Totally against campaign suspension, its a cop out, virtue signalling. I want May and Corbyn to knock on my door so I can ask them what they plan to do next friday.
Everything: NHS, economy, dementia tax, fades into insignificance against this.
Yes obviously right now May should be wandering around knocking on doors.
I don't suppose she's knocked a door in years. I don't want her locked away with advisors preparing a statement, she's PM, I want her to tell us what she's going to do. I want to see her instincts.
From where I'm sat it seems not a lot which is one of the reasons I won't be voting for her.
You think all she's doing right now is spending time preparing a statement???
"One of the clips that will doubtless be prominent on YouTube for the next 96 hours is that one of Corbyn saying he's uneasy about police shooting armed attackers dead."
I think Jezza will put out a carefully worded statement along the lines of 'needs must' and not take questions. Otherwise, he'll be gagged and put in a locked room somewhere.
But give it two or three days, and the loons will be out demanding an inquiry into the actions of the police officers. All appropriate, and totally ill-judged at this time. The questions, I mean.
Totally against campaign suspension, its a cop out, virtue signalling. I want May and Corbyn to knock on my door so I can ask them what they plan to do next friday.
Everything: NHS, economy, dementia tax, fades into insignificance against this.
Yes obviously right now May should be wandering around knocking on doors.
I don't suppose she's knocked a door in years. I don't want her locked away with advisors preparing a statement, she's PM, I want her to tell us what she's going to do. I want to see her instincts.
From where I'm sat it seems not a lot which is one of the reasons I won't be voting for her.
You think all she's doing right now is spending time preparing a statement???
Suspension of national campaign is just a reflection of the fact that many of the people leading on that have probably got other priorities at this particular moment.
Really, what was the prime minister doing? She's been nigh-on invisible for most of the campaign, along with the chancellor. That's not why campaigning has been suspended, and it's a shame it has been because it hands another small victory to the terrorists.
The PM is chairing cobra this morning and she will have briefings all day.
Of course the PM is busy with Cobra, but she was never leading the campaign; Crosby and Messina can carry on as usual. That's the point -- it would have been better, and trivially easy, to have continued the campaign without the PM.
It is the national campaign the local campaigns will continue I assume
The time pressure is such that local campaigning will have to get on with it tomorrow. But I would be very wary of calling on people today. Many people will get getting up to the news and a knock on the door from a party canvasser shortly afterwards may not be well received; at least a short period of respect for the dead and injured is what most people would expect.
8 minutes is seriously impressive. The level of threat may have been taken down to severe but we are geared up like never before. And quite right too. Intelligence is key to our security but stopping this kind of low tech attack is so much more difficult and we have to accept some will get through.
Totally against campaign suspension, its a cop out, virtue signalling. I want May and Corbyn to knock on my door so I can ask them what they plan to do next friday.
Everything: NHS, economy, dementia tax, fades into insignificance against this.
Yes obviously right now May should be wandering around knocking on doors.
It would probably be advantageous for TMay to continue knocking on doors, however, the PM’s first response and duty at a time like this is to put country first, arrange cobra meetings and to address the nation. No doubt we'll see her later today outside No.10.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
Totally against campaign suspension, its a cop out, virtue signalling. I want May and Corbyn to knock on my door so I can ask them what they plan to do next friday.
Everything: NHS, economy, dementia tax, fades into insignificance against this.
Yes obviously right now May should be wandering around knocking on doors.
I don't suppose she's knocked a door in years. I don't want her locked away with advisors preparing a statement, she's PM, I want her to tell us what she's going to do. I want to see her instincts.
From where I'm sat it seems not a lot which is one of the reasons I won't be voting for her.
You think all she's doing right now is spending time preparing a statement???
No idea what she's doing - what is it?
How the hell should I know? Perhaps she should maintain a running commentary on twitter?
8 minutes is seriously impressive. The level of threat may have been taken down to severe but we are geared up like never before. And quite right too. Intelligence is key to our security but stopping this kind of low tech attack is so much more difficult and we have to accept some will get through.
What's the situation in Scotland re armed police, if I may ask? I seem to recall a bit hullabaloo about it not that long ago.
I think Jezza will put out a carefully worded statement along the lines of 'needs must' and not take questions. Otherwise, he'll be gagged and put in a locked room somewhere.
But give it two or three days, and the loons will be out demanding an inquiry into the actions of the police officers. All appropriate, and totally ill-judged at this time. The questions, I mean.
By whom? Abbott, Macdonnell, Milne and Thornberry would agree with him on this point, indeed Abbott would probably go further. Khan and Watson would be ignored. Any interview with him on this subject and the clip is bound to come up, and he could easily get rattled.
Re your last paragraph, If Labour start that in the next 48 hours, I'll revise my view that the Liberal Democrats can't come second.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
What are pb-ers expectations about a postponement, as is being suggested. Can it be done legally? And if so, in a holiday season especially for the elderly, will late applications for a postal vote be allowed.
Absobloodylutely not. Next?
Some folks saying there is postponement precedent with 2001 (Foot and Mouth crisis) but wasn't that actually ostponement in the calling of the election resulting in a June rather than a May election? Technically speaking not a postponement at all. Correct me if I am wrong.
Either way - surely there is no precedent for a postponement 4 days from polling day?
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Democracy is pretty fundamental to the UK and you'd need to have an extremely good reason for postponing an election. I'm not enormously persuaded about the merits of suspending the campaigns either. Terrorism is part of our lives and if we stop every time they do something they win.
The "sweeties for all" approach from team Corbyn is worrying, I didn't have a great respect for Ed Milliband but at least he lived in the real world and wanted to stick to trying to undertake change that could be managed. McDonnell wants to raise taxes hugely, borrow more, spend more and disrupt the economy just before we enter Brexit. Most of his plans don't even have an end result, we have a skills shortage so to solve this....free tuition fees! We think electricity prices are high...nationalise! None of it has been thought through, none of it effectively analysed for knock on effects in the long term.
Then vote for one of the other parties. Labour has said what it will do, how much it will cost and how they will pay for it. If you don't like it, or if you do like the programme but doubt the numbers will work out as planned, you can vote for someone else. It is the Conservative manifesto that is uncosted, so you'll have to take it on trust. Maybe they'll raise income tax or NI, or extend the range of VAT and maybe they won't -- who knows? Perhaps they'll reduce record government debt. If you want to give Theresa May a mandate for her vision of Brexit, which after all was the claimed reason for calling this election, do so.
What are pb-ers expectations about a postponement, as is being suggested. Can it be done legally? And if so, in a holiday season especially for the elderly, will late applications for a postal vote be allowed.
Absobloodylutely not. Next?
Some folks saying there is postponement precedent with 2001 (Foot and Mouth crisis) but wasn't that actually ostponement in the calling of the election resulting in a June rather than a May election? Technically speaking not a postponement at all. Correct me if I am wrong.
Either way - surely there is no precedent for a postponement 4 days from polling day?
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Democracy is pretty fundamental to the UK and you'd need to have an extremely good reason for postponing an election. I'm not enormously persuaded about the merits of suspending the campaigns either. Terrorism is part of our lives and if we stop every time they do something they win.
I am not sure who would have the power to do it? Probably the Queen does, under some ancient power nowadays never exercised. But the precedent would be appalling. And the gap between June 8th and the revised date would be an open invitation for more attacks.
What are pb-ers expectations about a postponement, as is being suggested. Can it be done legally? And if so, in a holiday season especially for the elderly, will late applications for a postal vote be allowed.
Absobloodylutely not. Next?
Some folks saying there is postponement precedent with 2001 (Foot and Mouth crisis) but wasn't that actually ostponement in the calling of the election resulting in a June rather than a May election? Technically speaking not a postponement at all. Correct me if I am wrong.
Either way - surely there is no precedent for a postponement 4 days from polling day?
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Democracy is pretty fundamental to the UK and you'd need to have an extremely good reason for postponing an election. I'm not enormously persuaded about the merits of suspending the campaigns either. Terrorism is part of our lives and if we stop every time they do something they win.
Delaying the election is a non-starter for so many obvious reasons. Apart from anything else it would create a precedent that would mean motivated people could delay any future election. When you consider that the security services say that there are currently potentially 500 active plots we'd never have another one!
"Re your last paragraph, If Labour start that in the next 48 hours, I'll revise my view that the Liberal Democrats can't come second."
It might be 72 hours. But I agree with you. If anyone mentions 'extrajudicial killings', they'll be shouted down. Jezza has form here, but his 'save the Jihadi John one' campaign went nowhere.
Compare with Paris - no criticism of the French - I'm sure we learned from their experience too - but clearly now the SOP is to go in fast & hard. Hopefully giving some would be terrorists food for thought.
"One of the clips that will doubtless be prominent on YouTube for the next 96 hours is that one of Corbyn saying he's uneasy about police shooting armed attackers dead."
I think Jezza will put out a carefully worded statement along the lines of 'needs must' and not take questions. Otherwise, he'll be gagged and put in a locked room somewhere.
But give it two or three days, and the loons will be out demanding an inquiry into the actions of the police officers. All appropriate, and totally ill-judged at this time. The questions, I mean.
No-one will mourn there loss but plainly it would be easier to question the terrorists if they were still alive. Presumably the point of wearing fake bombs was to force the police to kill them rather than risk explosions. Mass murder followed by suicide by cop.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Tony Blair wanted to call an election a year early. Then FMD happened and he couldn't call it when he wanted to. He postponed it for a month to make it look like he cared, then went ahead and called it anyway (which made controlling the disease much more difficult) and to show how much he cared, then made Margaret Beckett Minister for Agriculture, renaming the department 'Food and Rural Affairs' (which sounds like something you get up to in a hotel in Market Drayton) in the process. She was there for five years and never once grasped a single basic principle of either agriculture or administration.
The epidemic continued until September despite the fact that warmer weather normally kills the pathogen off. Sion Simon solemnly informed everyone that there was no crisis so nobody should worry.
I didn't make up or exaggerate a single word of this post.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
Impressed that police had all 3 attackers shot dead within 8 minutes of attack starting, as is being reported. I wonder how quickly an armed response could happen outside cental London.
Correct to see a de facto death penalty for terrorists.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I've not cast a negative vote ever, actually. It certainly is this time.
Compare with Paris - no criticism of the French - I'm sure we learned from their experience too - but clearly now the SOP is to go in fast & hard. Hopefully giving some would be terrorists food for thought.
Food for thought how? They wanted to die. That's why they wore fake bombs -- so they'd be shot not tazered. These terrorists want to be killed because they really do believe they'll go straight to paradise.
The "sweeties for all" approach from team Corbyn is worrying, I didn't have a great respect for Ed Milliband but at least he lived in the real world and wanted to stick to trying to undertake change that could be managed. McDonnell wants to raise taxes hugely, borrow more, spend more and disrupt the economy just before we enter Brexit. Most of his plans don't even have an end result, we have a skills shortage so to solve this....free tuition fees! We think electricity prices are high...nationalise! None of it has been thought through, none of it effectively analysed for knock on effects in the long term.
Then vote for one of the other parties. Labour has said what it will do, how much it will cost and how they will pay for it. If you don't like it, or if you do like the programme but doubt the numbers will work out as planned, you can vote for someone else. It is the Conservative manifesto that is uncosted, so you'll have to take it on trust. Maybe they'll raise income tax or NI, or extend the range of VAT and maybe they won't -- who knows? Perhaps they'll reduce record government debt. If you want to give Theresa May a mandate for her vision of Brexit, which after all was the claimed reason for calling this election, do so.
After reading the IFS analysis the Labour manifesto may as well have been uncosted, they've already punched a hole in the largest tax rise and pointed out that this will get more divergent from the expected over time as people change their income habits to compensate. To claim it's "fully costed" just because someones chucked some random figures on a sheet of paper is akin to believing in magic.
£11bn in their first tax rise, and then the rest is seen as "very generous". Then there is the uncollected tax amount (oooh, its bollocks), free tuition fees won't really help and that they are such a nice and kind party they...are keeping the benefits cuts the evil Tories are enacting.
Actually I think extremist is the perfect description, it is very different to fundamentalist. Everyone who belives in something should belive in it fundamentally however you should not take any belief to extremes as by definition you are coming up against the boundries and the extremes of the belief system. You are therefore an extremist.
For example a socialist should belive a fundamental tenet of their belief system is redistribution, they are a fundamentalist if they believe this,and there is nothing wrong with being a fundamentalist. however if they then go beyond this and say for example they want redistribution or death that obviously is not a fundamental part of socialism and would be going out of the boundaries of socialism. They would be an extremist socialist.
Fundamentalist doesn't quite mean what you think.
It derived from the Protestant revival in early nineteenth century America - people who rejected the theology of the Episcopalians and Catholics in favour of a literal reading of the biblical texts.
So, for instance, a fundamentalist Christian would believe that homosexuality is a sin because that is what it says in Leviticus. But (as a Christian) I don't think a particular view on homosexuality is a fundamental tenet of the faith
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Tony Blair wanted to call an election a year early. Then FMD happened and he couldn't call it when he wanted to. He postponed it for a month to make it look like he cared, then went ahead and called it anyway (which made controlling the disease much more difficult) and to show how much he cared, then made Margaret Beckett Minister for Agriculture, renaming the department 'Food and Rural Affairs' (which sounds like something you get up to in a hotel in Market Drayton) in the process. She was there for five years and never once grasped a single basic principle of either agriculture or administration.
The epidemic continued until September despite the fact that warmer weather normally kills the pathogen off. Sion Simon solemnly informed everyone that there was no crisis so nobody should worry.
I didn't make up or exaggerate a single word of this post.
You missed out the bit about the General Election being intended to be timed to coincide with Local Elections. Which were postponed, and would have had to happen anyway.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
Agreed. I loathe the way governments, both Labour and Tory, kow tow to vile Middle eastern regimes. We should sup with Saudi Arabia and Iran and Pakistan and Qatar with a very long spoon indeed, if we have to sup with them at all. We certainly shouldn't be allowing them to fund mosques, madrassas, schools, university chairs in this country and we should question those politicians who appear on their propaganda channels.
But if we don't want those alien values then it rather begs an obvious question, one which those who criticise the regimes are prone to shying away from.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
My ambivalence towards May is turning towards contempt, her campaign has been awful and as PM she is failing to show leadership. Against the nutjob Corbyn she has floundered which is ridiculous.
I will gain financially if she wins, more so if its with a large majority but we face years of poor government under her.
Compare with Paris - no criticism of the French - I'm sure we learned from their experience too - but clearly now the SOP is to go in fast & hard. Hopefully giving some would be terrorists food for thought.
Food for thought how? They wanted to die. That's why they wore fake bombs -- so they'd be shot not tazered. These terrorists want to be killed because they really do believe they'll go straight to paradise.
I suspect they didn't expect to die quite so quickly
The EU must be absolutely shitting themselves at the prospect of losing access to our security and intelligence apparati that, er, guards against this sort of thing.
"One of the clips that will doubtless be prominent on YouTube for the next 96 hours is that one of Corbyn saying he's uneasy about police shooting armed attackers dead."
I think Jezza will put out a carefully worded statement along the lines of 'needs must' and not take questions. Otherwise, he'll be gagged and put in a locked room somewhere.
But give it two or three days, and the loons will be out demanding an inquiry into the actions of the police officers. All appropriate, and totally ill-judged at this time. The questions, I mean.
No-one will mourn there loss but plainly it would be easier to question the terrorists if they were still alive. Presumably the point of wearing fake bombs was to force the police to kill them rather than risk explosions. Mass murder followed by suicide by cop.
Continuing to attack people with a knife would have been sufficient to justify a police shooting, as we saw in the Westminster incident. I was thinking that the fake bombs were probably to make people think twice before 'having a go', in a confined space like a restaurant.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
Trump actually made a speech saying Islamic leaders had to root out 'extreme, radical Islam' on his tour of the Middle East, you never heard that from Obama
Another problem with the "sweeties for all" approach is that when it fails (and it will fail) then we disenfranchise another generation of people with politics, they will have been flat out lied to by people desperate to get into power (again) and will go back to the default position of having a negative view of politics.
That is my understanding too - calling the election was delayed, not postponement of a called election.
Tony Blair wanted to call an election a year early. Then FMD happened and he couldn't call it when he wanted to. He postponed it for a month to make it look like he cared, then went ahead and called it anyway (which made controlling the disease much more difficult) and to show how much he cared, then made Margaret Beckett Minister for Agriculture, renaming the department 'Food and Rural Affairs' (which sounds like something you get up to in a hotel in Market Drayton) in the process. She was there for five years and never once grasped a single basic principle of either agriculture or administration.
The epidemic continued until September despite the fact that warmer weather normally kills the pathogen off. Sion Simon solemnly informed everyone that there was no crisis so nobody should worry.
I didn't make up or exaggerate a single word of this post.
You missed out the bit about the General Election being intended to be timed to coincide with Local Elections. Which were postponed, and would have had to happen anyway.
True. I had forgotten. But why were they not postponed until the crisis was over, given they were in the rural shires? Delaying them for a month just smacked of silly tokenism. Especially since there was no need to call a Westminster election.
Tony Blair - almost as big on spin as Jeremy Corbyn.
(As you can tell, I'm still pretty angry about this even 16 years later.)
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
There does seem to be a lot of terrorist-related activity at the moment: not just these atrocities but an increasing number of arrests. The intelligence services are doing a sort of Whack-A-Mole with all the various plots (and I don't mean to be flippant).
They need all the support and resources they can get.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Under Jeremy Corbyn, we'd have nuclear submarines without missiles and armed police who aren't allowed to shoot. What good is that?
Your leader has seldom found an enemy of the British state he doesn't want to appease or speak for.
Mr. Ace, it's impossible to guard against low-tech attacks of individuals (or a small group, as in this case). But good work making a stupid a point. The police generally have done an excellent job and nailed the murderers inside 8 minutes.
Mr. Choose, indeed. May is useless, but Corbyn's dangerous.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
You may have a point and in that case your anger should also be directed at the Labour front bench for looking even weaker on security than the incumbents.
My ambivalence towards May is turning towards contempt, her campaign has been awful and as PM she is failing to show leadership. Against the nutjob Corbyn she has floundered which is ridiculous.
I will gain financially if she wins, more so if its with a large majority but we face years of poor government under her.
It's the complacency that is so shocking. A purported 'Brexit election' where we are quite literally none the wiser about Brexit than we were before. Speeches about the 'just about managing' without any significant steps to make their lives better. A manifesto where the only numbers are at the bottom of each page. A party that begins the campaign by saying almost nothing for a fortnight, assuming voters will simply run away from their opponents. And a PM who avoids debate and takes hiding from genuine encounters with real people up to new levels.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
you could have 20000 more police and it wouldn't have stopped this atrocity.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
That rather depends on how much the Tories win by this time, and how big any trouble down the line is - we are due for economic troubles.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Corbyn is a threat to security because he does not believe in confronting terrorists. And BTW community policemen are not directly involved in anti-terror operations.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
She has said she will end free movement and get immigration under 100 000 in contrast to Corbyn's largely pacifist open border policy but yes we need to ban travel to Libya and Syria as Trump has done and tag suspected extremists
There does seem to be a lot of terrorist-related activity at the moment: not just these atrocities but an increasing number of arrests. The intelligence services are doing a sort of Whack-A-Mole with all the various plots (and I don't mean to be flippant).
They need all the support and resources they can get.
The reports are that the significant upswing in western terrorist activity is a direct consequence of ISIS being driven backwards in the Middle East. They're losing so are getting desperate, but have an enormous pool of recruits in the West to exploit.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage. If Labour under Corbyn can hit the mid-30s, Labour under someone else can go higher; especially when May fails to deliver the stronger, fairer, more prosperous UK she has promised. One thing this election has done is revive the Labour party. It didn't seem possible a month ago, but May and Corbyn between them have achieved it (with a little extra help from the nice but dim Tim Farron).
Mr. Ace, it's impossible to guard against low-tech attacks of individuals (or a small group, as in this case). But good work making a stupid a point. The police generally have done an excellent job and nailed the murderers inside 8 minutes.
Mr. Choose, indeed. May is useless, but Corbyn's dangerous.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
That is possible.
Except that Labour are not saying they will reverse these cuts. They have said they will hire more police officers but not nearly as many as have been lost, and they have not costed their proposals (they seem to think the only cost involved in hiring more police is pay, and they can't even get that figure right - so these extra police officers will be walking around naked as there is no budget for uniforms, weapons, transport or office space).
And if Labour win, at least three of their top five will have actively supported terrorism in the recent past. Theresa May has never done that. Can you not see how regardless of the actuality, that's going to play very badly?
On a different subject, for anyone vaguely interested in the possibility of an Ind win in East Devon. Tory candidate Hugo Swire has declined to appear at the hustings - organising his own apparently. Not sure that is entirely wise.
Mr. Ace, it's impossible to guard against low-tech attacks of individuals (or a small group, as in this case). But good work making a stupid a point. The police generally have done an excellent job and nailed the murderers inside 8 minutes.
Mr. Choose, indeed. May is useless, but Corbyn's dangerous.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I've not cast a negative vote ever, actually. It certainly is this time.
To be fair, we haven't really had a two-party system GE in England and Wales since 1992.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
That is possible.
Except that Labour are not saying they will reverse these cuts. They have said they will hire more police officers but not nearly as many as have been lost, and they have not costed their proposals (they seem to think the only cost involved in hiring more police is pay, and they can't even get that figure right - so these extra police officers will be walking around naked as there is no budget for uniforms, weapons, transport or office space).
And if Labour win, at least three of their top five will have actively supported terrorism in the recent past. Theresa May has never done that. Can you not see how regardless of the actuality, that's going to play very badly?
"you could have 20000 more police and it wouldn't have stopped this atrocity."
It's only the rapid response that will reduce casualties. the rest is a club to bash May with. Jezza is priced in as a hand-wringer, so this will make little difference.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage.
Corbyn's preferred successor is Macdonnell.
He carries more baggage than a Ryanair overhead rack.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Corbyn is a threat to security because he does not believe in confronting terrorists. And BTW community policemen are not directly involved in anti-terror operations.
Hopefully No one will directly suggest the pm's personal detail are responsible and are too busy, this time.
Mr. Alex, an astute point on ISIS and losing territory.
Mr. Perdix, I agree, and not enough has been made of Corbyn's refusal to say he would take out (via drone strike) a British jihadi in Syria if he had the chance.
For starters shut down mosques that allow hate speech
Come down hard on hate preachers and shut down schools who spout islamist shit.
lengthy prison terms for those who spread hate
Stop kowtowing to islamists - we self censor right now - fuck em
Stop trying to shut down debate on the darker side of Islamic beliefs.
Exclude people from this country if they went abroad to fight jihad or have preached hate.
Cut down muslim immigration.
The issue with that is the basic principle that people can't be left stateless. If Syria won't give them citizenship (and why should they) we can't remove it.
But I'd be fine to lock them up. There must be a law against fighting in a foreign war (or we can introduce one)
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
That is possible.
Except that Labour are not saying they will reverse these cuts. They have said they will hire more police officers but not nearly as many as have been lost, and they have not costed their proposals (they seem to think the only cost involved in hiring more police is pay, and they can't even get that figure right - so these extra police officers will be walking around naked as there is no budget for uniforms, weapons, transport or office space).
And if Labour win, at least three of their top five will have actively supported terrorism in the recent past. Theresa May has never done that. Can you not see how regardless of the actuality, that's going to play very badly?
Also, they have not committed to increasing numbers to the full total promised within the next parliament. So tuition fees can be thrown out tomorrow but the imaginary police will have to wait a bit.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
Actually it was Labour who left the finances in a mess, in 2015 Osborne protected the police budget going forward and increased cyber security going forward. Corbyn refuses to commit to a shoot to kill policy, has a largely open door immigration policy, has years of fraternising with terrorists and has voted against all anti terrorism legislation
What are pb-ers expectations about a postponement, as is being suggested. Can it be done legally? And if so, in a holiday season especially for the elderly, will late applications for a postal vote be allowed.
Absobloodylutely not. Next?
Some folks saying there is postponement precedent with 2001 (Foot and Mouth crisis) but wasn't that actually ostponement in the calling of the election resulting in a June rather than a May election? Technically speaking not a postponement at all. Correct me if I am wrong.
Either way - surely there is no precedent for a postponement 4 days from polling day?
The local elections scheduled for May were postponed until June. This required a full Act of Parliament. The general election was then called under Perogative by Blair for the June date of the local elections. There wasn't a postponement of a general election.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
Agreed. I loathe the way governments, both Labour and Tory, kow tow to vile Middle eastern regimes. We should sup with Saudi Arabia and Iran and Pakistan and Qatar with a very long spoon indeed, if we have to sup with them at all. We certainly shouldn't be allowing them to fund mosques, madrassas, schools, university chairs in this country and we should question those politicians who appear on their propaganda channels.
But if we don't want those alien values then it rather begs an obvious question, one which those who criticise the regimes are prone to shying away from.
Would you also apply this to other Middle Eastern regimes, in particular Israel, which Trump visited as well on his recent visit to the region, and Turkey - a member of NATO? They both espouse values alien to the West.
The EU must be absolutely shitting themselves at the prospect of losing access to our security and intelligence apparati that, er, guards against this sort of thing.
How are the security services meant to guard against Islamists using motor vehicles as battering rams? It's impossible. Or, to put it another way, should the Government (a) ban motor vehicles or (b) forcibly deport all the Muslims in the UK?
And please, let's try not to turn EVERYTHING into an opportunity to bore on about fucking Brexit.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
Which party opened our borders to hundreds of thousands of people from culturally alien countries while openly endorsing multiculturalism and tacitly endorsing segregation and special treatment?
Of course you want to talk about the symptoms; a review of the causes would be damning.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
They haven't cut security forces funding and what on earth would the armed forces have done in central London on a saturday night?!
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
Agreed. I loathe the way governments, both Labour and Tory, kow tow to vile Middle eastern regimes. We should sup with Saudi Arabia and Iran and Pakistan and Qatar with a very long spoon indeed, if we have to sup with them at all. We certainly shouldn't be allowing them to fund mosques, madrassas, schools, university chairs in this country and we should question those politicians who appear on their propaganda channels.
But if we don't want those alien values then it rather begs an obvious question, one which those who criticise the regimes are prone to shying away from.
Would you also apply this to other Middle Eastern regimes, in particular Israel, which Trump visited as well on his recent visit to the region, and Turkey - a member of NATO? They both espouse values alien to the West.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage.
Corbyn's preferred successor is Macdonnell.
He carries more baggage than a Ryanair overhead rack.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Corbyn is a threat to security because he does not believe in confronting terrorists. And BTW community policemen are not directly involved in anti-terror operations.
You don't understand what community police actually do. Of course they are involved. They forge the community links to proactively pick up on Intel BEFORE things happen not after.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
She has said she will end free movement and get immigration under 100 000 in contrast to Corbyn's largely pacifist open border policy but yes we need to ban travel to Libya and Syria as Trump has done and tag suspected extremists
That long-standing commitment to getting immigration under control...how's that been working out then?
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage. If Labour under Corbyn can hit the mid-30s, Labour under someone else can go higher; especially when May fails to deliver the stronger, fairer, more prosperous UK she has promised. One thing this election has done is revive the Labour party. It didn't seem possible a month ago, but May and Corbyn between them have achieved it (with a little extra help from the nice but dim Tim Farron).
Labour has been revived by the effective death of UKIP and the LibDems as national parties. The Tory vote has held up very well (if you assume there was always a bit of froth at 47-48%) considering the very poor campaign they have had at the top. The opposition to the Govt. has coalesced - hard for a governing party to prevent that.
But even if Corbyn is not the Labour candidate for Prime Minister in 2022, he will have ensured that it is somebody to his liking. Labour will again offer a Hard Left proposition to the voters. Who will again say "Didn't you hear us last time? No...." And if the centre-Left gets its shit together, there might be another, different opposition to coalesce around next time.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Under Jeremy Corbyn, we'd have nuclear submarines without missiles and armed police who aren't allowed to shoot. What good is that?
Your leader has seldom found an enemy of the British state he doesn't want to appease or speak for.
And the Conservatives have axed 25,000 soldiers and 20,000 coppers.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage. If Labour under Corbyn can hit the mid-30s, Labour under someone else can go higher; especially when May fails to deliver the stronger, fairer, more prosperous UK she has promised. One thing this election has done is revive the Labour party. It didn't seem possible a month ago, but May and Corbyn between them have achieved it (with a little extra help from the nice but dim Tim Farron).
No Corbyn probably will leas Labour into the next general election election now, one thing this election has ensured is that even if May gets a majority over 50 it will not be the bearer 150 majority Labour moderates needed to get rid of Corbyn. Sanders ran for the Democratic nomination last year aged 74, Berlusconi is almost 80 and still leads Forza Italia and Corbyn will not go while he has membership support. As yougov showed just 2 weeks ago Cooper and Umunna poll no better than Corbyn against May and actually do slightly worse and Khan only does 1% better, so no Corbyn is staying almost certainly
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
And yet it is Abbott who has in the past called for MI5 to be closed down, which would undoubtedly significantly increase the number of attacks?
Has it occurred to you that whatever May's inadequacies Corbyn might be a great deal worse? Because he would be. May has screwed up. Corbyn has gone to the extent of being arrested while demonstrating in support of a member of the IRA (Patrick Macgee).
And he is a threat to national security. If saying that makes you angry, get angry at him for hanging out with such loathsome creatures as Paul Eisen, Patrick Macgee and Brendan McKenna.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Under Jeremy Corbyn, we'd have nuclear submarines without missiles and armed police who aren't allowed to shoot. What good is that?
Your leader has seldom found an enemy of the British state he doesn't want to appease or speak for.
And the Conservatives have axed 25,000 soldiers and 20,000 coppers.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage.
Corbyn's preferred successor is Macdonnell.
He carries more baggage than a Ryanair overhead rack.
McDonnell will not succeed Corbyn.
Who will? Corbyn seems about to do very well in vote share and possibly even ok in seats, if the hung parliament projections are right - and even if not he will be dozens of seats better off than some first predicted it seems - so his successor will be of similar thinking, from his coterie.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Corbyn is a threat to security because he does not believe in confronting terrorists. And BTW community policemen are not directly involved in anti-terror operations.
Corbyn doesn't believe in a de facto death penalty for terrorists. It requires a malicious interpretation of his views to pretend he would appear using lethal force to stop an ongoing attack when that's the only way to protect people (last night seems to have been a straightforward example of that from what we know so far) and I'd be astonished if he has any problem praising the police for their response.
Re community policing - you do understand the concept of intelligence gathering, right? A concern about this attack is the initial suggestions that it's a proper intelligence fail, I.e. no idea something was coming. Community policing is one of several tools intended to help pick up rumours in advance.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
I did not state nor think that she should be rewarded for failure. Unfortunately, many folk will respond in this way, given Corbyn's equivocations.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
They haven't cut security forces funding and what on earth would the armed forces have done in central London on a saturday night?!
If you missed the SAS arriving by chopper, it may have been in the previous thread.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
You have a point about police budgets but it's primarily the intelligence services who deal with terrorism threats. I don't think Corbyn is credible on security because he has over his whole career never shown any support for those fighting terrorists - quite the opposite in fact - and has consistently voted against all counter-terrorism measures.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
Unfortunately, Western leaders (presumably for reasons of realpolitic) show no hesitation in appeasing countries whose religious leaders promote alien values that lead to these atrocities - look at the countries that Trump visited on his recent trip to the Middle East.
Trump actually made a speech saying Islamic leaders had to root out 'extreme, radical Islam' on his tour of the Middle East, you never heard that from Obama
Extreme radical Islam has its roots in Islam. That is the problem. When terrorists behead they are doing what Mohammed did back in the 7th century to his enemies. So how realistic is it to expect those who claim that his is the example to be followed to say that some of what he did should not be followed?
Trump was right to say what he did. But I have yet to see any very convincing explanation of how Islam puts an effective firewall between itself and the extremists from any Islamic leader. The only ones I have seen are from people like Maajid Nawaz and Ayan Hirsi Ali, who are then threatened for their pains.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
She has said she will end free movement and get immigration under 100 000 in contrast to Corbyn's largely pacifist open border policy but yes we need to ban travel to Libya and Syria as Trump has done and tag suspected extremists
That long-standing commitment to getting immigration under control...how's that been working out then?
Judge me on my record, I think she said.
While in the EU we could do nothing about free movement or indeed Merkel's open door policy from Syria, now we are leaving the single market we can
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
They haven't cut security forces funding and what on earth would the armed forces have done in central London on a saturday night?!
Cut community police. Cut armed police. Cut the security services. Cut the Border Force. Cut the army, navy and air force. Tories know the cost to everything and the value of nothing.
That clip of the police federation meet in where the officer berated Theresa May for police cuts and told her 2 years ago that a Manchester attack would happen as she'd destroyed the police's ability to do the job properly went massive on social media a few weeks back. It's still valid now and I expect another airing.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
Under Jeremy Corbyn, we'd have nuclear submarines without missiles and armed police who aren't allowed to shoot. What good is that?
Your leader has seldom found an enemy of the British state he doesn't want to appease or speak for.
And the Conservatives have axed 25,000 soldiers and 20,000 coppers.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
I'm not sure more police would have stopped 3 nutters driving a van at innocent people. They killed them all within 8 minutes - mightily impressive.
What is worrying is the belief that Corbyn and Abbott would be better.
So lab no lower than 34 on any of the polls yesterday. This surge truly is real.
Given the Tories are no lower than 40% and as high as 47% and they got 37% last time you could equally say the Tory surge relative to 2015 is real too
Yes, but that doesn't surprise me like the labour surge. Or concern me as much (even though them winning by a huge amount I don't think is good for good governance).
In a FPTP-created two party system such as the one in England and most of Wales, many - if not most - votes are negative. Millions of people will not be voting for Corbyn and his policies, but against May and hers; and vice versa. We will all pretend that whoever wins received a positive mandate; and we'll then vote them out at the next election. For one thing seems pretty clear: whoever does prevail this time is very unlikely to the next.
I think if the Tories win this time they will probably still win in 2022 given Corbyn will do well enough to secure his leadership
Corbyn will not lead Labour into the next election. He will be into his 70s and too old. Whoever does - even if from the far left - will not have his baggage. If Labour under Corbyn can hit the mid-30s, Labour under someone else can go higher; especially when May fails to deliver the stronger, fairer, more prosperous UK she has promised. One thing this election has done is revive the Labour party. It didn't seem possible a month ago, but May and Corbyn between them have achieved it (with a little extra help from the nice but dim Tim Farron).
No Corbyn probably will leas Labour into the next general election election now, one thing this election has ensured is that even if May gets a majority over 50 it will not be the bearer 150 majority Labour moderates needed to get rid of Corbyn. Sanders ran for the Democratic nomination last year aged 74, Berlusconi is almost 80 and still leads Forza Italia and Corbyn will not go while he has membership support. As yougov showed just 2 weeks ago Cooper and Umunna poll no better than Corbyn against May and actually do slightly worse and Khan only does 1% better, so no Corbyn is staying almost certainly
Nope - he'll stand down before the next GE. But let's say you're right and he doesn't, the attacks on his past will not work again. They are a card that has been played. His baggage will be factored in next time. When May fails to deliver the stronger, fairer and more prosperous UK she has promised, videos of Corbyn with IRA leaders are not going to save her.
In times of trouble and danger, people will tend to hang onto nurse for fear of something worse. Security is paramount. Britain is reaping the reward of allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values, and tragically now sees the River Thames foaming with much blood. May's victory on 8/6 is now nailed on, and all the opinion polls published yesterday before 10 pm support this premise. The only question is the size of the Tory majority.
This is now the third attack this year. People are rightly questioning May's ability to deal with terrorism. Not only in general terms, cutting spending in policing and other vital services, but also the specific point that instead of focusing on Brexit and on national security, she chose to call an unnecessary election - a major distraction.
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
This. The first job of the government is to keep us safe. That means strengthening the police and security services and armed forces, not cutting them.
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
They haven't cut security forces funding and what on earth would the armed forces have done in central London on a saturday night?!
Cut community police. Cut armed police. Cut the security services. Cut the Border Force. Cut the army, navy and air force. Tories know the cost to everything and the value of nothing.
Osborne protected the police and defence budgets from 2015 and increased the counter terrorism budget
Comments
"One of the clips that will doubtless be prominent on YouTube for the next 96 hours is that one of Corbyn saying he's uneasy about police shooting armed attackers dead."
I think Jezza will put out a carefully worded statement along the lines of 'needs must' and not take questions. Otherwise, he'll be gagged and put in a locked room somewhere.
But give it two or three days, and the loons will be out demanding an inquiry into the actions of the police officers. All appropriate, and totally ill-judged at this time. The questions, I mean.
Condolences to the families and friends of those killed. It is such a beautiful morning here and to think that there were people out enjoying themselves last night who will not see the sun today is so sad.
My son was out last night and he texted me to let me know he was safe, in case I was watching the news. Life these days.....
Of course campaigning should continue. We should not let these scumbags derail our democracy.
Interesting to read this - https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/06/blind-bovine-hope-will-get-us-nowhere-time-change-response-islamic-extremism/ - and the interview with a leading prosecutor, who happens to be Muslim, in yesterday's Times, in light of these events. There is still too much denial around.
But a big thank you is due to the police, intelligence and emergency services.
Re your last paragraph, If Labour start that in the next 48 hours, I'll revise my view that the Liberal Democrats can't come second.
Democracy is pretty fundamental to the UK and you'd need to have an extremely good reason for postponing an election. I'm not enormously persuaded about the merits of suspending the campaigns either. Terrorism is part of our lives and if we stop every time they do something they win.
https://twitter.com/SweetASing/status/871250845832105985
"Re your last paragraph, If Labour start that in the next 48 hours, I'll revise my view that the Liberal Democrats can't come second."
It might be 72 hours. But I agree with you. If anyone mentions 'extrajudicial killings', they'll be shouted down. Jezza has form here, but his 'save the Jihadi John one' campaign went nowhere.
The epidemic continued until September despite the fact that warmer weather normally kills the pathogen off. Sion Simon solemnly informed everyone that there was no crisis so nobody should worry.
I didn't make up or exaggerate a single word of this post.
To claim it's "fully costed" just because someones chucked some random figures on a sheet of paper is akin to believing in magic.
Here is a link to a summary;
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/05/26/your-guide-to-how-the-ifs-dismantled-the-two-parties-plans
£11bn in their first tax rise, and then the rest is seen as "very generous". Then there is the uncollected tax amount (oooh, its bollocks), free tuition fees won't really help and that they are such a nice and kind party they...are keeping the benefits cuts the evil Tories are enacting.
It derived from the Protestant revival in early nineteenth century America - people who rejected the theology of the Episcopalians and Catholics in favour of a literal reading of the biblical texts.
So, for instance, a fundamentalist Christian would believe that homosexuality is a sin because that is what it says in Leviticus. But (as a Christian) I don't think a particular view on homosexuality is a fundamental tenet of the faith
But if we don't want those alien values then it rather begs an obvious question, one which those who criticise the regimes are prone to shying away from.
Because aside from all the guff about who said what we have practicalities. The Tories have slashed community police normal police armed police. And have budgeted more slashing going forward. Where I live we have had bursts of ASB problems and the lack of police has been identified and recognised by both residents and the police as the problem.
So with respect to questions about what Corbyn said, expect harder questions about what May has done. Judge us on our record as she keeps saying. A police force cut. Armed forces cut. A lack of resources and equipment and ships and planes. And you say Corbyn is the threat to security?
I will gain financially if she wins, more so if its with a large majority but we face years of poor government under her.
Tony Blair - almost as big on spin as Jeremy Corbyn.
(As you can tell, I'm still pretty angry about this even 16 years later.)
What's more, May is as responsible for "allowing the immigration of so many people with alien values" as anyone else. She's a hypocrite - she talks a lot about reducing immigration because it impresses Mail readers that it sounds like she's doing something, but then never actually does it. It gets worse: she has powers to stop potential terrorists from being here but doesn't use them.
She's hopeless and it's shocking that people like you think she should be rewarded for failure.
They need all the support and resources they can get.
Your leader has seldom found an enemy of the British state he doesn't want to appease or speak for.
Mr. Choose, indeed. May is useless, but Corbyn's dangerous.
I agree though.
Except that Labour are not saying they will reverse these cuts. They have said they will hire more police officers but not nearly as many as have been lost, and they have not costed their proposals (they seem to think the only cost involved in hiring more police is pay, and they can't even get that figure right - so these extra police officers will be walking around naked as there is no budget for uniforms, weapons, transport or office space).
And if Labour win, at least three of their top five will have actively supported terrorism in the recent past. Theresa May has never done that. Can you not see how regardless of the actuality, that's going to play very badly?
Who cut police number so that the police warned her this would happen? Theresa May. Who cut Border Force numbers so that we can't properly screen people coming in (creating the newsworthy side effect of queues at Heathrow)? Theresa May. Whose government slashed the armed forces and had to look to doing deals with the French to protect us as "we can't afford" Frigates? Theresa May.
I get very angry when people tell me Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security. Who's the bloody government responsible for the current state of our police and armed services?
"you could have 20000 more police and it wouldn't have stopped this atrocity."
It's only the rapid response that will reduce casualties. the rest is a club to bash May with. Jezza is priced in as a hand-wringer, so this will make little difference.
He carries more baggage than a Ryanair overhead rack.
Mr. Perdix, I agree, and not enough has been made of Corbyn's refusal to say he would take out (via drone strike) a British jihadi in Syria if he had the chance.
But I'd be fine to lock them up. There must be a law against fighting in a foreign war (or we can introduce one)
"He carries more baggage than a Ryanair overhead rack."
LOL.
And please, let's try not to turn EVERYTHING into an opportunity to bore on about fucking Brexit.
Of course you want to talk about the symptoms; a review of the causes would be damning.
That's what the police say anyway.
Judge me on my record, I think she said.
But even if Corbyn is not the Labour candidate for Prime Minister in 2022, he will have ensured that it is somebody to his liking. Labour will again offer a Hard Left proposition to the voters. Who will again say "Didn't you hear us last time? No...." And if the centre-Left gets its shit together, there might be another, different opposition to coalesce around next time.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2224108/british-army-now-has-fewer-soldiers-than-the-number-killed-on-the-first-day-of-the-battle-of-the-somme/
Oh, and that nice Mr Fallon will soon cut the Marines. Maybe he's chanelling Ed Miliband's dad.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/royal-marines-will-be-sacrificed-to-keep-navy-s-head-above-water-rfc80s5b5
Has it occurred to you that whatever May's inadequacies Corbyn might be a great deal worse? Because he would be. May has screwed up. Corbyn has gone to the extent of being arrested while demonstrating in support of a member of the IRA (Patrick Macgee).
And he is a threat to national security. If saying that makes you angry, get angry at him for hanging out with such loathsome creatures as Paul Eisen, Patrick Macgee and Brendan McKenna.
Re community policing - you do understand the concept of intelligence gathering, right? A concern about this attack is the initial suggestions that it's a proper intelligence fail, I.e. no idea something was coming. Community policing is one of several tools intended to help pick up rumours in advance.
Trump was right to say what he did. But I have yet to see any very convincing explanation of how Islam puts an effective firewall between itself and the extremists from any Islamic leader. The only ones I have seen are from people like Maajid Nawaz and Ayan Hirsi Ali, who are then threatened for their pains.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10140310/British-spies-face-millions-of-budget-cuts.html
Cut community police. Cut armed police. Cut the security services. Cut the Border Force. Cut the army, navy and air force. Tories know the cost to everything and the value of nothing.
'I like to move it move it....'
What is worrying is the belief that Corbyn and Abbott would be better.