politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Labour view of the party’s looming electoral disaster
Comments
-
Countries that are critical of Israel still get hit by terrorists. Israel's existence is a pretext, rather than a real grievance.0
-
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
0 -
Fair enough, so at least the rest of your arguement about radical islamism has fallen apart. We're making progress at least.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
..JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
0 -
Headline intention would suggest it is the first option, or else lots of new supporters are flocking to him (or saying they will at any rate).Nemtynakht said:
I think the key question about this election is will Corbyn disliking labour supporters hold their nose and vote for him, sit on their hands and stay away, or vote for the enemy to get rid of him. I would love to see some specific polling on this.CD13 said:I wonder what qualities Mrs May has? She is difficult to pigeonhole, butd wasn't a great home secretary as far as I remember. But being bland on a grand scale is more than enough to beat Jezza. He has a few fanatical supporters and a great many who are horrified at the thought of him as PM.
Labour's only hope is that enough of their supporters vote Labour despite him. It only needs a rain shower or a good programme on TV for them to sit on their hands.
0 -
Two big ifs.kle4 said:
The super pessimistic Uncut piece suggests via a crude model something like 90 losses, but frankly somewhere in the 170-200 total range looks more plausible than that, the upper end at the moment if the rise in polls is a, real, and b, not super badly distributed.another_richard said:
The Conservatives can gain quite a lot of seats in London and Wales on small swings.Nemtynakht said:I live in Thornbury and Yate which is the top SW target. There were 5000 UKIP votes last time and no UKIP standing this time so I cannot see it going yellow to blue.
you mean blue to yellow?
Of course - brain fade.
My big thing in this election is that I cannot figure out where the Tories are coming from. They don't appear to be doing well in Wales or London. They cannot gain many seats across south or south west. The north West looks nailed on for Labour after mayorals. Scotland looks like increased vote share for little return. That leaves east and West Midlands and NE and Yorkshire. I cannot see where the big majority will come from in those areas.
Con ...... 351
Lab ....... 220
SNP ......... 49
LibDem ... 8
N.I. ......... 18
Plaid ......... 3
Total ..... 650
Con Maj ... 51
And there's a lot more to North-West England than Liverpool and Manchester. Barrow, Blackpool S, Chester, Chorley, Copeland, Hyndburn and Workington for example. Plus various marginal within the two metropolitan counties.
But I don't expect a Labour meltdown - there's too much of the various Labour core votes (and too little of the those of the Conservatives) in the conurbations.0 -
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.0
-
Big ifs indeed. Labour could do surprisingly well, but also the worst predictions could come true (with little middle ground) depending on those questions.another_richard said:
Two big ifs.kle4 said:
The super pessimistic Uncut piece suggests via a crude model something like 90 losses, but frankly somewhere in the 170-200 total range looks more plausible than that, the upper end at the moment if the rise in polls is a, real, and b, not super badly distributed.another_richard said:
The Conservatives can gain quite a lot of seats in London and Wales on small swings.Nemtynakht said:I live in Thornbury and Yate which is the top SW target. There were 5000 UKIP votes last time and no UKIP standing this time so I cannot see it going yellow to blue.
you mean blue to yellow?
Of course - brain fade.
My big thing in this election is that I cannot figure out where the Tories are coming from. They don't appear to be doing well in Wales or London. They cannot gain many seats across south or south west. The north West looks nailed on for Labour after mayorals. Scotland looks like increased vote share for little return. That leaves east and West Midlands and NE and Yorkshire. I cannot see where the big majority will come from in those areas.
Con ...... 351
Lab ....... 220
SNP ......... 49
LibDem ... 8
N.I. ......... 18
Plaid ......... 3
Total ..... 650
Con Maj ... 51
And there's a lot more to North-West England than Liverpool and Manchester. Barrow, Blackpool S, Chester, Chorley, Copeland, Hyndburn and Workington for example. Plus various marginal within the two metropolitan counties.
But I don't expect a Labour meltdown - there's too much of the various Labour core votes (and too little of the those of the Conservatives) in the conurbations.0 -
Trump said this week in the Middle East they had to confront radical Islam which is rather more than Corbyn has saidWhisperingOracle said:HYUFD said:
Saudi planes are now bombing ISISRoger said:
That is true to the extent that supporting Saudi Arabia the biggest exporter of terrorism and the most shocking exponent of misogyny is at least as morally suspect as Corbyn's support for dubious organisations and much more dangerousJWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
But the inspiration for terrorism worldwide continues to flow out of saudi arabia, in the form of billions upon billions dollars' worth of resources to build mosques, madrassas, and surrounding infrastracture for the most, highly, conservative forms of islam.0 -
I guess the other thing is that if Corbyn is racking up huge majorities in safe seats, and May is annoying the pensioner vote in her safe seats then vote distribution will heavily favour the conservatives. It will be fascinating.kle4 said:
The super pessimistic Uncut piece suggests via a crude model something like 90 losses, but frankly somewhere in the 170-200 total range looks more plausible than that, the upper end at the moment if the rise in polls is a, real, and b, not super badly distributed.another_richard said:
The Conservatives can gain quite a lot of seats in London and Wales on small swings.Nemtynakht said:I live in Thornbury and Yate which is the top SW target. There were 5000 UKIP votes last time and no UKIP standing this time so I cannot see it going yellow to blue.
you mean blue to yellow?
Of course - brain fade.
My big thing in this election is that I cannot figure out where the Tories are coming from. They don't appear to be doing well in Wales or London. They cannot gain many seats across south or south west. The north West looks nailed on for Labour after mayorals. Scotland looks like increased vote share for little return. That leaves east and West Midlands and NE and Yorkshire. I cannot see where the big majority will come from in those areas.
Con ...... 351
Lab ....... 220
SNP ......... 49
LibDem ... 8
N.I. ......... 18
Plaid ......... 3
Total ..... 650
Con Maj ... 51
And there's a lot more to North-West England than Liverpool and Manchester. Barrow, Blackpool S, Chester, Chorley, Copeland, Hyndburn and Workington for example. Plus various marginal within the two metropolitan counties.0 -
Indeed so, but I wanted to hear Jack's definition. *wink*ThreeQuidder said:
The conventional definition is 100, I thought?peter_from_putney said:0 -
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
Pots and kettles after your undignified response yesterday.JackW said:
"JWisemann" - Rarely has posters name been less appropriate.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
0 -
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
You do realise that history didn't start in 2003, right?FeersumEnjineeya said:
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
I see that JStupidman and the Labour damage control team are out in force today, I wonder why that could be.0
-
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
0 -
https://theaviationist.com/2016/02/13/saudi-arabia-is-deploying-combat-planes-to-turkey-to-fight-isis/JWisemann said:
Source? They may have bombed ISIS like once or something. Certainly an infinitesimal fraction of the damage they caused in their part in the organisation's rise in the first place. Their planes are more concerned with killing kids in Yemen, with the help of our Tory government (the Saudi intervention in Yemen has also allowed Islamic State and Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to flourish, in some case in direct collaboration as de facto allies).HYUFD said:
Saudi planes are now bombing ISISRoger said:
That is true to the extent that supporting Saudi Arabia the biggest exporter of terrorism and the most shocking exponent of misogyny is at least as morally suspect as Corbyn's support for dubious organisations and much more dangerousJWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
0 -
Come now. Everyone knows that we exert huge moral influence over the Saudis by selling them our finely crafted weaponry. Think how ghastly they'd be if they had to buy that stuff from some unprincipled bounder of a country.Roger said:
That is true to the extent that supporting Saudi Arabia the biggest exporter of terrorism and the most shocking exponent of misogyny is at least as morally suspect as Corbyn's support for dubious organisations and much more dangerousJWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...JWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
0 -
I'm not commenting on domestic politics until the national campaigns resume (tomorrow, I expect), but punters may want to note that Merkel is now running away with the prospective German vote:
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The free-market FDP, Merkel's natural allies, are doing well too. And I was talking to a left-wing Dutch politician yesterday: he is certain that the protracted negotiations will lead to a centre-right coalition there. So after this turbulent year, the EU will be dominated by centre-right governments, with the possible exception of Italy and small countries like Greece. Both the anti-immigrant right and the poipulist left are falling short everywhere, and the centre-left is getting squeezed wherever you look.0 -
Perhaps you could get to your point?Slackbladder said:
You do realise that history didn't start in 2003, right?FeersumEnjineeya said:
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
Troops on the streets (or at "events") might not be that good an idea after a few days. Blunkett was ridiculed over tanks at Heathrow. More worryingly, soldiers aren't trained for interactions with the public, and the history of using troops as police in Northern Ireland or abroad is not encouraging. Increasing the police overtime budget might have been the better choice.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, surely the public will be reassured by having 300 million more police on the streets if Diane Abbott becomes Home Secretary?
On-topic: Mr. Brind, not heartened at all by Labour's surge in the polls?0 -
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
0 -
THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
Labour's strategy of concede and move on from Brexit turned out best for them.foxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.0 -
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.0 -
Mr. L, I agree that the sooner troops can be off the streets the better, but the suggestion is another attack may be imminent and it's a precaution.
Mr. Palmer, cheers for that post, although there's only 1.2 or so available for Merkel to be next Chancellor.0 -
The french saying that abedi believed to have travelled to syria and has proven links to islamic state.
0 -
Corbyn will be vilified by the MSM, a proportion of the mud will stick. We live in uncertain times.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
0 -
Italy next year is the interesting one now. Beppe Grillo's populist 5* leads half the Italian polls and will likely have a majority with Forza Italia and Northern League supportNickPalmer said:I'm not commenting on domestic politics until the national campaigns resume (tomorrow, I expect), but punters may want to note that Merkel is now running away with the prospective German vote:
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The free-market FDP, Merkel's natural allies, are doing well too. And I was talking to a left-wing Dutch politician yesterday: he is certain that the protracted negotiations will lead to a centre-right coalition there. So after this turbulent year, the EU will be dominated by centre-right governments, with the possible exception of Italy and small countries like Greece. Both the anti-immigrant right and the poipulist left are falling short everywhere, and the centre-left is getting squeezed wherever you look.
France of course is now Blairite rather than centre right0 -
Can I hear anyone saying 'busted flush'?CarlottaVance said:THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
I remember the enforcement of lots of UNSC resolutions. Don't you?FeersumEnjineeya said:
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
Has not helped on this occasion when British born.However nor has our intervention in Libya.A failed state training camps and persons able to travel there and back .HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.0 -
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
Just received an email from an old school friend whom I would normally regard as sensible Labour chappie.
"I sense the fingerprints of Lynton Crosby all over this latest wheeze to scare the electorate.
"0 -
All along information has flowed more freely from abroad about him, from France, and the U.S., than domestically. That suggests to me the authorities are maybe sitting on quite a few other bits of information.Tykejohnno said:The french saying that abedi believed to have travelled to syria and has proven links to islamic state.
0 -
Rather like his controversial views on "AGW" it seems like history begins wherever it best suits FeersumEnjineeya's graph.Slackbladder said:
You do realise that history didn't start in 2003, right?FeersumEnjineeya said:
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
Heart of stone etc etcMortimer said:
Can I hear anyone saying 'busted flush'?CarlottaVance said:THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
I find armed police or soldiers alarming, not reassuring - Rome was crawling with them on Monday (in advance of the G7, I assume).DecrepitJohnL said:
Troops on the streets (or at "events") might not be that good an idea after a few days. Blunkett was ridiculed over tanks at Heathrow. More worryingly, soldiers aren't trained for interactions with the public, and the history of using troops as police in Northern Ireland or abroad is not encouraging. Increasing the police overtime budget might have been the better choice.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, surely the public will be reassured by having 300 million more police on the streets if Diane Abbott becomes Home Secretary?
On-topic: Mr. Brind, not heartened at all by Labour's surge in the polls?0 -
So we keep being told, though this bomber was British born, as were the 7/7 bombers.HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
None have had EU links.0 -
If you think the SNP, a party still riding high in the opinion polls in Scotland if a little off its peak, have access to only £3300 if they want donations, then you're not thinking. The correct question to ask is: what's happening to the money that the SNP could draw on if they wished to and why are they not trying to draw on it?Mortimer said:
Can I hear anyone saying 'busted flush'?CarlottaVance said:THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
We could impose a travel ban now on all travel to and from Libya, Syria and Northern Iraq except for the media and international relief agencies and of course Merkel's refugee quota exacerbated the problemYorkcity said:
Has not helped on this occasion when British born.However nor has our intervention in Libya.A failed state training camps and persons able to travel there and back .HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.0 -
I was in Rome in Jan and there were troops at major locations then so i think thats just paft of their policing strategy for the cityThreeQuidder said:
I find armed police or soldiers alarming, not reassuring - Rome was crawling with them on Monday (in advance of the G7, I assume).DecrepitJohnL said:
Troops on the streets (or at "events") might not be that good an idea after a few days. Blunkett was ridiculed over tanks at Heathrow. More worryingly, soldiers aren't trained for interactions with the public, and the history of using troops as police in Northern Ireland or abroad is not encouraging. Increasing the police overtime budget might have been the better choice.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, surely the public will be reassured by having 300 million more police on the streets if Diane Abbott becomes Home Secretary?
On-topic: Mr. Brind, not heartened at all by Labour's surge in the polls?0 -
Correct.foxinsoxuk said:
So we keep being told, though this bomber was British born, as were the 7/7 bombers.HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
None have had EU links.0 -
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
When we were in the EU and if Corbyn got in it would be virtually open borders and anyone could come inDecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
Or they are clueless and reliant on France and America. Unlikely but not impossible. He was on MI5's radar might be our equivalent of ISIS claiming responsibility for every outrage that crosses their twitter feed.WhisperingOracle said:
All along information has flowed more freely from abroad about him, from France, and the U.S., than domestically. That suggests to me the authorities are maybe sitting on quite a few other bits of information.Tykejohnno said:The french saying that abedi believed to have travelled to syria and has proven links to islamic state.
0 -
Sounds like paranoia to me. How could Crosby have the attack happen and evidence from site suggest a bomb maker and continued and therefore possible imminent threat. Whilst I think he will make the most of the circumstances, it's not really an attempt to scare the electorate but agreed procedure, which was agreed and defined well ahead of this time.GeoffH said:Just received an email from an old school friend whom I would normally regard as sensible Labour chappie.
"I sense the fingerprints of Lynton Crosby all over this latest wheeze to scare the electorate.
"
0 -
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
It waa when he came back from Libya that was the problem and Merkel opened the floodgates from Syria etcfoxinsoxuk said:
So we keep being told, though this bomber was British born, as were the 7/7 bombers.HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
None have had EU links.0 -
That is a matter of considerable debate.ThreeQuidder said:
I remember the enforcement of lots of UNSC resolutions. Don't you?FeersumEnjineeya said:
On Iraq, yes. Don't you remember? Mission accomplished and all that?ThreeQuidder said:
You mentioned an unprovoked attack, though?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Iraq is the uninvolved country that I was referring to.Slackbladder said:
Did I mention Iraq?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Al-Qaida and the Taliban were operating in Iraq?Slackbladder said:
Oh yes, becuase it's 'so' easy to catch people which have an entire country to freely roam in and launch strikes from without actually invading it and going after people. Both Al-Qaida and the Taliban needed taking out, at source. You cannot have an openly operating terrorist nation.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Carried out by Saudis, from a base in Afghanistan. If only the US and UK administrations had restricted themselves to catching and dealing with the perpetrators rather than using it as an excuse to launch an unprovoked attack on an uninvolved country.Slackbladder said:
Errr...remind me.. 9/11?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, at a lowish level, primarily driven by the Israeli/Palestine situation. The Iraq invasion is what made it mainstream.WhisperingOracle said:
I'm far from a rightwinger, but radical islamism predates Bush and Blair.FeersumEnjineeya said:
If it were not for the West's one-sided support of Israel and Bush and Blair's unprovoked invasion of Iraq (with the enthusiastic support of the Tories), the world would almost certainly be a much safer place today. Grievance is the fuel of extremism.JWisemann said:
Well, the pathetic attempts to paint Corbyn as a danger to this country, when our Tory government is a serial supporter of Islamic extremism abroad, requires a sensible fact-based response. I would have avoided the issue otherwise, despite the Tories' glass jaw re: Syria, Libya and the source of 90% of global islamic fundamentalism, Wobbly May's masters in Riyadh.numbertwelve said:
So in and amongst the attempts to "politicise an atrocity" you're going to, erm, politicise an atrocity...0 -
So they knew about himHYUFD said:
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
Libya is not in the EU, nor is the Commonwealth. Theresa May did nothing about non-EU immigration, so either she is completely inept or the anti-Polish plumber faction of the Brexiteer brigade will be sadly disappointed when they discover the PM believes immigration is good for the country or the economy.HYUFD said:
When we were in the EU and if Corbyn got in it would be virtually open borders and anyone could come inDecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
Correct. Though it helps that no-one expects Labour to have to implement whatever its policy is, so there has been little examination of it.Sean_F said:
Labour's strategy of concede and move on from Brexit turned out best for them.foxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
I think a number of us here suggested that the LibDem’s policy of ignoring the referendum result would turn out to be a disaster.
Just as the Tories did over devolution, you have to accept the result and move on.
The only demographic that the policy has much appeal to is the young, and Jazza has that constituency locked up with his free tuition fees.
0 -
Not quite the way I'd look at it sunshine - how about this piece of slime chose to repay our nation's generosity to his parents by carrying out if not quite the most blood thirsty act of terrorism in our recent history certainly the most heart-breaking.foxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
quite so. There a 161million lottery winner who can always be called upon if required.AlastairMeeks said:
If you think the SNP, a party still riding high in the opinion polls in Scotland if a little off its peak, have access to only £3300 if they want donations, then you're not thinking. The correct question to ask is: what's happening to the money that the SNP could draw on if they wished to and why are they not trying to draw on it?Mortimer said:
Can I hear anyone saying 'busted flush'?CarlottaVance said:THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
The stations of the fruit cakes, loonies & racists cross:foxinsoxuk said:
So we keep being told, though this bomber was British born, as were the 7/7 bombers.HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
None have had EU links.
EU!
Refugees!
Immigrants!
Commonwealth!
Muzzies!
er, er, er...ENOCH!!!
0 -
Dear God, the world really is going bonkers.GeoffH said:Just received an email from an old school friend whom I would normally regard as sensible Labour chappie.
"I sense the fingerprints of Lynton Crosby all over this latest wheeze to scare the electorate.
"0 -
Oh of course - I assume the key donors are holding out to waste funds on the Indy ref that is now unlikely to ever occur.AlastairMeeks said:
If you think the SNP, a party still riding high in the opinion polls in Scotland if a little off its peak, have access to only £3300 if they want donations, then you're not thinking. The correct question to ask is: what's happening to the money that the SNP could draw on if they wished to and why are they not trying to draw on it?Mortimer said:
Can I hear anyone saying 'busted flush'?CarlottaVance said:THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15304613.SNP_relying_on_public_funds_as_big_donors_dry_up/0 -
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with0 -
When the campaign starts again all the Conservatives have to do is to make this point. In serious times Jeremy Corbyn thinks that the person to oversee our police and secret service is er......Diane Abbott.0
-
Did his parents report their suspicions to the police ? And if not, are there not laws surrounding that sort of stuff.Blue_rog said:
So they knew about himHYUFD said:
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.
Terrorism prevention begins at home.0 -
At least there'll be more police. 300,000 was the number I last heard iirc.dyingswan said:When the campaign starts again all the Conservatives have to do is to make this point. In serious times Jeremy Corbyn thinks that the person to oversee our police and secret service is er......Diane Abbott.
0 -
SCON lose out after councillor suspensions
https://twitter.com/CentralFMNews/status/8672967849551790080 -
Straw clutching now. This is established protocol. Or were there not enough police in 2007 either, last time it was used?bigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with0 -
bigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..0 -
Did his parents report their suspicions to the police ? And if not, are there not laws surrounding that sort of stuff.
Terrorism prevention begins at home.
Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.0 -
A mile long, and an inch thickcalum said:SCON lose out after councillor suspensions
https://twitter.com/CentralFMNews/status/8672967849551790080 -
He was right. Mass immigration is the driver of terrorism.Theuniondivvie said:
The stations of the fruit cakes, loonies & racists cross:foxinsoxuk said:
So we keep being told, though this bomber was British born, as were the 7/7 bombers.HYUFD said:
Brexit will allow us to greater control our bordersfoxinsoxuk said:
I don't think that it will change the result too drastically, but it has changed the narrative of the campaign after Theresas wobbly weeekend. This was already a difficult election to call with a Tory majority anywhere between 50 and 150 plausible.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
A lot depends on what happens with the resumption at the weekend. Jezza has time to get his response tuned. This is turning into an election where Brexit is barely mentioned, despite that being its justification.
None have had EU links.
EU!
Refugees!
Immigrants!
Commonwealth!
Muzzies!
er, er, er...ENOCH!!!0 -
Merkel opened the floodgates to refugees from Syria etc and ISIS sympathisers could come in through that route and because of free movement they could come here, May is ending free movement. Instead she is focusing aid on refugee assistance in the Middle East itselfDecrepitJohnL said:
Libya is not in the EU, nor is the Commonwealth. Theresa May did nothing about non-EU immigration, so either she is completely inept or the anti-Polish plumber faction of the Brexiteer brigade will be sadly disappointed when they discover the PM believes immigration is good for the country or the economy.HYUFD said:
When we were in the EU and if Corbyn got in it would be virtually open borders and anyone could come inDecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
No one is disagreeing with that, just that Brexit would not have changed a thing, and it was nothing to do with New Labour either.Norm said:
Not quite the way I'd look at it sunshine - how about this piece of slime chose to repay our nation's generosity to his parents by carrying out if quite not the most blood thirsty act of terrorism in our recent history certainly the most heart-breaking.foxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.
Indeed the biggest supporters of sunni jihadism were Maggie and Ronnie as part of their cold war strategy against the Soviet Afghan war. After the collapse of the Soviets there, they turned to other targets.0 -
Rather than simply looking st the swing we need to take account what the demographics of the seat is. IF the Dems win it (and they really should have won it in the first round), then other highly educated diverse disticts come into play. Barbara Comstock's VA 10th district for example looks gone to me.rkrkrk said:Over in the US - Ossoff (D) is leading in Georgia 6th in one poll I saw.
That was a very safe seat (61% R last time).
If that's in play then where else is?0 -
Yes Gaddaffi was a useful patsy for many USA and UK administration's .foxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.DavidL said:
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.MarqueeMark said:
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.ydoethur said:
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.Cyclefree said:
It is entirely legitimate to ask of a candidate for PM whether his previously expressed views and actions and failures to act - especially for someone whose USP is meant to be his consistently held principles - show him to have the right character and judgment for PM, especially with regard to security issues.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.0 -
She was implementing Osborne's austerity which Hammond has slowedbigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with0 -
Everyone will have their own, following to make sure we don't get up to anything naughtyrottenborough said:
At least there'll be more police. 300,000 was the number I last heard iirc.dyingswan said:When the campaign starts again all the Conservatives have to do is to make this point. In serious times Jeremy Corbyn thinks that the person to oversee our police and secret service is er......Diane Abbott.
0 -
Internment camps, or bulldozing the families' homes perhaps?Blue_rog said:Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.
0 -
There is no evidence they knew he had links with ISIS or was a terror risk there is for his brotherBlue_rog said:
So they knew about himHYUFD said:
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
It is interesting the profile of the terrorist. Another second generation immigrant university dropout.0
-
I can't imagine 5* would want that, at all. Opposition is where they'll want to be.HYUFD said:
Italy next year is the interesting one now. Beppe Grillo's populist 5* leads half the Italian polls and will likely have a majority with Forza Italia and Northern League supportNickPalmer said:I'm not commenting on domestic politics until the national campaigns resume (tomorrow, I expect), but punters may want to note that Merkel is now running away with the prospective German vote:
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The free-market FDP, Merkel's natural allies, are doing well too. And I was talking to a left-wing Dutch politician yesterday: he is certain that the protracted negotiations will lead to a centre-right coalition there. So after this turbulent year, the EU will be dominated by centre-right governments, with the possible exception of Italy and small countries like Greece. Both the anti-immigrant right and the poipulist left are falling short everywhere, and the centre-left is getting squeezed wherever you look.
France of course is now Blairite rather than centre right0 -
0
-
Whilst the points about Libya not being in the EU & the Commonwealth are correct, most people will be hugely dismayed that we as a country gave refuge to a family fleeing from Libya, and their son carries out such an atrocity.
Are the family to blame?
Well, if my son ended up in prison for even a minor offence or did something highly discreditable, I’d be disappointed in him, and I’d be disappointed in me.
I’d like to have an open & welcoming culture to refugees, but there are also obligations on the refugee family & community.
Most of the Jewish refugees admitted in the 30s went on to become astonishingly successful in many fields. Most of the Ugandan and Kenyan Asians admitted in the 70s have been similarly successful.
It didn’t used to happen that a second generation member from a refugee family became a bomber. They used to become professors or civic leaders or successful businessmen/women.
There does need to be a searching examination of what is going wrong.
0 -
Very similar to 7/7 .Some of them were from Leeds.FrancisUrquhart said:It is interesting the profile of the terrorist. Another second generation immigrant university dropout.
0 -
And yet it is the Corbynistas who are crying foul on security being raised to 'severe' - it's almost as if they think their team isn't that strong on security matters and trust on that crucial issue.... why is that I wonder?bigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with0 -
Deleted owing to internal quotes mess.0
-
How do you know ?HYUFD said:
There is no evidence they knew he had links with ISIS or was a terror risk there is for his brotherBlue_rog said:
So they knew about himHYUFD said:
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friends in Riyadh and Doha.HYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Gaddafi's involvement in Lockerbie is still controversial (more likely Iran IMO), but anyway, he had long been 'rehabilitated'. Who posed a bigger threat to the UK in 2011, Gaddafi, or the islamic extremists that our Tory government helped to destroy the country and turn it into the terrorist paradise we see today (they tried to help a bunch of genocidal jihadi nutters destroy Syria too, but thankfully it looks like they failed)?
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?SquareRoot said:bigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
0 -
They should report suspicions of what, though? Just becoming more religious doesn't often lead to bombs and guns.DecrepitJohnL said:
Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.Blue_rog said:
Did his parents report their suspicions to the police ? And if not, are there not laws surrounding that sort of stuff.
Terrorism prevention begins at home.
Almost all the Islamic extremists that carry out these attacks are also drug users. Maybe taking drugs should be made illegal0 -
Sounds expensive down there to me though, especially that "modern living" in the north of Brent.isam said:Get yourself something nice
https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/8669633069422714890 -
They were not the problem, the son was if we had a travel ban to and from Libya, Syria and Northern Iraq this may not have happenedYorkcity said:
How do you know ?HYUFD said:
There is no evidence they knew he had links with ISIS or was a terror risk there is for his brotherBlue_rog said:
So they knew about himHYUFD said:
The parents were law abiding and opposed their son's radicalismfoxinsoxuk said:
This bomber's parents were admitted from Libya under the Tory government too.DecrepitJohnL said:
Lax immigration policies that were overseen by the Conservative Home Secretary from 2010 onwards? Not Amber Rudd, well yes, Amber Rudd as well but the other one.HYUFD said:
Actually it is Western arsteikes in Iraq on ISIS which may shortly enable the liberation of Mosul. Like it or not moderate rebels in Syria have to be part of the solution, Assad staying in power on his own will not bring peace to the country. While it is lax immigration policies supported by Corbyn which have given us many of the problems we have nowJWisemann said:
The RAF has made almost zero impact on ISIS. The Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army, and the SDF in Syria, and the Iraqi popular militias and IAF in Iraq have done 95% of the work. Notably, the Russian Air Force and Syrian Army would have already wiped out ISIS if it weren't for the other Islamic fundamentalist jihadis in the country sponsored by our Tory government and their friendsHYUFD said:
Gaddafi sponsored Lockerbie and the IRA so hardly kept us safe either and Corbyn would be a recipe for lax border controls and an end to arstrikes on ISISJWisemann said:So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
Face it, Weak & Wobbly May and her buddies have been the extremists' best friends over the last 7 years.0 -
That enables Strling Tories to pose as the only alternative to the SNPcalum said:SCON lose out after councillor suspensions
https://twitter.com/CentralFMNews/status/8672967849551790080 -
Jahadi John also fitted the same profile. Also the rapper the the daily mail incorrectly suggested was jahadi John.Yorkcity said:
Very similar to 7/7 .Some of them were from Leeds.FrancisUrquhart said:It is interesting the profile of the terrorist. Another second generation immigrant university dropout.
The question are they been brought up with radical views, developing them at uni or finding Islamism after failing at higher education?0 -
A well-reasoned position and one I'd certainly agree with.YBarddCwsc said:Whilst the points about Libya not being in the EU & the Commonwealth are correct, most people will be hugely dismayed that we as a country gave refuge to a family fleeing from Libya, and their son carries out such an atrocity.
Are the family to blame?
Well, if my son ended up in prison for even a minor offence or did something highly discreditable, I’d be disappointed in him, and I’d be disappointed in me.
I’d like to have an open & welcoming culture to refugees, but there are also obligations on the refugee family & community.
Most of the Jewish refugees admitted in the 30s went on to become astonishingly successful in many fields. Most of the Ugandan and Kenyan Asians admitted in the 70s have been similarly successful.
It didn’t used to happen that a second generation member from a refugee family became a bomber. They used to become professors or civic leaders or successful businessmen/women.
There does need to be a searching examination of what is going wrong.0 -
Thanks London & SE !isam said:Get yourself something nice
https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/8669633069422714890 -
Your party cut 20k police when threat level was severe did you support it?Scrapheap_as_was said:
And yet it is the Corbynistas who are crying foul on security being raised to 'severe' - it's almost as if they think their team isn't that strong on security matters and trust on that crucial issue.... why is that I wonder?bigjohnowls said:
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.SquareRoot said:
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.dyedwoolie said:Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with0 -
I'm a politically correct liberal type; but seriously, in getting together a group of 'ordinary Mancunians' the BBC has found three Muslims, a black woman, a gay white man, and a second generation Spanish immigrant....0
-
Of course, many of the Jewish refugees in the late 30s were held in internment camps until their bona fides were established.Theuniondivvie said:
Internment camps, or bulldozing the families' homes perhaps?Blue_rog said:Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.
I remember talking to one such individual (a famous scientist, now dead).
He said it was correct that the UK interned all German emigrees until they could be sure they were anti-Nazis.
Even though he had been interned.
I was astonished at his forgiveness, though he was looking back from the bounty of a subsequent hugely successful career.0 -
When you're working an 18 hour day for £50 there's not much time to spend it!Pulpstar said:
Sounds expensive down there to me though, especially that "modern living" in the north of Brent.isam said:Get yourself something nice
https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/8669633069422714890 -
All 3 will vote against Renzi if he tries to form a government whichever one of them takes power, probably with indirect support from the others. Grillo and Berlusconi united in the referendum last year to defeat RenziIanB2 said:
I can't imagine 5* would want that, at all. Opposition is where they'll want to be.HYUFD said:
Italy next year is the interesting one now. Beppe Grillo's populist 5* leads half the Italian polls and will likely have a majority with Forza Italia and Northern League supportNickPalmer said:I'm not commenting on domestic politics until the national campaigns resume (tomorrow, I expect), but punters may want to note that Merkel is now running away with the prospective German vote:
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The free-market FDP, Merkel's natural allies, are doing well too. And I was talking to a left-wing Dutch politician yesterday: he is certain that the protracted negotiations will lead to a centre-right coalition there. So after this turbulent year, the EU will be dominated by centre-right governments, with the possible exception of Italy and small countries like Greece. Both the anti-immigrant right and the poipulist left are falling short everywhere, and the centre-left is getting squeezed wherever you look.
France of course is now Blairite rather than centre right0 -
Has Corbyn made a statement yet?0
