the hell-holes where these Leave voters lived and talked them over, on the doorsteps.
NOW they bitch and moan. Twelve months ago was the time to get engaged, if they truly thought it was the defining moment of our age.
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
How many people did you try and win over in Jaywick?
I was in Jaywick during the Clacton by-election and was astonished at how few immigrants there appeared to be there, and how much hostility there was to immigration.
you know I have been thinking internment for the people who fight with ISIS and return here is necessary. As reluctant as I used to be, we are just understanding the scale of the problem. Ofcourse if possible we should stip them of citizenship aswell. Those Daily Mail comments are not even close to the maddest ones I've seen.
You should have listened to Lord Blair and Frank Gardner on the Today programme this morning. They knocked that one straight on the head.
Internment? Why? Parliament must suspend the Human rights act.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or...Brexit was secured by hectoring, smug, superior arses, thinking that the argument for the EU was so fucking obvious that it made itself - but we'll gratuitously insult the intellects of the voters by the by.
These hand-wringers could have a) formulated the reasons why staying in the EU was full off benefits, even for the dumbest fucks in society b) made that case to them in measured terms c) got out to the hell-holes where these Leave voters lived and talked them over, on the doorsteps.
NOW they bitch and moan. Twelve months ago was the time to get engaged, if they truly thought it was the defining moment of our age.
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
Xenophobic is the lazy slur of the half-educated. Yes, the ancient Greeks were better than the barbarians. Do you disagree ?
Curiously, the Greeks themselves were by no means unanimous on that one. Alexander's adoption of Persian dress and customs is a case in point.
If you're going that route then I'd point out Alexander wasn't Greek...
Wow. It's suprising how similar the tory and labour response is!
Neither of the big parties represents a coalition appropriate to the emerging divides in politics, now that class has faded as a driver of political views. The Tories have managed to defer their day of reckoning, aided by Brexit and at least some attempts to adapt. Labour's reckoning approaches.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or...Brexit was secured by hectoring, smug, superior arses, thinking that the argument for the EU was so fucking obvious that it made itself - but we'll gratuitously insult the intellects of the voters by the by.
These hand-wringers could have a) formulated the reasons why staying in the EU was full off benefits, even for the dumbest fucks in society b) made that case to them in measured terms c) got out to the hell-holes where these Leave voters lived and talked them over, on the doorsteps.
NOW they bitch and moan. Twelve months ago was the time to get engaged, if they truly thought it was the defining moment of our age.
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
Xenophobic is the lazy slur of the half-educated. Yes, the ancient Greeks were better than the barbarians. Do you disagree ?
Curiously, the Greeks themselves were by no means unanimous on that one. Alexander's adoption of Persian dress and customs is a case in point.
If you're going that route then I'd point out Alexander wasn't Greek...
Super, Mr. Wheel, absolutely super post. PB pedantry at its best. Well done, Sir.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or...Brexit was secured by hectoring, smug, superior arses, thinking that the argument for the EU was so fucking obvious that it made itself - but we'll gratuitously insult the intellects of the voters by the by.
These hand-wringers could have a) formulated the reasons why staying in the EU was full off benefits, even for the dumbest fucks in society b) made that case to them in measured terms c) got out to the hell-holes where these Leave voters lived and talked them over, on the doorsteps.
NOW they bitch and moan. Twelve months ago was the time to get engaged, if they truly thought it was the defining moment of our age.
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
Xenophobic is the lazy slur of the half-educated. Yes, the ancient Greeks were better than the barbarians. Do you disagree ?
Curiously, the Greeks themselves were by no means unanimous on that one. Alexander's adoption of Persian dress and customs is a case in point.
If you're going that route then I'd point out Alexander wasn't Greek...
Contentious.... All I can say is, don't tell a modern Greek that, they tend to get a bit upset!
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Could argue that a regulated weed market with limits on THC content might be more effective than prohibition.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Isn't "Assassin" a corruption of "Hashishim" because the original Assassins were, as you put it, doped up to the eyeballs?
Who precisely is shocked at any of this information about identity and bombs, and did these maiden aunts think the forensic teams in the white coveralls shown on or in British media were painters and decorators?
None of this is exactly new with the US. During the Falklands, info was far more forthcoming from the US than it was from the MOD iirc.
Likewise July 7.
Lord Blair was on the Today programme this morning and said it was exactly the same back then. The UK police and security provided their US counterparts with sensitive information on the understanding that it would be handled sensitively, but it was leaked all over the media. The UK complained, as it has done this time, but nothing changed.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Looks to me like UKIP are trying to set up the Tories to fail over Brexit.
What a bunch of meanies ^_~;;
How much clout does a party have with no elected MPs, few Councillors and soon no MEPs?
Enough to get Britain out of the EU.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
That was then. The pertinent question is how much power UKIP has (or potentially has) now that their driving force is gone and now that by far their most effective leader has retired.
Been a while since I was called a racist for voting leave. sheesh
Pointless re-re-re-running this argument surely?
I voted to leave an undemocratic, unaccountable more-than-embryonic political union. I did this in the full knowledge that it would involve short term economic pain (although not nearly as much as the ridiculously hyperbolic Remain campaign claimed, and in the long run economic gain is very much in our own hands)
I did not do it because I hate foreigners.
Love Europe, not the EU. No a hard concept. imagine a football fan who may - shock, horror, despite their love of the beautiful game, not have a high opinion of FIFA. It was a bit like that.
Nothing that has happened since has made me regret my decision, even though I admit my pencil did hover uncertainly for a second over the box in the voting booth. I knew it was a big decision.
Get over yourselves Remainers! Sanctimonious, superior and bitter is not a good look.
you know I have been thinking internment for the people who fight with ISIS and return here is necessary. As reluctant as I used to be, we are just understanding the scale of the problem. Ofcourse if possible we should stip them of citizenship aswell. Those Daily Mail comments are not even close to the maddest ones I've seen.
You should have listened to Lord Blair and Frank Gardner on the Today programme this morning. They knocked that one straight on the head.
Internment? Why? Parliament must suspend the Human rights act.
Looks to me like UKIP are trying to set up the Tories to fail over Brexit.
What a bunch of meanies ^_~;;
How much clout does a party have with no elected MPs, few Councillors and soon no MEPs?
Enough to get Britain out of the EU.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
He said 'have' not 'had'. Although we'd have stayed in if it hadn't been for Boris's ambition and Gove's idiocy.
There are many reasons that Remain lost. The negative nature of their campaign and the refusal of the Labour leadership to engage are two others.
But had Leave lost, the issue would not have gone away unless Remain could turn round hearts as well as heads. Leave would have latched on to 'lies' told either in scaremongering or - worse - reassurance, and used them as the basis of a narrative that the referendum was 'stolen' from them. The reason the false assurances would have been worse for Remain is because they could be proved demonstrably wrong.
That, however, is an alternate history that we can speculate about for amusement but which has no relevance to today's politics.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
@bbclaurak: UKIP putting attack on May at centre of manifesto launch - all but blaming her for Manchester because of policy during time at Home Office
Fair enough, she was Home Secretary for six years and is currently the default PM.
12 years without an attack given what has happened in the world could be argued as a success, not that this is any comfort to Manchester.
Feels like a cheap shot from UKIP
Everybody has forgotten that they took down a guy very publicly in the middle of London when it seems he was just about to carry out an attack. At the time everybody said aren't our security services great.
If they were only having to follow a couple of handful of people around, but instead it is 1000s.
A commendable effort, but it's a waste of time talking to the bigoted and rapidly diminishing Remainer fanatics. They are few, but noisy, and best ignored.
But had Leave lost, the issue would not have gone away unless Remain could turn round hearts as well as heads. Leave would have latched on to 'lies' told either in scaremongering or - worse - reassurance, and used them as the basis of a narrative that the referendum was 'stolen' from them. The reason the false assurances would have been worse for Remain is because they could be proved demonstrably wrong.
Yes, once the referendum was called there were only two only good outcomes for democracy: a win for Leave, or a very emphatic win for Remain. A narrow win for Remain would have been the worst possible result.
@bbclaurak: UKIP putting attack on May at centre of manifesto launch - all but blaming her for Manchester because of policy during time at Home Office
Fair enough, she was Home Secretary for six years and is currently the default PM.
12 years without an attack given what has happened in the world could be argued as a success, not that this is any comfort to Manchester.
Feels like a cheap shot from UKIP
Everybody has forgotten that they took down a guy very publicly in the middle of London when it seems he was just about to carry out an attack. At the time everybody said aren't our security services great.
If they were only having to follow a couple of handful of people around, but instead it is 1000s.
We keep being told it is only a very small minority of Muslims trying to kill us. How hard can it be to track them?
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or...Brexit was secured by hectoring, smug, superior arses, thinking that the argument for the EU was so fucking obvious that it made itself - but we'll gratuitously insult the intellects of the voters by the by.
These hand-wringers could have a) formulated the reasons why staying in the EU was full off benefits, even for the dumbest fucks in society b) made that case to them in measured terms c) got out to the hell-holes where these Leave voters lived and talked them over, on the doorsteps.
NOW they bitch and moan. Twelve months ago was the time to get engaged, if they truly thought it was the defining moment of our age.
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
How many people did you try and win over in Jaywick?
I was in Jaywick during the Clacton by-election and was astonished at how few immigrants there appeared to be there, and how much hostility there was to immigration.
Kudos to you, Sir, for being there....
Not really. I was with Shadsy, doing research. But it was illuminating in more respects than mere betting.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
The worst possible policy is unofficial toleration i.e. what we have now. If the police won't enforce this law, why should you respect others? Same with blanket 20mph speed limits.
@bbclaurak: UKIP putting attack on May at centre of manifesto launch - all but blaming her for Manchester because of policy during time at Home Office
Fair enough, she was Home Secretary for six years and is currently the default PM.
12 years without an attack given what has happened in the world could be argued as a success, not that this is any comfort to Manchester.
Feels like a cheap shot from UKIP
Everybody has forgotten that they took down a guy very publicly in the middle of London when it seems he was just about to carry out an attack. At the time everybody said aren't our security services great.
If they were only having to follow a couple of handful of people around, but instead it is 1000s.
We keep being told it is only a very small minority of Muslims trying to kill us. How hard can it be to track them?
That's a good point. Thousands doesn't sound like a very small minority.
Here is a question....the media have been reporting lots of stories of synthetic cannabis alternative, spice, now causing huge amount of problems both in the streets and prisons.
If we legalize cannabis, it will be highly taxed and highly regulated. Spice is very very cheap, way stronger and despite being made illegal is easily available and being chosen instead of cannabis by many people.
How do we address this issue?
I believe in places like Colorado, despite being able to legally buy it from very nice shops, illegal cannabis dealing hasn't gone away because it is just far cheaper than the highly taxed shops. All the nice middle class people go to the shops, but lots of people can't afford to do so.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
Plus it would raise a whole bunch of money by VAT and tax.
I assume you're being sarcastic. I suspect even a few hundred would overwhelm the security resources, and internment would not be acceptable. Apart from anything else, there's always the risk of grudge accusations.
If the election is about Brexit, what's the difference between Labour and the Tories on Brexit again? The Tories already had a mandate to form the government until 2020, a year after Brexit negotiations are expected to have ended.
Finance capital and big business generally perceieve Brexit as an enormous opportunity, and living standards for the majority are likely to accelerate their fall over the next 2-3 years. It's possible a major war will have started by then too. An election in 2020 would have been a major inconvenience and even a risk to the Tory party.
Certainly no intellectually honest person believes Theresa May's stated reasons for calling the election are true.
What people gives a government a "mandate" to "do as it sees fit"?
In effect, @Alastair, you are saying this election is a plebiscite.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
Eh? It took you twelve minutes to go from making a "valid argument" post opposing looser drug laws to recognising the current laws aren't working and after another six minutes you're saying full legalisation might be the answer?
You make the 'moving target' defence into an art form.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
I'd agree with all of that.
Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
It wouldn't entirely kill the illegal drugs market any more than ending prohibition killed off moonshine but it'd make a pretty big dent in not only that but other organised and associated criminal activity - plus the usual benefits of having a properly regulated market in dangerous goods.
These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
And in many places in Britain, it is the guys responsible for "security" at crowded events who sell people the drugs.
Perhaps when people have finished their one minute's silence and are tired with imagining they are in MI5 watching suspects, they could realise that security at events such as pop concerts in arenas should be improved.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
I'm sorry that it upsets you so much to be reminded that Brexit was secured through xenophobic lies, but it's the essential reason why Brexit is the enduring disaster of the age for the country.
Or..
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
How many people did you try and win over in Jaywick?
Why Brexit is a disaster is because far too many people were comfortable with using xenophobic lies in pursuit of their marginal obsession. As a result, the country has become unhappier, more divided and more racist and will continue down that path until those who did so accept that race-baiting in pursuit of votes is a recipe for disaster, the more so if the pursuit is successful.
There really isn't much that the Remain campaign could do to stop the Leave campaign stooping to such depths. But those in charge of the Leave campaign were too stupid to see that winning on those terms was itself a defeat.
There must come a point when the xenophobic lies of Brexit Britain, the racist, europhobic atmosphere of division and rancour, will finally force you to emigrate to your spiritual homeland, Viktor Orban's quasi-Fascist Hungary.
I'm just wondering if we're at that point now. No one wishes to detain you unduly.
Well, judging by your hysterical alcohol-fuelled BNP rantings after every terrorist attack, it sounds like you're hardly happy with the state of this country either. Perhaps you may decide to emigrate to your own spiritual homeland, the extremely stable and terror-free country that is Thailand, and spend the autumn of your life as a sad lonely old man pretending that you enjoy shagging prostitutes. To be honest I hope Alistair stays and you go. It beats me how you are allowed to keep posting here when every second post of yours is ordering someone you don't agree with to leave the site or emigrate.
Been a while since I was called a racist for voting leave. sheesh
Pointless re-re-re-running this argument surely?
I voted to leave an undemocratic, unaccountable more-than-embryonic political union. I did this in the full knowledge that it would involve short term economic pain (although not nearly as much as the ridiculously hyperbolic Remain campaign claimed, and in the long run economic gain is very much in our own hands)
I did not do it because I hate foreigners.
Love Europe, not the EU. No a hard concept. imagine a football fan who may - shock, horror, despite their love of the beautiful game, not have a high opinion of FIFA. It was a bit like that.
Nothing that has happened since has made me regret my decision, even though I admit my pencil did hover uncertainly for a second over the box in the voting booth. I knew it was a big decision.
Get over yourselves Remainers! Sanctimonious, superior and bitter is not a good look.
I voted remain, but I also share all the views that you, as a 'leaver', have just expressed above.
My principle reason for voting remain was that I did not see it making much difference between if we stayed under Camerons terms and if we were to leave. Both campaigns were poor and the antics of odious Farage swayed it for me.
But I agree with all your points, the ever closer EU union and Euro are not for me. So the vote is Leave and I believe we go with that and the nasty Farage has gone. If any party wants to take us back in then they are welcome to encourage us to vote for them, sans rebates plus Schengen and closer union / euro. Good luck with trying that as the LDs are proving. Corbyn of course does not want the EU to interfere with his plans for a communist stateist Britain.
For all the praise heaped by others on Mr Meeks' article I find his comments and those of other prominent 'Remainers' on here pretty facile and odious
When I were a lad, the worst you got from the God-botherers was a call to buy "War Cry" when you were busy getting pissed. Now it could be a call to war instead. Different times, different religions.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
The worst possible policy is unofficial toleration i.e. what we have now. If the police won't enforce this law, why should you respect others? Same with blanket 20mph speed limits.
Yep, current drug laws are the worst possible option. Either go for a liberal, regulated and taxed system such as in Portugal, Amsterdam and Colorado, or an authoritarian zero-tolerance system as seen in Bangkok, Dubai and Singapore.
With some wishy washy middle way people don't know where they stand, disrespect for the law is normalised and police can selectively enforce according to their prejudices.
I assume you're being sarcastic. I suspect even a few hundred would overwhelm the security resources, and internment would not be acceptable. Apart from anything else, there's always the risk of grudge accusations.
I plead guilty to what has already been described on PB today as the lowest form of wit.
I've been predicting for some time that immigration would fall by using the simple method of being so unpleasant to foreigners that they would get the message. Clearly that's working.
It lacks the elegance of your method of ensuring Brexit by telling most Brits they're racist scum.
.
Or..
What did you do in the Great Referendum War, daddy?
In your case, smirk while xenophobic lies were told.
How many people did you try and win over in Jaywick?
Why Brexit is a disaster is because far too many people were comfortable with using xenophobic lies in pursuit of their marginal obsession. As a result, the country has become unhappier, more divided and more racist and will continue down that path until those who did so accept that race-baiting in pursuit of votes is a recipe for disaster, the more so if the pursuit is successful.
There really isn't much that the Remain campaign could do to stop the Leave campaign stooping to such depths. But those in charge of the Leave campaign were too stupid to see that winning on those terms was itself a defeat.
There must come a point when the xenophobic lies of Brexit Britain, the racist, europhobic atmosphere of division and rancour, will finally force you to emigrate to your spiritual homeland, Viktor Orban's quasi-Fascist Hungary.
I'm just wondering if we're at that point now. No one wishes to detain you unduly.
Well, judging by your hysterical alcohol-fuelled BNP rantings after every terrorist attack, it sounds like you're hardly happy with the state of this country either. Perhaps you may decide to emigrate to your own spiritual homeland, the extremely stable and terror-free country that is Thailand, and spend the autumn of your life as a sad lonely old man pretending that you enjoy shagging prostitutes. To be honest I hope Alistair stays and you go. It beats me how you are allowed to keep posting here when every second post of yours is ordering someone you don't agree with to leave the site or emigrate.
Sean doesn't actually think about what he posts. You only have to read that Daily Mail article, which half an hour ago he shared with us as a "valid argument", and compare it with his subsequent stream of consciousness to see that there is no analysis going on at all.
He makes a very good living selling bullsh*t to the gullible; it's just a shame that the excess production has to be dumped onto the market free of charge.
I assume you're being sarcastic. I suspect even a few hundred would overwhelm the security resources, and internment would not be acceptable. Apart from anything else, there's always the risk of grudge accusations.
I plead guilty to what has already been described on PB today as the lowest form of wit.
It also comes in a mediocre form which is perceived by boneheaded cloth-eared perpetrators who dispose of a "little knowledge" to be the most superior and sophisticated form of excellence. British culture practically runs on that.
This is a general comment on sarcasm and not aimed at anyone here.
I assume you're being sarcastic. I suspect even a few hundred would overwhelm the security resources, and internment would not be acceptable. Apart from anything else, there's always the risk of grudge accusations.
I plead guilty to what has already been described on PB today as the lowest form of wit.
It also comes in a mediocre form which is perceived by boneheaded cloth-eared perpetrators who dispose of a "little knowledge" to be the most superior and sophisticated form of excellence. British culture practically runs on that.
This is a general comment on sarcasm and not aimed at anyone here.
Love Europe, not the EU. No a hard concept. imagine a football fan who may - shock, horror, despite their love of the beautiful game, not have a high opinion of FIFA. It was a bit like that.
So your solution is that England should withdraw from FIFA and not participate in the World Cup?
Oh, wait, maybe that analogy is really, really, really crap...
Asking whether JC will resign after a defeat seems a perfectly reasonable. Thousands if not millions of former Labour voters are going to look elsewhere because they fear him soldiering on.
I'm in that position myself. Unless I got word from Jeremy saying he would resign in the event of defeat I would vote elsewhere. Previously such an assurance hasn't been necessary. It's always been the convention. With Jeremy the evidence suggests that support from his clique is all the excuse he needs.
you know I have been thinking internment for the people who fight with ISIS and return here is necessary. As reluctant as I used to be, we are just understanding the scale of the problem. Ofcourse if possible we should stip them of citizenship aswell. Those Daily Mail comments are not even close to the maddest ones I've seen.
You should have listened to Lord Blair and Frank Gardner on the Today programme this morning. They knocked that one straight on the head.
Internment? Why? Parliament must suspend the Human rights act.
I heard the interview as well-i thought they dealt with the issue well.
they were also very clear that no matter what comes out over the next few weeks, the security forces do an amazing job and we are literally clueless to the extent of their actions.
I also thought Frank Gardner's comments at the beginning in regard to the number of young Moslem men in French jails was quite worrying.
He seemed to be implying that this was going to be a real source of problems in the future.
For the last time: I said he had a valid hypothesis - (my precise line was "that's actually a perfectly valid argument"). Because there is, all-too-often, a provable link between drug use and later radicalisation. Cannabis is particularly implicated.
The proposed solution: Prohibition, is certainly one possible approach. It is arguable. So the Daily Mail article was not bat-shit crazy as was being implied. Which, again, was the point I was making.
However, I think there are some other, possibly better solutions we should also consider. There. That's MY thesis. Now go and argue with some other shadow on the wall. I'm off for a long country walk. In the glorious sun.
Prohibition is the existing state of affairs and it is not proposed as a solution to a problem that it has clearly not solved.
As someone who values clear thought not just in myself but in others, I would like to see a much tougher clampdown on recreational drugs. That might be a solution.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Just do some bloody reading. This took me 0.002 seconds of Googling. And relates to an attack last Monday. In Manchester. You may have heard about it.
"Salman Abedi’s journey from cannabis-smoking university dropout to Isis suicide bomber is being gradually pieced together by investigators"
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
This site is a cannabis of sorts. It's oddly addictive, like the opinion polls.
Yep, current drug laws are the worst possible option. Either go for a liberal, regulated and taxed system such as in Portugal, Amsterdam and Colorado, or an authoritarian zero-tolerance system as seen in Bangkok, Dubai and Singapore.
With some wishy washy middle way people don't know where they stand, disrespect for the law is normalised and police can selectively enforce according to their prejudices.
Do you really think those laws are not selectively enforced in Bangkok or Dubai?
you know I have been thinking internment for the people who fight with ISIS and return here is necessary. As reluctant as I used to be, we are just understanding the scale of the problem. Ofcourse if possible we should stip them of citizenship aswell. Those Daily Mail comments are not even close to the maddest ones I've seen.
You should have listened to Lord Blair and Frank Gardner on the Today programme this morning. They knocked that one straight on the head.
Internment? Why? Parliament must suspend the Human rights act.
I heard the interview as well-i thought they dealt with the issue well.
they were also very clear that no matter what comes out over the next few weeks, the security forces do an amazing job and we are literally clueless to the extent of their actions.
I also thought Frank Gardner's comments at the beginning in regard to the number of young Moslem men in French jails was quite worrying.
He seemed to be implying that this was going to be a real source of problems in the future.
I always hate the media reporting on what the security services might know based upon a single (often dodgy) member of the public testimony. The BBC gave a prime platform to a very dodgy individual to make all sorts of claims about the security services after the murder of Lee Rigby.
The media know the security services can't come out and say that individual is talking total horseshit, so there is no "right of reply".
We either never know the truth or it comes out much much later and people only remember the initial reporting.
Hague decisions over the role of SAS in securing workers in Libya being a classic example.
For the last time: I said he had a valid hypothesis - (my precise line was "that's actually a perfectly valid argument"). Because there is, all-too-often, a provable link between drug use and later radicalisation. Cannabis is particularly implicated.
The proposed solution: Prohibition, is certainly one possible approach. It is arguable. So the Daily Mail article was not bat-shit crazy as was being implied. Which, again, was the point I was making.
However, I think there are some other, possibly better solutions we should also consider. There. That's MY thesis. Now go and argue with some other shadow on the wall. I'm off for a long country walk. In the glorious sun.
Prohibition is the existing state of affairs and it is not proposed as a solution to a problem that it has clearly not solved.
As someone who values clear thought not just in myself but in others, I would like to see a much tougher clampdown on recreational drugs. That might be a solution.
For the last time: I said he had a valid hypothesis - (my precise line was "that's actually a perfectly valid argument"). Because there is, all-too-often, a provable link between drug use and later radicalisation. Cannabis is particularly implicated.
The proposed solution: Prohibition, is certainly one possible approach. It is arguable. So the Daily Mail article was not bat-shit crazy as was being implied. Which, again, was the point I was making.
However, I think there are some other, possibly better solutions we should also consider. There. That's MY thesis. Now go and argue with some other shadow on the wall. I'm off for a long country walk. In the glorious sun.
Prohibition is the existing state of affairs and it is not proposed as a solution to a problem that it has clearly not solved.
As someone who values clear thought not just in myself but in others, I would like to see a much tougher clampdown on recreational drugs. That might be a solution.
Asking whether JC will resign after a defeat seems a perfectly reasonable. Thousands if not millions of former Labour voters are going to look elsewhere because they fear him soldiering on.
I'm in that position myself. Unless I got word from Jeremy saying he would resign in the event of defeat I would vote elsewhere. Previously such an assurance hasn't been necessary. It's always been the convention. With Jeremy the evidence suggests that support from his clique is all the excuse he needs.
Of course it's reasonable. Most opposition leaders do resign when they lose elections. If the Tories win but with a smaller majority, Corbyn probably won't resign right away. May "should" then resign and it's possible she will, but it's also possible that the media will "forget" why she said she called the election. There is a threshold for the size of Tory majority that will make Corbyn resign. Somewhere between 10 and 30 I reckon.
That's actually a perfectly valid argument. A lot of these jihadis are doped up to the eyeballs on skunk, or worse. It makes them paranoid and disinhibited at the same time, a bad mix. It also catalyses and accentuates any underlying mental issues.
Amsterdam and California being renowned for hoardes of pot-smoking Islamic terrorists compared to those being supplied by criminals here.
Reading cannot make up for not thinking. These people are getting their drugs here, where it is already illegal.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
It's illega suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
Eh? It took you twelve minutes to go from making a "valid argument" post opposing looser drug laws to recognising the current laws aren't working and after another six minutes you're saying full legalisation might be the answer?
You make the 'moving target' defence into an art form.
You're a moron. I'm gonna give up arguing with you as you don't read my remarks, you just argue with what you think or hope I said. Boring.
For the last time: I said he had a valid hypothesis - (my precise line was "that's actually a perfectly valid argument"). Because there is, all-too-often, a provable link between drug use and later radicalisation. Cannabis is particularly implicated.
The proposed solution: Prohibition, is certainly one possible approach. It is arguable. So the Daily Mail article was not bat-shit crazy as was being implied. Which, again, was the point I was making.
However, I think there are some other, possibly better solutions we should also consider. There. That's MY thesis. Now go and argue with some other shadow on the wall. I'm off for a long country walk. In the glorious sun.
If I am making any mistake, it is to actually read your posts.
Well, the penalties for drink driving seem to have reduced the numbers - why not target the drug customer with £1000 pound fines and loss of driving licence?
4: Sean Thomas, Tom Knox, S K Tremayne, and ONE I AM NOT ALLOWED TO TELL YOU
Is it Dianne Abbot?
No. He is Dianne Abbot and I claim my £5.20
(It used to be £5.00 but with Brexit-induced inflation....)
If it was really Diane Abbot it would £5,200,000,000. Or - no, sorry (sound of rustling papers in the background) it would be...er...er...um...52p. No - hang on....
It's illegal in name only. I smell weed regularly as I walk around Camden and Regent's Park. People now smoke it pretty openly. In public spaces.
Dealing is a little more clandestine, but walk thirty yards through Camden market and several dealers will make you an offer.
As I said downthread Prohibition is not necessarily the answer. Indeed full legalisation might be the answer, as has been suggested, so we can stamp out these mad brands of skunk with stupid THC levels.
What is daft is denying a link between drugs, esp cannabis, and terror. There is a link, often.
What! You detect illegal terrorist-related behaviour regularly? And you haven't even said if the dealers are wearing beards. Have you called the terrorist helpline yet? Imagine how you'd feel if one of these dealers sold pot to someone who later watched dodgy videos.
Yep, current drug laws are the worst possible option. Either go for a liberal, regulated and taxed system such as in Portugal, Amsterdam and Colorado, or an authoritarian zero-tolerance system as seen in Bangkok, Dubai and Singapore.
With some wishy washy middle way people don't know where they stand, disrespect for the law is normalised and police can selectively enforce according to their prejudices.
Do you really think those laws are not selectively enforced in Bangkok or Dubai?
Over here is pretty consistently harsh for drugs - would need to have an awful lot of wasta to avoid the clink. Several Brits get caught with drugs every year in the ME and Asia, usually by sniffer dogs at the airports. They did just drop the minimum sentence for possession to two years though (from four) and have opened a residential treatment centre for locals as an alternative if they hand themselves in.
Selective enforcement is a huge problem in the US, where (as with most things to do with policing in the US) it's seen as having a racial element to it.
I am tittering this morning at the suggestions for Mr T's other pen name. I can't hazard a guess myself, since as far as I know, I haven't read any of his books.
Love Europe, not the EU. No a hard concept. imagine a football fan who may - shock, horror, despite their love of the beautiful game, not have a high opinion of FIFA. It was a bit like that.
So your solution is that England should withdraw from FIFA and not participate in the World Cup?
Oh, wait, maybe that analogy is really, really, really crap...
well OK it's not the best.
Point was some remainers seem to think that Leave voters must necessarily therefore also dislike all French people for example. Utter cobblers.
you know what I am not going to re-run the argument.
Hoping it all goes badly for the UK now, as some on here seem to, is really, really, really crap.
The couple who live in the downstairs flat smoke weed outside the front door most nights. The other day she was dressed as a smurf. This stream of consciousness is meant to act as a substitute for polling data.
I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists. Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?
The closest comparison would be Callaghan who stayed on to reform the way the leader was elected before resigning. Corbyn would probably like to do that to assist the hard left.
There are many examples of Labour leaders remaining in post following election defeats - Kinnock in 1987 - Wilson in 1970 - Gaitskell in 1959 - Attlee in 1951. Ditto for Tory leaders.
Asking whether JC will resign after a defeat seems a perfectly reasonable. Thousands if not millions of former Labour voters are going to look elsewhere because they fear him soldiering on.
I'm in that position myself. Unless I got word from Jeremy saying he would resign in the event of defeat I would vote elsewhere. Previously such an assurance hasn't been necessary. It's always been the convention. With Jeremy the evidence suggests that support from his clique is all the excuse he needs.
Of course it's reasonable. Most opposition leaders do resign when they lose elections. If the Tories win but with a smaller majority, Corbyn probably won't resign right away. May "should" then resign and it's possible she will, but it's also possible that the media will "forget" why she said she called the election. There is a threshold for the size of Tory majority that will make Corbyn resign. Somewhere between 10 and 30 I reckon.
A majority of somewhere between 100 and 300 and Corbyn might start thinking about resigning.
Comments
Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
Although we'd have stayed in if it hadn't been for Boris's ambition and Gove's idiocy.
Pointless re-re-re-running this argument surely?
I voted to leave an undemocratic, unaccountable more-than-embryonic political union. I did this in the full knowledge that it would involve short term economic pain (although not nearly as much as the ridiculously hyperbolic Remain campaign claimed, and in the long run economic gain is very much in our own hands)
I did not do it because I hate foreigners.
Love Europe, not the EU. No a hard concept. imagine a football fan who may - shock, horror, despite their love of the beautiful game, not have a high opinion of FIFA. It was a bit like that.
Nothing that has happened since has made me regret my decision, even though I admit my pencil did hover uncertainly for a second over the box in the voting booth. I knew it was a big decision.
Get over yourselves Remainers! Sanctimonious, superior and bitter is not a good look.
I did giggle though as the wife just asked me what i was laughing at.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08qxfr8#play
It's about 2hours 10mins in.
Feels like a cheap shot from UKIP
Shame.
But had Leave lost, the issue would not have gone away unless Remain could turn round hearts as well as heads. Leave would have latched on to 'lies' told either in scaremongering or - worse - reassurance, and used them as the basis of a narrative that the referendum was 'stolen' from them. The reason the false assurances would have been worse for Remain is because they could be proved demonstrably wrong.
That, however, is an alternate history that we can speculate about for amusement but which has no relevance to today's politics.
You of all people should know that our current regime does not stop people getting hold of drugs, if they want them.
If they were only having to follow a couple of handful of people around, but instead it is 1000s.
A commendable effort, but it's a waste of time talking to the bigoted and rapidly diminishing Remainer fanatics. They are few, but noisy, and best ignored.
If we legalize cannabis, it will be highly taxed and highly regulated. Spice is very very cheap, way stronger and despite being made illegal is easily available and being chosen instead of cannabis by many people.
How do we address this issue?
I believe in places like Colorado, despite being able to legally buy it from very nice shops, illegal cannabis dealing hasn't gone away because it is just far cheaper than the highly taxed shops. All the nice middle class people go to the shops, but lots of people can't afford to do so.
I assume you're being sarcastic. I suspect even a few hundred would overwhelm the security resources, and internment would not be acceptable. Apart from anything else, there's always the risk of grudge accusations.
Finance capital and big business generally perceieve Brexit as an enormous opportunity, and living standards for the majority are likely to accelerate their fall over the next 2-3 years. It's possible a major war will have started by then too. An election in 2020 would have been a major inconvenience and even a risk to the Tory party.
Certainly no intellectually honest person believes Theresa May's stated reasons for calling the election are true.
What people gives a government a "mandate" to "do as it sees fit"?
In effect, @Alastair, you are saying this election is a plebiscite.
You make the 'moving target' defence into an art form.
Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
It wouldn't entirely kill the illegal drugs market any more than ending prohibition killed off moonshine but it'd make a pretty big dent in not only that but other organised and associated criminal activity - plus the usual benefits of having a properly regulated market in dangerous goods.
Perhaps when people have finished their one minute's silence and are tired with imagining they are in MI5 watching suspects, they could realise that security at events such as pop concerts in arenas should be improved.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/woman-realises-shes-slept-with-at-least-four-tories-20170525128318
My principle reason for voting remain was that I did not see it making much difference between if we stayed under Camerons terms and if we were to leave. Both campaigns were poor and the antics of odious Farage swayed it for me.
But I agree with all your points, the ever closer EU union and Euro are not for me. So the vote is Leave and I believe we go with that and the nasty Farage has gone. If any party wants to take us back in then they are welcome to encourage us to vote for them, sans rebates plus Schengen and closer union / euro. Good luck with trying that as the LDs are proving.
Corbyn of course does not want the EU to interfere with his plans for a communist stateist Britain.
For all the praise heaped by others on Mr Meeks' article I find his comments and those of other prominent 'Remainers' on here pretty facile and odious
When I were a lad, the worst you got from the God-botherers was a call to buy "War Cry" when you were busy getting pissed. Now it could be a call to war instead. Different times, different religions.
With some wishy washy middle way people don't know where they stand, disrespect for the law is normalised and police can selectively enforce according to their prejudices.
He makes a very good living selling bullsh*t to the gullible; it's just a shame that the excess production has to be dumped onto the market free of charge.
This is a general comment on sarcasm and not aimed at anyone here.
You are allowed to… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867690657955098625
Oh, wait, maybe that analogy is really, really, really crap...
I'm in that position myself. Unless I got word from Jeremy saying he would resign in the event of defeat I would vote elsewhere. Previously such an assurance hasn't been necessary. It's always been the convention. With Jeremy the evidence suggests that support from his clique is all the excuse he needs.
(It used to be £5.00 but with Brexit-induced inflation....)
they were also very clear that no matter what comes out over the next few weeks, the security forces do an amazing job and we are literally clueless to the extent of their actions.
I also thought Frank Gardner's comments at the beginning in regard to the number of young Moslem men in French jails was quite worrying.
He seemed to be implying that this was going to be a real source of problems in the future.
As someone who values clear thought not just in myself but in others, I would like to see a much tougher clampdown on recreational drugs. That might be a solution.
The media know the security services can't come out and say that individual is talking total horseshit, so there is no "right of reply".
We either never know the truth or it comes out much much later and people only remember the initial reporting.
Hague decisions over the role of SAS in securing workers in Libya being a classic example.
LibDems: UKIP for pussies....
It would be All Your Fault.
Selective enforcement is a huge problem in the US, where (as with most things to do with policing in the US) it's seen as having a racial element to it.
Unless he's the Reverend W. Awdry?
Point was some remainers seem to think that Leave voters must necessarily therefore also dislike all French people for example. Utter cobblers.
you know what I am not going to re-run the argument.
Hoping it all goes badly for the UK now, as some on here seem to, is really, really, really crap.
This stream of consciousness is meant to act as a substitute for polling data.
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/867695767959597057