"An investigation is to be carried out into whether the use of police helicopters during the Grenfell Tower fire led to more people dying. Nabil Choucair, who lost relatives in the blaze, complained the presence of helicopters led to some people remaining inside the tower as they thought they would be rescued."
LONDON — Michel Barnier has provoked fury in Whitehall by saying that, in voting for Brexit, Britons chose not to stand “shoulder to shoulder” with the EU just six months after a French call for solidarity against ISIS.
A U.K. official close to the Brexit negotiations said the claim was tantamount to “accusing us of ducking out of the fight against Daesh [ISIS].” The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, branded Barnier’s assertion “irrational and stupid.”
LONDON — Michel Barnier has provoked fury in Whitehall by saying that, in voting for Brexit, Britons chose not to stand “shoulder to shoulder” with the EU just six months after a French call for solidarity against ISIS.
A U.K. official close to the Brexit negotiations said the claim was tantamount to “accusing us of ducking out of the fight against Daesh [ISIS].” The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, branded Barnier’s assertion “irrational and stupid.”
Oh Theresa what are you doing responding to a non-story?? Didn’t Rachel and Richard make it clear it was best to do nothing?
Can't speak for Rachel, but the point I was making was to say it wasn't a problem for the PM, not that she (or in this case her spokesman) wouldn't respond to a question about it.
I do find it slightly weird that Trump being Trump is instantly a massive problem for May, but never for the French Tony Blair who couldn't get the racist American uncle over for a full spread fast enough.
Incidentally, if anyone else nearish Morley is about beware, weirdly, of fake Scottish banknotes circulating around there. Apparently it's Irishmen trying to use them [according to a local paper story].
@rpjs second article very interesting. Especially his(?) observation on the libertarian/4chan/alt-right angle to BTC.
Bitcoin was created by libertarians as a way of limiting the power of the state by reducing the control exerted by central banks and by allowing money to flow freely (and, to an extent, untraceably) across borders. That is why China hates it - it circumvents their capital controls.
Bitcoin, and libertarians, are about the furthest away you can get from the quasi-fascistic, authoritarian alt-right.
Theresa May warned European leaders that failure to reach a comprehensive Brexit agreement will result in a weakening of cooperation on crime and security, triggering accusations that her remarks amounted to blackmail.
Senior figures in Brussels complained about the prime minister’s remarks, while critics in Westminster also piled in, arguing that the prime minister had issued a “blatant threat” and was treating security as a “bargaining chip” in negotiations.
Incidentally, if anyone else nearish Morley is about beware, weirdly, of fake Scottish banknotes circulating around there. Apparently it's Irishmen trying to use them [according to a local paper story].
You see, if only we had joined the Euro, we wouldn't be face with such problems.
(Incidentally, I offloaded a couple of Clydesdale 20s at the weekend!)
Theresa May warned European leaders that failure to reach a comprehensive Brexit agreement will result in a weakening of cooperation on crime and security,
Barnier says (with the PM in Iraq) that we already have....
She's really gone for it, the sort of level of criticism reserved for when Philip doesn't do the washing up....
And why should I do her washing up?
Because her husband's busy putting the rubbish out.
I think:
Never had the need to be together, to protect ourselves together, to act together been so strong, so manifest. Yet rather than stay shoulder to shoulder with the Union, the British chose to be on their own again.
Really? Yes, it did smack of an attempt by pro-Brexit hardliners to portray the EU as the bullying bogeyman while casting the UK in the role of victim. All a bit pointless really - how does shoring up the sympathy vote help anyone?
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
That the state visit is continuing is likely to a line of attack for Labour, who are in a much stronger position to attack TMay now on this issue then they were pre-GE.
Meanwhile, in the real world....
Most people couldn't give a tinker's cuss about this . And a large part of the population probably quite like Trump anyway.
I could be wrong, but Brendan's enthusiasm for the Donald phenomenon seems to have taken a hit:
First things first: for Trump to share this tweet is unquestionably evidence of his idiocy, childishness, prejudice, dearth of the most basic PR nous, and lack of online decorum. The man’s a moron. It’s one thing for a teenager to retweet stuff he knows he shouldn’t, or for us non-presidents to get on Facebook when we’re drunk and Like stupid shit. But the president of the United States? That is just nuts. It’s proof of his infantile streak, his lack of awareness of the historic responsibilities of his office. This artless man should have his phone taken off him.
@bbclaurak: No 10 - Trump is wrong to have posted the messages, but plans for the state visit remain in place
Might be best for Trump to spend most of his state visit in Burnley rather than London though
Bit of a slur on Burnley perhaps - I attended Burnley v Arsenal at the weekend and the only dubious comment I heard was after Arsenal had stolen the match with an injury time penalty and which merely reminded Mr Wenger of his illegitimate French parentage and advising him to vacate the stadium as soon as possible.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
That the state visit is continuing is likely to a line of attack for Labour, who are in a much stronger position to attack TMay now on this issue then they were pre-GE.
Meanwhile, in the real world....
Most people couldn't give a tinker's cuss about this . And a large part of the population probably quite like Trump anyway.
Get real.
Do you have any links to polls to supporting your final assertion?
I seem to recall every poll conducted by a BPC pollster shows Donald Trump as popular with British voters as a handjob from Edward Scissorhands.
That the state visit is continuing is likely to a line of attack for Labour, who are in a much stronger position to attack TMay now on this issue then they were pre-GE.
Meanwhile, in the real world....
Most people couldn't give a tinker's cuss about this . And a large part of the population probably quite like Trump anyway.
Get real.
Not really. I can only find this poll after his election, but I've seen more recent polling showing that he remains extremely unpopular in Britain:
That's not to say that people would object to a working visit - we have to deal with all sorts. But a state visit with pomp and circumstance is less well accepted.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
Not jeopardising the Northern Irish peace process by claiming a mandate to remove Northern Ireland from the customs union and single market also counts as security cooperation. The UK government has shown itself to be reckless on this issue.
That the state visit is continuing is likely to a line of attack for Labour, who are in a much stronger position to attack TMay now on this issue then they were pre-GE.
Meanwhile, in the real world....
Most people couldn't give a tinker's cuss about this . And a large part of the population probably quite like Trump anyway.
Get real.
It’s ironic that you tell me to ‘get real’, when as others have noted a lot of polling shows him to be quite unpopular.
A large part of the population doesn’t need to be concerned for it to be trouble for TMay. She lost her majority thanks to many under 55s/Conservative Remainers - groups likely to be more socially liberal - turning away from her party. A visit for Trump hardly helps her gain back some of those voters, and gives Labour a chance to signal that they share the values of the many socially liberal members of these groups.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
I do not think for one moment that the French felt that by leaving the EU we were abandoning them in the fight against terrorism. It does not fit with any of their statements at the time or since.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
I don't read it as 'accusing us of ducking out of the fight against Daesh', as has been alleged,, but accurately expressing the bewilderment of our EU friends that we decided to leave at a time when they saw an increased need to stand together.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
In 2018 we will have to work on the framework of our new partnership with the United Kingdom. After – and only after – the detailed arrangements for and the principles of an orderly separation have been agreed. Soon I hope.
As for the future, I would like to stress two points: First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe. Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe.
There are three reasons for this: London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland. London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO. After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security.
I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
On the day that the British PM is in Iraq discussing the fight against Daesh and in a year that the UK has suffered multiple terrorist attacks to suggest that we are abandoning our fight against Daesh is tin-eared at best, downright insulting at worst.....
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
I don't read it as 'accusing us of ducking out of the fight against Daesh', as has been alleged,, but accurately expressing the bewilderment of our EU friends that we decided to leave at a time when they saw an increased need to stand together.
Exactly. And Barnier then makes a very specific point of thanking the PM:
Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security. I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
On the day that the British PM is in Iraq discussing the fight against Daesh and in a year that the UK has suffered multiple terrorist attacks to suggest that we are abandoning our fight against Daesh is tin-eared at best, downright insulting at worst.....
Indeed, Mr. Meeks. It's almost as if the EU has decided to earnestly forget NATO exists.
Except Barnier mentions it specifically ...
As for the future, I would like to stress two points: First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe. Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe. There are three reasons for this: London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland. London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO. After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security. I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions. They cause anxiety to law abiding people.
"British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudice of the far-right, which it is the antithesis of the values that this country represents: decency tolerance and respect. It is wrong for the President to have done this."
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
On the day that the British PM is in Iraq discussing the fight against Daesh and in a year that the UK has suffered multiple terrorist attacks to suggest that we are abandoning our fight against Daesh is tin-eared at best, downright insulting at worst.....
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
Sort-of, but the speech as a whole is a mixture of exhortation to the EU27 that they'll need to up their game with the UK no longer around, a bit of routine EU self-praise as you always get in Eurocrat speeches, and a reminder that they will actually continue to need to cooperate closely with the UK.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
After the introduction, it's pretty banal Eurocratese with some uninspired sort-of-obvious-but-lacking-in-imagination decisions being communicated. It makes the introduction all the more bizarre.
Not jeopardising the Northern Irish peace process by claiming a mandate to remove Northern Ireland from the customs union and single market also counts as security cooperation. The UK government has shown itself to be reckless on this issue.
Sadly, the government's threat to 'take our information with us' was an unnecessary and provocative piece of bravado. We should have made clear that cooperation in security matters was set in stone and retained the moral high ground.
I could be wrong, but Brendan's enthusiasm for the Donald phenomenon seems to have taken a hit:
First things first: for Trump to share this tweet is unquestionably evidence of his idiocy, childishness, prejudice, dearth of the most basic PR nous, and lack of online decorum. The man’s a moron. It’s one thing for a teenager to retweet stuff he knows he shouldn’t, or for us non-presidents to get on Facebook when we’re drunk and Like stupid shit. But the president of the United States? That is just nuts. It’s proof of his infantile streak, his lack of awareness of the historic responsibilities of his office. This artless man should have his phone taken off him.
I think Brendan O Neill hits the nail on the head there. The PC fatwa on debating the merits of allowing in vast numbers of people of a culture completely at odds with our own liberal democracy was only ever going to end badly. It created a space for people like Trump that would not have existed had we openly acknowledged that radical Islam was problematic and undesirable in our own countries, long before the point they started mowing us down with trucks.
With regards Trump's own views, it was fairly obvious what his views were from all his campaign rallies, where he ended with a dramatic reading of Al Wilson's "The Snake".
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
A missing capital letter makes all the difference...
The reports seem a pretty fair summary of the introductory words to the speech.
He explains why the initial reaction to the British vote was shock and then goes on to talk about how it has driven the EU27 closer together. I really can't see the problem with it.
The words @CarlottaVance quoted below seem to be a direct suggestion that Britain voting to leave the EU was a desertion of its collective role on defence. It's an extraordinary thing to say at the present stage.
They seem to me to be a description of how the EU27 felt when they found out the result. They were said at the start of a speech to create a context for the rest of the speech. I really can't see the problem.
On the day that the British PM is in Iraq discussing the fight against Daesh and in a year that the UK has suffered multiple terrorist attacks to suggest that we are abandoning our fight against Daesh is tin-eared at best, downright insulting at worst.....
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
A missing capital letter makes all the difference...
Indeed, Mr. Meeks. It's almost as if the EU has decided to earnestly forget NATO exists.
Except Barnier mentions it specifically ...
As for the future, I would like to stress two points: First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe. Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe. There are three reasons for this: London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland. London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO. After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security. I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
So it's real purpose is just to undermine TMay's position and remove one of her cards to play.
On topic, I'm struggling to see the news here. Donald Trump rode to power on anti-immigrant anti-Muslim rhetoric. He struggled to condemn American neo-Nazis. Why would anyone think he'd have a problem with the British variety?
On topic, I'm struggling to see the news here. Donald Trump rode to power on anti-immigrant anti-Muslim rhetoric. He struggled to condemn American neo-Nazis. Why would anyone think he'd have a problem with the British variety?
Agreed. It's not like Trump suddenly pivoted from views he clearly held before he was elected. Or similar views that he's tweeted since being elected.
You aim for Diego Simone and end up with Sam Allardyce.
If it is to be Sam, I for one will get behind him.
There's one thing he's good at is organising a defence.
I think there's going to be two major issues for him
1) Appointing Sammy Lee to the coaching staff, that's going to be weird and a problem for the fans.
2) The January targets, I suspect what Allardyce wants and what the board want and will sanction will be two very different things
Is Sammy Lee coming? Not sure it will be a deal-breaker. What the board wants is over-priced tat. Sam will bring in over-priced workhorses. I know which I'd prefer.
You aim for Diego Simone and end up with Sam Allardyce.
If it is to be Sam, I for one will get behind him.
There's one thing he's good at is organising a defence.
I think there's going to be two major issues for him
1) Appointing Sammy Lee to the coaching staff, that's going to be weird and a problem for the fans.
2) The January targets, I suspect what Allardyce wants and what the board want and will sanction will be two very different things
Is Sammy Lee coming? Not sure it will be a deal-breaker. What the board wants is over-priced tat. Sam will bring in over-priced workhorses. I know which I'd prefer.
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
A missing capital letter makes all the difference...
Yes, I was a bit worried by that!
Richard re. Trump's tweets and Tezza's response.
You said it was nothing to do with her and she had no need to make a statement, only needing to respond if asked.
Me, TSE, small children in Pontefract pointed out that she could not wait until she was asked and had to respond.
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
A missing capital letter makes all the difference...
Yes, I was a bit worried by that!
Richard re. Trump's tweets and Tezza's response.
You said it was nothing to do with her and she had no need to make a statement, only needing to respond if asked.
Me, TSE, small children in Pontefract pointed out that she could not wait until she was asked and had to respond.
As indeed she did.
I think it was her spokesman responding to a question, wasn't it?
Either way, it's no big deal for her, which was the point.
You aim for Diego Simone and end up with Sam Allardyce.
If it is to be Sam, I for one will get behind him.
There's one thing he's good at is organising a defence.
I think there's going to be two major issues for him
1) Appointing Sammy Lee to the coaching staff, that's going to be weird and a problem for the fans.
2) The January targets, I suspect what Allardyce wants and what the board want and will sanction will be two very different things
Is Sammy Lee coming? Not sure it will be a deal-breaker. What the board wants is over-priced tat. Sam will bring in over-priced workhorses. I know which I'd prefer.
On topic, I'm struggling to see the news here. Donald Trump rode to power on anti-immigrant anti-Muslim rhetoric. He struggled to condemn American neo-Nazis. Why would anyone think he'd have a problem with the British variety?
the news is N Korea just launched a bigger missile and Trump has delefected his impotence with some tweets
Indeed, Mr. Meeks. It's almost as if the EU has decided to earnestly forget NATO exists.
Except Barnier mentions it specifically ...
As for the future, I would like to stress two points: First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe. Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe. There are three reasons for this: London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland. London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO. After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security. I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
So it's real purpose is just to undermine TMay's position and remove one of her cards to play.
You 'take the moral high ground' (as frequently advised), make an offer the EU 'banks it' then asks for more....
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
A missing capital letter makes all the difference...
Yes, I was a bit worried by that!
Richard re. Trump's tweets and Tezza's response.
You said it was nothing to do with her and she had no need to make a statement, only needing to respond if asked.
Me, TSE, small children in Pontefract pointed out that she could not wait until she was asked and had to respond.
As indeed she did.
I think it was her spokesman responding to a question, wasn't it?
Either way, it's no big deal for her, which was the point.
"Mrs May is currently on a surprise visit to Baghdad. But her official spokesman said in a statement:
"Britain First seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
"They cause anxiety to law-abiding people. British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudiced rhetoric of the far right, which is the antithesis of the values that this country represents – decency, tolerance and respect.
"It is wrong for the President to have done this.""
Doesn't sound like an answer to a question.
The bigger deal is that she cannot ignore everything that Trump tweets as she is perceived to be arm in arm with him. And regardless of that, he impinged upon the UK with that tweet so she also had to respond.
On topic, I'm struggling to see the news here. Donald Trump rode to power on anti-immigrant anti-Muslim rhetoric. He struggled to condemn American neo-Nazis. Why would anyone think he'd have a problem with the British variety?
the news is N Korea just launched a bigger missile and Trump has delefected his impotence with some tweets
The UK failed to show solidarity with a Europe reeling from terror attacks when it voted for Brexit, in 2016, the EU's chief negotiator has suggested.
The UK "chose to be on their own again" when the need to act together against groups such as Islamic State had never been "so strong", Michel Barnier said......
.....The UK, which has suffered a string of terror attacks in 2017, has been at the forefront of the fight against IS - carrying out air strikes against the militants in Iraq and Syria
Comments
https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/935900326007328768
Tim Farron"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/28/liberalism-eaten-itself-british-religious-liberty-christianity-tim-farron?CMP=fb_gu
"An investigation is to be carried out into whether the use of police helicopters during the Grenfell Tower fire led to more people dying.
Nabil Choucair, who lost relatives in the blaze, complained the presence of helicopters led to some people remaining inside the tower as they thought they would be rescued."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42167979
Yes, the POTUS using his twitter to give a platform to a far right group when they were previously struggling for one is deeply irresponsible.
A U.K. official close to the Brexit negotiations said the claim was tantamount to “accusing us of ducking out of the fight against Daesh [ISIS].” The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, branded Barnier’s assertion “irrational and stupid.”
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-negotiation-britain-furious-with-barnier-over-isis-claim/
Ms. Apocalypse, indeed, this might prove significant for them.
https://twitter.com/DianeJamesMEP/status/935906088834265090
Incidentally, if anyone else nearish Morley is about beware, weirdly, of fake Scottish banknotes circulating around there. Apparently it's Irishmen trying to use them [according to a local paper story].
Maybe he's actually addressing our EU friends, and subtly reminding them that no deal would have implications beyond the economic?
Bitcoin, and libertarians, are about the furthest away you can get from the quasi-fascistic, authoritarian alt-right.
middle class england shrieks its superior morality
then goes on holiday to france where Macron welcomes Trump with open arms
Theresa May warned European leaders that failure to reach a comprehensive Brexit agreement will result in a weakening of cooperation on crime and security, triggering accusations that her remarks amounted to blackmail.
Senior figures in Brussels complained about the prime minister’s remarks, while critics in Westminster also piled in, arguing that the prime minister had issued a “blatant threat” and was treating security as a “bargaining chip” in negotiations.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/brexit-eu-condemns-mays-blackmail-over-security-cooperation
(Incidentally, I offloaded a couple of Clydesdale 20s at the weekend!)
No wonder our productivity is so low.
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/935812720326336512
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-5021_en.htm
Never had the need to be together, to protect ourselves together, to act together been so strong, so manifest. Yet rather than stay shoulder to shoulder with the Union, the British chose to be on their own again.
Speaks for itself. With the PM in Iraq....
https://twitter.com/itvmotorsport/status/935915001419878401?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/liverpool-news-transfers-live-team-13965906
Most people couldn't give a tinker's cuss about this . And a large part of the population probably quite like Trump anyway.
Get real.
First things first: for Trump to share this tweet is unquestionably evidence of his idiocy, childishness, prejudice, dearth of the most basic PR nous, and lack of online decorum. The man’s a moron. It’s one thing for a teenager to retweet stuff he knows he shouldn’t, or for us non-presidents to get on Facebook when we’re drunk and Like stupid shit. But the president of the United States? That is just nuts. It’s proof of his infantile streak, his lack of awareness of the historic responsibilities of his office. This artless man should have his phone taken off him.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/britain-first-a-monster-of-the-lefts-own-making-trump-retweet/20589#.Wh7pONRl-Uk
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-42167619/daredevils-jump-from-a-mountain-into-a-plane
I seem to recall every poll conducted by a BPC pollster shows Donald Trump as popular with British voters as a handjob from Edward Scissorhands.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/donald-trump-dangerous-opinium-poll-uk-voters
That's not to say that people would object to a working visit - we have to deal with all sorts. But a state visit with pomp and circumstance is less well accepted.
At the risk of cross-dressing for the second time this afternoon, I agree with Southam.
A large part of the population doesn’t need to be concerned for it to be trouble for TMay. She lost her majority thanks to many under 55s/Conservative Remainers - groups likely to be more socially liberal - turning away from her party. A visit for Trump hardly helps her gain back some of those voters, and gives Labour a chance to signal that they share the values of the many socially liberal members of these groups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morlanwelz_train_collision_and_runaway
It'll be interesting to see what the final report says - if I can read it, that is!
As for the future, I would like to stress two points:
First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe.
Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe.
There are three reasons for this:
London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland.
London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO.
After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security.
I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security.
I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
As for the future, I would like to stress two points:
First, as Prime Minister Theresa May has said, the United Kingdom is leaving the Union, but not leaving Europe.
Second, despite the UK's withdrawal, we shall maintain our strategic capability: there will be no security vacuum in Europe.
There are three reasons for this:
London's withdrawal will not affect bilateral cooperation between certain Member States and the United Kingdom, particularly at operational level. The UK will for example continue to play a part in NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia and Poland.
London's withdrawal will not affect the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO.
After all, Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European security.
I welcome this commitment and thank Theresa May for making it. History teaches us that there must be no horse-trading over the security of Europeans – that is an absolute necessity.
May's spokesman told a press briefing attended by Business Insider: "Britain first seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions. They cause anxiety to law abiding people.
"British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudice of the far-right, which it is the antithesis of the values that this country represents: decency tolerance and respect. It is wrong for the President to have done this."
http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-condemns-trump-for-retweeting-britain-first-hate-videos-2017-11?IR=T
https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/727864437038825472
With regards Trump's own views, it was fairly obvious what his views were from all his campaign rallies, where he ended with a dramatic reading of Al Wilson's "The Snake".
So it's real purpose is just to undermine TMay's position and remove one of her cards to play.
I think there's going to be two major issues for him
1) Appointing Sammy Lee to the coaching staff, that's going to be weird and a problem for the fans.
2) The January targets, I suspect what Allardyce wants and what the board want and will sanction will be two very different things
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11147493/european-paper-talk-barcelona-switch-attention-from-philippe-coutinho-to-christian-eriksen
http://time.com/4905420/donald-trump-pershing-pigs-blood-muslim-tweet/
What the board wants is over-priced tat. Sam will bring in over-priced workhorses. I know which I'd prefer.
You said it was nothing to do with her and she had no need to make a statement, only needing to respond if asked.
Me, TSE, small children in Pontefract pointed out that she could not wait until she was asked and had to respond.
As indeed she did.
Either way, it's no big deal for her, which was the point.
It would probably send him insane(er).
I'm beginning to think he might be a bus
"Britain First seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions.
"They cause anxiety to law-abiding people. British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudiced rhetoric of the far right, which is the antithesis of the values that this country represents – decency, tolerance and respect.
"It is wrong for the President to have done this.""
Doesn't sound like an answer to a question.
The bigger deal is that she cannot ignore everything that Trump tweets as she is perceived to be arm in arm with him. And regardless of that, he impinged upon the UK with that tweet so she also had to respond.
Not Garrison Keillor!!
The UK failed to show solidarity with a Europe reeling from terror attacks when it voted for Brexit, in 2016, the EU's chief negotiator has suggested.
The UK "chose to be on their own again" when the need to act together against groups such as Islamic State had never been "so strong", Michel Barnier said......
.....The UK, which has suffered a string of terror attacks in 2017, has been at the forefront of the fight against IS - carrying out air strikes against the militants in Iraq and Syria
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42166307
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/29/channel-4-news-complains-to-labour-over-tulip-siddiqs-threat
Together with Emily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Emma Dent Coad and Dawn Butler its quite a group.
Are there any others I've forgotten about ?
Just watched the Infinity War trailer.
It was so good, I need a cigarette.