politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May was right, this election should be about Brexit
Comments
-
Mr. Sandpit, just one more reason not to go to Monaco...
0 -
More accurately he is 'disappointed' with the Hillary backing New York Times which did the leakingPulpstar said:
Michael Fallon is 'disappointed' with the US.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
That's "utterly and completely furious" for anyone who needs the translation from British English.0 -
If he gets more votes than ed m, as it quite possible, why should he?SquareRoot said:YBarddCwsc said:
No-one even tries to defend the Iraq War anymore (or if they do it is some pussy-footing, like the War was right but we lost the Aftermath).ydoethur said:
It was an error. A stupid and avoidable error that around half the population were opposed to. An error that could and should have been foreseen. An error that has had terrible consequences.
But to try and atone for it by electing Corbyn as leader is the equivalent of Stalin making amends for the Ukrainian famine of 1931 by shooting all the coal miners in the Donbass, blowing up every steel factory with the workers inside and ordering Moscow burned to the ground.
There is failure - and there is compounding the failure.
But, the concomitant of Theresa being lucky is that Jeremy has been unlucky.
First, the Labour centre-left refused to accept his election. Second, Brexit delivered to Labour an almost unplayable hand. And third, terrorism has now forced the election onto the worst arena of all for him.
After all that, I kind of feel amazed that Jeremy has kept going.
I won’t be voting for him, but I would buy his home-made jam.
Corbyn believes in his own invincibility. He will still be directing his "armies" long after the war has been lost. His bunker has been prepared. They will have to smoke him out. He aint quitting evah..0 -
Votes don't mean jack in our system.kle4 said:
If he gets more votes than ed m, as it quite possible, why should he?SquareRoot said:YBarddCwsc said:
No-one even tries to defend the Iraq War anymore (or if they do it is some pussy-footing, like the War was right but we lost the Aftermath).ydoethur said:
It was an error. A stupid and avoidable error that around half the population were opposed to. An error that could and should have been foreseen. An error that has had terrible consequences.
But to try and atone for it by electing Corbyn as leader is the equivalent of Stalin making amends for the Ukrainian famine of 1931 by shooting all the coal miners in the Donbass, blowing up every steel factory with the workers inside and ordering Moscow burned to the ground.
There is failure - and there is compounding the failure.
But, the concomitant of Theresa being lucky is that Jeremy has been unlucky.
First, the Labour centre-left refused to accept his election. Second, Brexit delivered to Labour an almost unplayable hand. And third, terrorism has now forced the election onto the worst arena of all for him.
After all that, I kind of feel amazed that Jeremy has kept going.
I won’t be voting for him, but I would buy his home-made jam.
Corbyn believes in his own invincibility. He will still be directing his "armies" long after the war has been lost. His bunker has been prepared. They will have to smoke him out. He aint quitting evah..
0 -
RobD said:
If they wanted to discredit Trump, surely they should make it look like the leaks are coming from there?Blue_rog said:
That's what I meant. The leaks being orchestrated from Capital HillRobD said:
Except it's not coming from the White House, according to the BBC. Trump could easily say that this is a perfect example of how leaky the US intelligence service is.Blue_rog said:
'm generally not a conspiracy nut but these leaks may be of benefit to the traditional politicians in the US. I find it difficult to believe that changing one or two people at the top of the intelligence tree means the whole edifice suddenly leaks like a sieve.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
I'm wondering if this is a play on depicting the Trump administration as untrustworthy and the leaks are part of a bigger domestic game.
While the cat's away, the mice will play.
Unfortunately, this is very dangerous. As the PM would say, "this is not a game".
I'm sure terrorists, all over the world, are delighted to hear Manchester Police have stopped sharing intelligence with the US. It was a very bad mistake to put this out there in the media and counter-productive.
0 -
You've also got to wonder at the NYT publishing photos of blood splattered debris before all the victims have been identified let alone buried. What are we to read next - autopsy reports detailing injuries & cause of death?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.0 -
Brown people.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
True about Corbyn but I can't say what Mrs May has done so far lends me to believe she'd be much better.DavidL said:
That wording seems weirdly familiar. This huge deficiency in the twice elected leader of the Labour Party will now move centre stage. But I don't share Alastair's frustration about Brexit not being discussed. The key for Brexit is who do we trust to negotiate the best possible deal on our behalf? Since the idea of trusting Corbyn about anything is pretty risible there is only one answer to that.Scott_P said:This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/it-s-time-we-talked-about-corbyn-s-patriotism-2f2xwzcnn
Foolishly I imagined a Brexit election might lead to us getting some idea as to her plans. Silly me.
Seems to me we're expected to vote for her with absolutely no idea of why.
It's not good enough and against anyone else she would've been exposed more than she has.0 -
Well, it's a temporary measure, and only relating to this one issue.LadyBucket said:RobD said:
If they wanted to discredit Trump, surely they should make it look like the leaks are coming from there?Blue_rog said:
That's what I meant. The leaks being orchestrated from Capital HillRobD said:
Except it's not coming from the White House, according to the BBC. Trump could easily say that this is a perfect example of how leaky the US intelligence service is.Blue_rog said:
'm generally not a conspiracy nut but these leaks may be of benefit to the traditional politicians in the US. I find it difficult to believe that changing one or two people at the top of the intelligence tree means the whole edifice suddenly leaks like a sieve.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
I'm wondering if this is a play on depicting the Trump administration as untrustworthy and the leaks are part of a bigger domestic game.
While the cat's away, the mice will play.
Unfortunately, this is very dangerous. As the PM would say, "this is not a game".
I'm sure terrorists, all over the world, are delighted to hear Manchester Police have stopped sharing intelligence with the US. It was a very bad mistake to put this out there in the media and counter-productive.0 -
Well, I doubt he considered himself British.Bromptonaut said:
Brown people.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
0 -
Lady Bucket
There was a point in recent history when we ceased to be a pragmatic, rational nation and became a pious bunch who loved making a drama out of a crisis. Probably around Lady Diana's death. Of course the 24 news media should leave Manchester in peace, but they won't for a day or so yet.0 -
Freetochoose is right that I support Corbyn's policies. I also like him and his political style very much, something I wouldn't say of everyone on the left. .
You present as a nice man. A decent man. But you are clearly a useful idiot for profoundly not nice and evil men. You like Corbyn's accommodation with terrorism. You like his Stop The West coalition. You like his deficit apocalypse. You approve of Diane Abbot becoming Home Sec. You approve of McMao becoming chancellor. It is a very good thing that you are not a candidate. It is a very good thing that the far left is going to fail badly on June 8th. You are the epitome of why Labour is in such a deep crisis.0 -
I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.0
-
I don't really buy that. The other side of technology is that it has multiplied the number of attractive portable things to steal.Ishmael_Z said:
Tis also that stuff doesn't cost anything anymore. 1983 vhs recorder £3500 nominal, 2017 Sony dvd recorder £50 or if you want second hand, £30 on ebay, so who would buy one off a bloke in the pub?IanB2 said:
It's non-violent crime that has taken the big fall - burglarly, car theft etc. - thanks to technology (cars that are harder to start and easier to track, DNA testing, cctv, internet cams) - it's been happening across the world since the mid-90s so not really tied to any domestic change in policing or spending. There is also a view that technology has 'diverted' some criminals into online crime, which isn't so easily measured.foxinsoxuk said:
Not all crimes:RobD said:
Hasn't crime been on a downward trend though?SouthamObserver said:
Crimes will always be committed. Reducing the numbers of those tasked with preventing and solving them may not be the best move. We need the debate. But with no opposition we won't get it. No-one serious believes Diane Abbott or Jeremy Corbyn have anything sensible to say about security.RobD said:
Higher numbers didn't seem to make much difference in 2005. If anything, more needs to be spent on the intelligence services - more eyes to keep an eye on their watchlist.SouthamObserver said:
Yep - so the fact that Theresa May cut police numbers, and the number of armed police by 10%, goes under-reported and undebated. That's what having no opposition does. We are all wose off as a result.SquareRoot said:A very good article by Mr Meeks. It should be about Brexit, but I cannot see it being so. The Manchester outrage will be on our TV;s for some while with the aftermath .The Tories will undoubtedly hammer home the Labour leadership as security risks, after all its not as tho it isn't true.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-392156680 -
Indeed. If Jezza lands more votes but fewer seats he will simply have confirmed he and his merry band are strategically inept, piling up votes in their metropolitan comfort zone where they are surplus to requirements.RobD said:
Votes don't mean jack in our system.kle4 said:
If he gets more votes than ed m, as it quite possible, why should he?SquareRoot said:YBarddCwsc said:
No-one even tries to defend the Iraq War anymore (or if they do it is some pussy-footing, like the War was right but we lost the Aftermath).ydoethur said:
It was an error. A stupid and avoidable error that around half the population were opposed to. An error that could and should have been foreseen. An error that has had terrible consequences.
But to try and atone for it by electing Corbyn as leader is the equivalent of Stalin making amends for the Ukrainian famine of 1931 by shooting all the coal miners in the Donbass, blowing up every steel factory with the workers inside and ordering Moscow burned to the ground.
There is failure - and there is compounding the failure.
But, the concomitant of Theresa being lucky is that Jeremy has been unlucky.
First, the Labour centre-left refused to accept his election. Second, Brexit delivered to Labour an almost unplayable hand. And third, terrorism has now forced the election onto the worst arena of all for him.
After all that, I kind of feel amazed that Jeremy has kept going.
I won’t be voting for him, but I would buy his home-made jam.
Corbyn believes in his own invincibility. He will still be directing his "armies" long after the war has been lost. His bunker has been prepared. They will have to smoke him out. He aint quitting evah..0 -
As a technology consultant to businesses, I wholeheartedly support your fantastic suggestionJosiasJessop said:
One law I'd like to be brought in is that any public institution (e.g. councils, hospitals etc) or publicly-traded company (e.g. banks) need to disclose every year an estimate of how much money has been lost to cybercrime - either directly or indirectly.IanB2 said:
It's non-violent crime that has taken the big fall - burglarly, car theft etc. - thanks to technology (cars that are harder to start and easier to track, DNA testing, cctv, internet cams) - it's been happening across the world since the mid-90s so not really tied to any domestic change in policing or spending. There is also a view that technology has 'diverted' some criminals into online crime, which isn't so easily measured.foxinsoxuk said:
Not all crimes:RobD said:
Hasn't crime been on a downward trend though?SouthamObserver said:
Crimes will always be committed. Reducing the numbers of those tasked with preventing and solving them may not be the best move. We need the debate. But with no opposition we won't get it. No-one serious believes Diane Abbott or Jeremy Corbyn have anything sensible to say about security.RobD said:
Higher numbers didn't seem to make much difference in 2005. If anything, more needs to be spent on the intelligence services - more eyes to keep an eye on their watchlist.SouthamObserver said:
Yep - so the fact that Theresa May cut police numbers, and the number of armed police by 10%, goes under-reported and undebated. That's what having no opposition does. We are all wose off as a result.SquareRoot said:A very good article by Mr Meeks. It should be about Brexit, but I cannot see it being so. The Manchester outrage will be on our TV;s for some while with the aftermath .The Tories will undoubtedly hammer home the Labour leadership as security risks, after all its not as tho it isn't true.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39215668
Rumours are that the figures for banks alone are shocking. And given the stupidity banks show (e.g. Barclays' voice biometric verification), it's not surprise.
0 -
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
The NYT reported what it was told. If it hadn't been told it could not have reported.HYUFD said:
More accurately he is 'disappointed' with the Hillary backing New York Times which did the leakingPulpstar said:
Michael Fallon is 'disappointed' with the US.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
That's "utterly and completely furious" for anyone who needs the translation from British English.
0 -
It doesn't have to report on everything it is told, at least not immediately!SouthamObserver said:
The NYT reported what it was told. If it hadn't been told it could not have reported.HYUFD said:
More accurately he is 'disappointed' with the Hillary backing New York Times which did the leakingPulpstar said:
Michael Fallon is 'disappointed' with the US.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
That's "utterly and completely furious" for anyone who needs the translation from British English.0 -
Any update on the length of Sean's dry cleaner's beard? Long enough to shop him to the authorities yet?0
-
Osborne froze the police budget in 2015 and there will be a real terms increase by 2018-19LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
0 -
Oh she will be better. Much better. Not great, indeed seriously flawed unless she can learn from her mistakes, but much better. That in a nutshell is the problem.midwinter said:
True about Corbyn but I can't say what Mrs May has done so far lends me to believe she'd be much better.DavidL said:
That wording seems weirdly familiar. This huge deficiency in the twice elected leader of the Labour Party will now move centre stage. But I don't share Alastair's frustration about Brexit not being discussed. The key for Brexit is who do we trust to negotiate the best possible deal on our behalf? Since the idea of trusting Corbyn about anything is pretty risible there is only one answer to that.Scott_P said:This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/it-s-time-we-talked-about-corbyn-s-patriotism-2f2xwzcnn
Foolishly I imagined a Brexit election might lead to us getting some idea as to her plans. Silly me.
Seems to me we're expected to vote for her with absolutely no idea of why.
It's not good enough and against anyone else she would've been exposed more than she has.0 -
Security is now off the table as a Brexit negotiating tool. Though, to be fair, only deluded anti-European right wingers ever thought otherwise.0
-
Morning all.
Very pleased to see information is no longer being shared with the US. Wouldn't be a bad policy generally, the states are a busted flush, cooperation with China and the East is the way forward. Unshackle from the yee haw boys and a lot of the hatred dissipates. I hope America soon elects an isolationist and disappears up its own backside. The world would instantly be a safer place.0 -
Nobody who didn't want to had to read it. Why shouldn't we know what's being done to us?CarlottaVance said:
You've also got to wonder at the NYT publishing photos of blood splattered debris before all the victims have been identified let alone buried. What are we to read next - autopsy reports detailing injuries & cause of death?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.0 -
If you have brown skin you'll never be perceived as British, is that what you're saying? Just want to be clear on thisfreetochoose said:
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
And of course, we used to cooperate with Gadaffi's Libya and Assad's Syria throughout the early part of the 21st century by rendering "suspects" to the US who then handed them to the respective secret police in those countries.......the whole issue of intelligence sharing with the US et al.. has never looked good in daylight.0
-
What else can GMP do?LadyBucket said:RobD said:
If they wanted to discredit Trump, surely they should make it look like the leaks are coming from there?Blue_rog said:
That's what I meant. The leaks being orchestrated from Capital HillRobD said:
Except it's not coming from the White House, according to the BBC. Trump could easily say that this is a perfect example of how leaky the US intelligence service is.Blue_rog said:
'm generally not a conspiracy nut but these leaks may be of benefit to the traditional politicians in the US. I find it difficult to believe that changing one or two people at the top of the intelligence tree means the whole edifice suddenly leaks like a sieve.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
I'm wondering if this is a play on depicting the Trump administration as untrustworthy and the leaks are part of a bigger domestic game.
While the cat's away, the mice will play.
Unfortunately, this is very dangerous. As the PM would say, "this is not a game".
I'm sure terrorists, all over the world, are delighted to hear Manchester Police have stopped sharing intelligence with the US. It was a very bad mistake to put this out there in the media and counter-productive.
The immediate security of the people they are responsible for protecting is being undermined by the people they're sharing their intel with.
The solution is to immediately stop sharing. If this isn't being done at a national level, it has to be done at a local police level. They have no other option.
Hopefully this can be resolved within 24 hrs - a public commitment from trump to identify and extradite the leakers will probably be enough to regain GMP's confidence.0 -
Not least that they would have to wheel out Diane "in hiding" Abbott to do so.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
Labour's biggest mistake of all was breaking its promise to change to voting system. The party clings to the current one yet refuses its lessons.NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?
I do however agree with Nick on one thing - it is hard to see that Smith, Cooper or Argclu would be doing any better. Indeed last week Corbyn was exceeding expectations (which for many on this site started at low-20%s. Labour is nothing without its ground campaign and this does depend heavily upon having a large enthused membership,0 -
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
The leaked photos might be annoying or even distasteful but if throwing GMP's toys out of the pram means they cut themselves off from American expertise and intelligence, who wins?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.0 -
If there is no deal, all bets are off!SouthamObserver said:Security is now off the table as a Brexit negotiating tool. Though, to be fair, only deluded anti-European right wingers ever thought otherwise.
0 -
The closest comparison would be Callaghan who stayed on to reform the way the leader was elected before resigning. Corbyn would probably like to do that to assist the hard left.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
Have we even heard from Abbott yet?camel said:
Not least that they would have to wheel out Diane "in hiding" Abbott to do so.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
Mr. Observer, no, it isn't.
Disregarding the point (you may not have seen) I made earlier about most intelligence being nothing to do with imminent threats and the cessation of info-sharing with the Germans because it kept falling into nefarious hands, many organisations through which co-operation is co-ordinated are ones which we're members of due to being in the EU.
Rejoining said organisations will therefore form part of the deal that is negotiated when we leave the EU.
Furthermore, the leaks from the US (earlier ones from France also) show that co-operation is not risk free.0 -
It's all about them throwing their toys out of the pram. Normal service will probably resume asap, with hopefully fewer leaks from the US.DecrepitJohnL said:
The leaked photos might be annoying or even distasteful but if throwing GMP's toys out of the pram means they cut themselves off from American expertise and intelligence, who wins?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.0 -
Heath 1966dyedwoolie said:
The closest comparison would be Callaghan who stayed on to reform the way the leader was elected before resigning. Corbyn would probably like to do that to assist the hard left.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
No, but they should not have had the option, so the principle fault lies with those who gave it to them - we can hardly blame, too much, a news organisation deciding to break some news.RobD said:
It doesn't have to report on everything it is told, at least not immediately!SouthamObserver said:
The NYT reported what it was told. If it hadn't been told it could not have reported.HYUFD said:
More accurately he is 'disappointed' with the Hillary backing New York Times which did the leakingPulpstar said:
Michael Fallon is 'disappointed' with the US.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
That's "utterly and completely furious" for anyone who needs the translation from British English.0 -
Mr. L, the investigation is live. If sharing info means terrorists learn what we know that could make it easier for them to evade justice.
GMP are not throwing their toys out of the pram, they're trying to crack a terrorist network and are not aided by having secret intelligence information leaked to the media.0 -
Agreed. The positionis well established. Don't forget and move on, but it doesn't need a forensic inquiry.YBarddCwsc said:
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
Irresponsible to leak, but the paper knew what they were doing when they published the name so soon after the attack. That's unacceptable.kle4 said:
No, but they should not have had the option, so the principle fault lies with those who gave it to them - we can hardly blame, too much, a news organisation deciding to break some news.RobD said:
It doesn't have to report on everything it is told, at least not immediately!SouthamObserver said:
The NYT reported what it was told. If it hadn't been told it could not have reported.HYUFD said:
More accurately he is 'disappointed' with the Hillary backing New York Times which did the leakingPulpstar said:
Michael Fallon is 'disappointed' with the US.RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210
So much for Five Eyes.
That's "utterly and completely furious" for anyone who needs the translation from British English.0 -
Here is the CNN perspective on the matter. Reported in a low-key factual way; article ends with the words probably not going to change intelligence-sharing arrangements all that much.RobD said:
It's all about them throwing their toys out of the pram. Normal service will probably resume asap, with hopefully fewer leaks from the US.DecrepitJohnL said:
The leaked photos might be annoying or even distasteful but if throwing GMP's toys out of the pram means they cut themselves off from American expertise and intelligence, who wins?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/24/europe/manchester-us-leaks-investigation/index.html0 -
The NSA, CIA and FBI will be livid at losing visibility of 10 quid dope deals in Hulme.DecrepitJohnL said:
The leaked photos might be annoying or even distasteful but if throwing GMP's toys out of the pram means they cut themselves off from American expertise and intelligence, who wins?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.0 -
Don't think so, Shabi Chakrabarti has been doing the rounds instead of Diane Abbott recently.RobD said:
Have we even heard from Abbott yet?camel said:
Not least that they would have to wheel out Diane "in hiding" Abbott to do so.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
On your second point, I think they are doing it with this level of publicity to show just how miffed they are.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. L, the investigation is live. If sharing info means terrorists learn what we know that could make it easier for them to evade justice.
GMP are not throwing their toys out of the pram, they're trying to crack a terrorist network and are not aided by having secret intelligence information leaked to the media.0 -
Free to choose says offensive things from time to time, but I feel you are searching for reasons to be offended more than necessary.Bromptonaut said:
If you have brown skin you'll never be perceived as British, is that what you're saying? Just want to be clear on thisfreetochoose said:
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
I would expect Trump to turn fire against the NYT and the intelligence services. I expect some tweets about it soon. May would probably berate him in private over it though, and rightly so. He is the president, the buck stops with him.0
-
There's an elephant in every front room in Britain wearing a Michael Howard mask and whispering 'are you thinking what we're thinking'0
-
I asked a perfectly reasonable question. Since when was debate 'interrogation'? You are treading the same line as ThreeQuidder who accused me of bullying Moniker by asking him to forecast an election result instead of dog whistling.YBarddCwsc said:
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
The sarcasm is noted, and no one would be comfortable doing so nor did many say they would, but in a world where 'they changed their habits significantly, why did no one notice anything was up' is a real thing, the suggestion was not inexplicable or entirely irrational, even if one fell on the side of it being disproportionate and unpleasant.bobajobPB said:Any update on the length of Sean's dry cleaner's beard? Long enough to shop him to the authorities yet?
0 -
Mr. D, perhaps. What matters is that the leaking is unacceptable, and has to stop.0
-
I think Corbyn should go but there is a precedent. Harold Wilson lost 76 seats and saw Labour's vote share reduced by 4.9% in 1970. He remained leader and went on to regain power in 1974.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?NickPalmer said:I won't pursue the personal debate further as I can't imagine it's of general interest, but it's certainly true that lots of Labour members who are not always left-wing will not vote to replace Corbyn after a possible election defeat unless someone offers an attractive alternative. To write all of us off as deluded zealots misses the point and is self-defeating for centrists.
Anyway, we have an election to fight now: time to worry about what happens next thereafter.
In the meantime, there's an interesting discussion here of the challenges faced by voters and MPs in our electronic age:
https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Signal-and-Noise-Demos.pdf
At first skim, I think they're right about the problem, but I don't instantly see that their dashboards etc. solve it. But perhaps I've not studied it enough?0 -
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.0 -
SeanF
I can only presume their beards have passed the 5 inch threshold.0 -
Yep. It would be nice to be able to vote Conservative for positive reasons rather than because Mrs May is probably the least atrocious option though.DavidL said:
Oh she will be better. Much better. Not great, indeed seriously flawed unless she can learn from her mistakes, but much better. That in a nutshell is the problem.midwinter said:
True about Corbyn but I can't say what Mrs May has done so far lends me to believe she'd be much better.DavidL said:
That wording seems weirdly familiar. This huge deficiency in the twice elected leader of the Labour Party will now move centre stage. But I don't share Alastair's frustration about Brexit not being discussed. The key for Brexit is who do we trust to negotiate the best possible deal on our behalf? Since the idea of trusting Corbyn about anything is pretty risible there is only one answer to that.Scott_P said:This is what it is to live in a democracy under attack. We disagree on the extent of the danger and what should be done, but we are all on the same side.
Or are we? This brings us to the rank unsuitability of Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister and the fact that a once great party like Labour can seriously propose him as the person who could, in a matter of weeks, be chairing meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee.
Almost without fail, Corbyn has expressed support for this country’s enemies, opposed British military deployments overseas, or sided with assorted fringe elements who say we deserve what we get. The man is by no reasonable definition a patriot. He is quite simply unfit to hold office.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/it-s-time-we-talked-about-corbyn-s-patriotism-2f2xwzcnn
Foolishly I imagined a Brexit election might lead to us getting some idea as to her plans. Silly me.
Seems to me we're expected to vote for her with absolutely no idea of why.
It's not good enough and against anyone else she would've been exposed more than she has.0 -
Trouble is even if they did that, the alternative (them) are about a million times less trusted on the issue.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.0 -
Monaco: Whoops, I got the time an hour out - P1 starting now.0
-
Dyed
Unlikely the McDonnell amendment gets past conference, especially in the wake of a huge defeat for the far left.0 -
Lots of big events this weekend; having 1000 troops on the streets to support the police at this exceptional time seems sensible. To suggest this means that the police are underfunded is ill-times mischief-making, not least by the police trade union.
As an aside, it's Monaco time. There must be security worries, especially after Nice. Does the principality organise its own security, or does France take over?0 -
Off topic..
I presume polls have been held back over the last few days. Are we ezpecting any today?0 -
Indeed, but I'll bet that's his game plan. They are desperate to keep labour left.bobajobPB said:Dyed
Unlikely the McDonnell amendment gets past conference, especially in the wake of a huge defeat for the far left.0 -
JackW
Good question. Perhaps Jesmondo should be shopped to MI6 for crimes against a properly functioning democracy0 -
Do they have anyone vaguely agreeable on the front bench?SimonStClare said:
Don't think so, Shabi Chakrabarti has been doing the rounds instead of Diane Abbott recently.RobD said:
Have we even heard from Abbott yet?camel said:
Not least that they would have to wheel out Diane "in hiding" Abbott to do so.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
DuraAce
Chortle.0 -
I didn't miss the point.freetochoose said:
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.
Nevertheless taking 'revenge', even verbal, on a large group of people for the crimes of a tiny handful is a sure-fire way to make things worse. And there is no time-machine available to travel back and undo whatever mistakes you might argue were made in the past, anyway.0 -
Hard evidence ?YellowSubmarine said:
It's no surprise folk like me think Brexit is going to be a disaster. Though with 11 months hard evidence rather than opinion I feel that more strongly than I did on June 23rd last year.
Eleven months ago people were posting here that the economy was certain to go into immediate recession, that the stock market was collapsing and that there were attacks on foreigners all over the country.
Perhaps we should compare the hard evidence of what has actually happened during the last eleven months with what we were told was going to happen.
I wonder if the people who pedalled all those fake news and scare stories have felt any sense of shame since.
0 -
If Labour were led by Attlee, Gaitskell, Wilson or Callaghan, that might be a profitable line of attack.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
But, when they're led by people like Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbot, it certainly isn't.0 -
Thanks, YBard! I don't think my personal views matter much at this point except insofar as they explify the sort of party members whom centrists should be trying to win over. We haven't lost yet, but should we do so, I'll need to be convinced that someone else would have done better and, more important, that they'll do bett next time. And by "do better" I mean not just win, but make us feel it's worth winning.YBarddCwsc said:
Nick doesn’t deserve this ferocious interrogation by all and sundry.bobajobPB said:
It certainly is of general interest, Nick. Can you explain to me why Jezza should remain in post if - as is likely - he presides over a defeat and a reduction in Labour seats? Is there even a precedent for such behaviour?0 -
Nuttall has some way to go; he is barely beyond the stubble stage,RobD said:
Ridiculous as it sounds, unexpected beard growth (common cure: a shaver) is a warning sign of radicalisation. Probably not sufficient for detention on its own thoughbobajobPB said:SeanF
I can only presume their beards have passed the 5 inch threshold.0 -
Kle4
Actually lots of PBers said that the bearded one should be grassed up. Obviously that included a lot of the hard-right semi racists, but also several people who do not fall into such a category. The odd thing about the exchange was that SeanT himself came across as relatively liberal.0 -
Quite, this is simply the nature of being the junior partner in a relationship - one we are about to find out in our Brexit negotiations.DecrepitJohnL said:
The leaked photos might be annoying or even distasteful but if throwing GMP's toys out of the pram means they cut themselves off from American expertise and intelligence, who wins?Morris_Dancer said:Can't blame Manchester police for ceasing to share information. The leaks are totally unacceptable.
Mr. Rog, it might be that sort of game-playing, but it's so short-sighted and stupid it's deeply disappointing.
And the more cynical might suggest that given most of the leaks relate to how many flags the terrorist had triggered, the UK government might be more concerned about reputational damage than actual damage to the investigation.0 -
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.0 -
Hmm, I think Emily, the patron saint of white van drivers is quite popular…camel said:
Do they have anyone vaguely agreeable on the front bench?SimonStClare said:
Don't think so, Shabi Chakrabarti has been doing the rounds instead of Diane Abbott recently.RobD said:
Have we even heard from Abbott yet?camel said:
Not least that they would have to wheel out Diane "in hiding" Abbott to do so.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.0 -
Mr F,
You can double the number of armed police but with Jezza in number 10, they'd be armed with sticks of Blackpool rock. An exaggeration perhaps, but it makes it a problematic area for Labour.0 -
Anyway, must be off. Play nicely, children.0
-
-
RobD
That Moeen Ali was sporting a particularly handsome beard, at Headingley yesterday. His use of a cricket bat like a scimitar to smash several boundaries and put South Africa to the sword will worry some.0 -
Associates of Abedi will already have known his name, and any international terrorist with a room temperature IQ, just like any member of the public, would realise Abedi would be quickly identified and that bomb parts would be recovered.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. L, the investigation is live. If sharing info means terrorists learn what we know that could make it easier for them to evade justice.
GMP are not throwing their toys out of the pram, they're trying to crack a terrorist network and are not aided by having secret intelligence information leaked to the media.
You know what would be reduced though? GMP and MI5 embarrassment that people who had previously reported their suspicions are now telling the papers. If a few red faces in officialdom is the price to pay for preventing the next outrage, let the NYT publish and be damned.
0 -
Not at all. Simply giving him an opportunity to clarify his views. Isn't that why he's here?kle4 said:
Free to choose says offensive things from time to time, but I feel you are searching for reasons to be offended more than necessary.Bromptonaut said:
If you have brown skin you'll never be perceived as British, is that what you're saying? Just want to be clear on thisfreetochoose said:
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
Yeah, but was it really necessary to announce it less than 24 hours after the attack?DecrepitJohnL said:
Associates of Abedi will already have known his name, and any international terrorist with a room temperature IQ, just like any member of the public, would realise Abedi would be quickly identified and that bomb parts would be recovered.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. L, the investigation is live. If sharing info means terrorists learn what we know that could make it easier for them to evade justice.
GMP are not throwing their toys out of the pram, they're trying to crack a terrorist network and are not aided by having secret intelligence information leaked to the media.
You know what would be reduced though? GMP and MI5 embarrassment that people who had previously reported their suspicions are now telling the papers. If a few red faces in officialdom is the price to pay for preventing the next outrage, let the NYT publish and be damned.0 -
All I can say is it's a good job Jeremy Corbyn has had his beard for a long time.0
-
Barry "Mad Bazza" Gardiner is dangerously close to radicalisation, judging by his shaving regime.dyedwoolie said:0 -
Jezza had a chance, upon election, to transform the Labour Party well short of becoming Tory-lite
Renounce and apologise for perviously held extreme views (he is now head of a mainstream party), promise an ethical approach to government, and declare himself willing to govern for everyone,
But then of course that wouldn't have been Jeremy.0 -
That's a policy we can all get behind.dyedwoolie said:0 -
Whatever the truth behind the story, I agree it's a mistake. First law of politics is to try and fight on the issues that favour your own side. Barring a memo having passed across a Tory politician's desk about this particular individual, trying to make something of it is doomed to fail.YBarddCwsc said:
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.0 -
Careful, ThreeQuidder will pop up shortly and accuse you of bullying FreeToChoose, vulnerable snowflake that he is.Bromptonaut said:
Not at all. Simply giving him an opportunity to clarify his views. Isn't that why he's here?kle4 said:
Free to choose says offensive things from time to time, but I feel you are searching for reasons to be offended more than necessary.Bromptonaut said:
If you have brown skin you'll never be perceived as British, is that what you're saying? Just want to be clear on thisfreetochoose said:
Perception is important. Keep wringing your hands and go into a pub on a council estate, you'll soon get my point.IanB2 said:
*foreigners* ?freetochoose said:
No, I'm saying that there will be a rise in attacks on foreign people and that Remainers will blame it on Brexit. It has nothing to do with Brexit, its to do with foreigners blowing up concerts.Malmesbury said:
Ah, you are falling into the trap that our "Betters" live in - that we are 30 seconds away from a pogrom, complete with pitchforks and torches.freetochoose said:FPT
I'm very concerned about the sort of country we're becoming if people are worried that shopkeepers are growing beards, that sounds flippant but its a serious point. I said on here yesterday that reprisals are inevitable, I might be wrong but its unlikely that Sean T will take direct action, in 1 or 2 places I wouldn't be so sure.
We are in troubled times and there will be people who say Brexit is the catalyst to violence against foreigners when it is not connected in any way. There will be dozens of reports of "racist" attacks which I find abhorrent, but if Islamists choose to murder children and nothing is "seen" to be done, there will be problems.
BNP, Britain First etc will be whipping people up into a frenzy, it is unconnected to Brexit in every way.
I think events in the last few years have demonstrated a ridiculous high bar for such a thing to happen.0 -
It wasn't that long ago that the Brexiteers on here were rimming themselves over how the UK's peerless intelligence and counter terrorism expertise would be a massive bargaining chip in the Brexit negotiations. Now its seems we can't stop a istishhadi half wit who's ALREADY KNOWN to the security services from blowing up an Ariane Grande concert in Britain's third worst city.YBarddCwsc said:
I guess we’ll see. It looks like a God-awful mistake.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
Just because someone says to a reporter that they know that some neighbours reported Abedi does not constitute strong evidence. Or indeed, any evidence.
Do we really know that there were “multiple warnings from different sources”?
And even if there were, trying to stick that on Theresa looks like a smear.
In fact the mistake looks very like Healey’s “glorifying in the Falklands War” comment which caused the 83 election to be fought in exactly the wrong arena for Labour.0 -
He definitley used to have a baldy chin, when he started his career. Like Samson, though, hairiness has improved his game.RobD said:
But have you ever seen him without one?bobajobPB said:RobD
That Moeen Ali was sporting a particularly handsome beard, at Headingley yesterday. His use of a cricket bat like a scimitar to smash several boundaries and put South Africa to the sword will worry some.
0 -
Given Conservative anxiety this week to pin Corbyn as a danger to security, I'd reckon CCHQ think I'm right and that the government is vulnerable to attack on its record and on this issue.Sean_F said:
If Labour were led by Attlee, Gaitskell, Wilson or Callaghan, that might be a profitable line of attack.DecrepitJohnL said:
Disagree. I'm with Karl Rove (G W Bush's election guru) on this one. Labour needs to attack Tories' and specifically Theresa May's perceived strengths, and particularly here as May's roles as Prime Minister and Home Secretary are directly relevant. This means the cuts to police numbers, the failure to stop Abedi after multiple warnings from different sources, failure to monitor travel to and return from terrorist hotspots, threats to stop sharing intelligence as part of Brexit, and yes, failure to control non-EU immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
I am not sure the PM should close it down.LadyBucket said:I think the PM can close down this debate about police numbers before Labour really get going, by just saying there is going to be a "review" after the election.
It looks like a huge mistake by Labour to me, tantamount to trying to “blame” Theresa for the attack.
Labour need to get the focus off police & security asap, and onto anything else.
In short, Labour needs to attack and destroy any impression that Theresa May and a Conservative government make Britain safe.
But, when they're led by people like Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbot, it certainly isn't.0
