"Police Scotland confirms it has been instructed by the Crown Office to launch an investigation into “alleged irregularities relating to property deals” following the Tribunal which saw SNP MP Michelle Thomson’s solicitor struck off for professional misconduct"
Corbyn's speech seems to have gone down an absolute storm on Twitter amongst his supporters.
He's keeping his job till 2020, you heard it here first.
That is very good news that all Conservatives will welcome.
What was the phrase again - too many tweets make a twat? It was twitter, facebook and online political activism by a vocal minority that buggered up the 2015 opinion polls. I am sure he'll keep his job until 2020 since his cosy swarm of supporters will ensure that - and there will be no leadership campaign. In fact as the polls get worse for Labour I suspect his supporters will clamour for ever-more left-wing policies. 'to galvanise the nation'.
41,000 tweets, higher than Ed's 2014 speech, and hugely more +ve #Twitter reaction: 76% cheers vs 22% for Ed #Lab15
Wow, just think the massive majority Corbyn can get. On the Twittersphere Ed was nailed on for a 50 majority, we can expect a landslide in 2010 for #jezwecan
According to Sky News.. Corbyn says spending 100 bn on new nuclear weapons is not the right way to go..I assume he means Trident Submarine replacements...not the actual weapons..apart from the fact it is spread of over many years.. and is a major part of the UK defence system...Has Big Len been told about this..
People who will be removed from the register unless they apply to register under the new system If you haven’t already applied individually to be on the electoral register, you’ll receive a letter asking you to register. If you don't register under the new system your name will be removed on the 1 December.
Except that the Tories have brought forward the cut-off date for doing so.
This is quite clearly so that the Boundary Commission will draw up the boundaries before people have got round to getting registered - in some places more than others.
The result will be an even larger gerrymandering of the boundaries in favour of the Tories than it otherwise would have been.
The Tories are very good at gerrymandering the boundaries to suit their own convenience. Everybody recognises this.
I thought the undisputed kings of Boundary Commission manipulation were New Labour.
The boundary commission is an independent organisation, who put their recommendations (based on standardised protocols) to parliament. Parliament can accept or reject, but not modify them. The last couple were rejected by (a) Labour and (b) The Lib Dems in coalition because they knew that demographic changes favoured the tories. The refusal to accept the (fair) proposals is gerrymandering.
Lance Price "I had low expectations and this fell way way below it"
Says a disgruntled Blairite.
I've not seen the speech so won't comment on it directly. I will however note that those commentators and activists who criticised Miliband's speeches were on the money.
If Corbyn's speech was poor then it's hardly surprising. He's had little time to prepare and has had no training in this sort of thing. If he's lucky, he'll get some decent clips this evening and the news cycle will move on before it falls apart (which badly prepared speeches tend to). If he's not, then it just adds to the view that he's not up to the job.
Your points are well made.
how do you get a majority of 5.3?
:-) The odds are 5.3 on a Labour majority. I could have phrased it better.
Labour majority at GE2020 depends more on how the LD and the SNP does rather than Labour / Conservative.
We must not forget in the "disastrous" GE2015 election, there was actually a swing to Labour from GE2010. In fact , some of that swing to Labour cost the LDs a few seats.
Arithmetically, a Labour majority is daunting. Though depriving the Tories a majority is not.
Quite. That is why I'm on NOM at 2.74 rather than Labour majority on 5.6. But it's a heck of a long time to invest your cash. There's only a £1000 invested on Betfair. Mine is a token amount just to get some money on the table.
I think you're forgetting that it was only the LIB-LAB swing that resulted in a swing to Labour. Also - there must be a fair number of people who are going to be put off by Labour's current platform. Labour have positioned themselves well to the left of the Bell Curve, where there are by definition fewer voters and some Blairites may flirt with the Lib Dems. There is also the Boundary commission who presumably are going to have their recommendations applied. And the fact that Labour could (incredibly compared to their position a year ago) pick up lots of votes in Scotland without gaining seats. The odds against NOM must be much more than 2.74 (at the moment). (Not that I am a betting man, I come here for the thoughts)
You might be right about NOM. But there are only three possibilities - Tory Majority at 2.0, NOM at 2.74 and Labour Majority at 5.6. If NOM should be longer, presumably one (or both) of the others should be shorter. Which do you fancy? Tory majority has been steady at 50% chance, NOM has been drifting a bit to 35% and Labour majority firming a bit to 15%.
Or is your prejudice so overwhelming that you'd actually stoop to the level of not being disgusted by what he says?"
No I hadn't. I don't have the time to read every post on a thread like this. I'd come on to get a rough idea of what people made of Corbyn's speech but as so often the usual suspects made it an exercise in wading through treacle. Sorry to pick on a post by you (one of the least deserving) to vent my frustration. And no I don't think anyone should be gassed at Auschwitz.
@holyroodmandy: I can reveal @Lawscot raised "alleged irregularities relating to property deals" informally with @COPFS December 2014 & formally July 2015
The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Jezza, for lack of a better word, is good. Jezza is right, Jezza works. Jezza clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the (R)evolutionary spirit. Jezza, in all of his forms; Jezza for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Jezza, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
@paulhutcheon: Crown Office refusing to say *when* it instructed police to look at controversial property deals that involved Michelle Thomson MP @thesnp
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
There was some decent structural stuff on debt (public and household), manufacturing, house and asset price inflation. He then pledged more public housing (doesn't everyone at conference...?).
Everyone from every party at every conference! And in every manifesto!
And the fact it never quite materialises in the way that everyone says it's going to, suggests to me that there are some deeper structural issues that folk are sticking heads deep into sand about. (Electorally unpalatable realities, perhaps, about planning restrictions for instance?)
People who will be removed from the register unless they apply to register under the new system If you haven’t already applied individually to be on the electoral register, you’ll receive a letter asking you to register. If you don't register under the new system your name will be removed on the 1 December.
Except that the Tories have brought forward the cut-off date for doing so.
This is quite clearly so that the Boundary Commission will draw up the boundaries before people have got round to getting registered - in some places more than others.
The result will be an even larger gerrymandering of the boundaries in favour of the Tories than it otherwise would have been.
The Tories are very good at gerrymandering the boundaries to suit their own convenience. Everybody recognises this.
I thought the undisputed kings of Boundary Commission manipulation were New Labour.
The boundary commission is an independent organisation, who put their recommendations (based on standardised protocols) to parliament. Parliament can accept or reject, but not modify them. The last couple were rejected by (a) Labour and (b) The Lib Dems in coalition because they knew that demographic changes favoured the tories. The refusal to accept the (fair) proposals is gerrymandering.
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that the LibDems are opposed to the reduction in number of seats to 600, and would have accepted equalised constituencies if there were 650 of them.
Which is funny, of course, because the LibDem 2010 manifesto contained a "pledge" to reduce seats, IIRC.
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
While cutting the incomes of most of the low-paid.
F1: Mr. L, yes. Grosjean's confirmed as a Haas 2016 driver, and Force India and Sauber have called in the EU, accusing F1 of being unlawfully run. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34388544
Edited extra bit: cheers for the heads up, Mr. 1000.
@paulhutcheon: Crown Office refusing to say *when* it instructed police to look at controversial property deals that involved Michelle Thomson MP @thesnp
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
While cutting the incomes of most of the low-paid.
only some. Not for example those who do not claim welfare.
He began with some jokes at the expense of the press. These were funny, although one of them was a bit odd (he mocked the press for reporting that he'd once expressed a wish to see the Earth wiped out by an asteroid; the audience guffawed at the press's absurdity, evidently unaware that the story was in fact true).
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
While cutting the incomes of most of the low-paid.
only some. Not for example those who do not claim welfare.
Most people on low incomes claim tax credits, and per the IFS, most will see drops in their incomes even after the increase in the min wage.
People who will be removed from the register unless they apply to register under the new system If you haven’t already applied individually to be on the electoral register, you’ll receive a letter asking you to register. If you don't register under the new system your name will be removed on the 1 December.
Except that the Tories have brought forward the cut-off date for doing so.
This is quite clearly so that the Boundary Commission will draw up the boundaries before people have got round to getting registered - in some places more than others.
The result will be an even larger gerrymandering of the boundaries in favour of the Tories than it otherwise would have been.
The Tories are very good at gerrymandering the boundaries to suit their own convenience. Everybody recognises this.
I thought the undisputed kings of Boundary Commission manipulation were New Labour.
The boundary commission is an independent organisation, who put their recommendations (based on standardised protocols) to parliament. Parliament can accept or reject, but not modify them. The last couple were rejected by (a) Labour and (b) The Lib Dems in coalition because they knew that demographic changes favoured the tories. The refusal to accept the (fair) proposals is gerrymandering.
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that the LibDems are opposed to the reduction in number of seats to 600, and would have accepted equalised constituencies if there were 650 of them.
Which is funny, of course, because the LibDem 2010 manifesto contained a "pledge" to reduce seats, IIRC.
It's the Lords wot needs reducing in size! The world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
While cutting the incomes of most of the low-paid.
only some. Not for example those who do not claim welfare.
Most people on low incomes claim tax credits, and per the IFS, most will see drops in their incomes even after the increase in the min wage.
But mainly if they are part time and only whilst their kids are young. And people without kids wont now get it in the future.
Similar to the child benefit cut dog that never barked.
Or is your prejudice so overwhelming that you'd actually stoop to the level of not being disgusted by what he says?"
No I hadn't. I don't have the time to read every post on a thread like this. I'd come on to get a rough idea of what people made of Corbyn's speech but as so often the usual suspects made it an exercise in wading through treacle. Sorry to pick on a post by you (one of the least deserving) to vent my frustration. And no I don't think anyone should be gassed at Auschwitz.
An honest assessment? It was the worst speech I have seen in my lifetime by a leader of the opposition. There was some good pieces which would go down well with the audience. But in the overall it was just shambolic, incoherent ramblings.
That said....
If your shtick is that you arent smooth, and a teflon smiling PR man selling shoddy washing powder, this kind of thing can work.
A humble ordinary man trying earnestly to do whats best. There are people this genuinely will work for.
There is a fair point to make that judging a politician on his capacity to give a speech is a bit like judging a plumber on the neatness of his handwriting on the invoice.
Can he sustain that kind of thing though? People dont mind you being rough round the edges if you polish up into a diamond.
The "the Tories have claimed the centre ground" meme is almost as baffling to me as the "Osborne is a wildly popular political colossus". The public see the Tories as extreme right-wing ideologues, but competent extreme right-wing ideologues.
"About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well"
Absolute rubbish born of a primeval prejudice. Do you consider a majority of Egyptians to be so stupid or malevolent to vote overwhelmingly for the Muslim Brotherhood if they are as you describe? Your prejudices are as profound as anything I've read on these boards. I can only assume you have an unhealthy hatred of Muslims.
People who will be removed from the register unless they apply to register under the new system If you haven’t already applied individually to be on the electoral register, you’ll receive a letter asking you to register. If you don't register under the new system your name will be removed on the 1 December.
Except that the Tories have brought forward the cut-off date for doing so.
This is quite clearly so that the Boundary Commission will draw up the boundaries before people have got round to getting registered - in some places more than others.
The result will be an even larger gerrymandering of the boundaries in favour of the Tories than it otherwise would have been.
The Tories are very good at gerrymandering the boundaries to suit their own convenience. Everybody recognises this.
I thought the undisputed kings of Boundary Commission manipulation were New Labour.
The boundary commission is an independent organisation, who put their recommendations (based on standardised protocols) to parliament. Parliament can accept or reject, but not modify them. The last couple were rejected by (a) Labour and (b) The Lib Dems in coalition because they knew that demographic changes favoured the tories. The refusal to accept the (fair) proposals is gerrymandering.
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that the LibDems are opposed to the reduction in number of seats to 600, and would have accepted equalised constituencies if there were 650 of them.
Which is funny, of course, because the LibDem 2010 manifesto contained a "pledge" to reduce seats, IIRC.
It's the Lords wot needs reducing in size! The world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!
That's a very unfair chart. If you look the sum of IQs in the upper houses and compare to the lower houses, you'll see that the US Senate is actually bigger than the House of Representatives. While the House of Lords is smaller than the House of Commons.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
Which just shows how much bearing the Left-Right spectrum has on how people vote.
This year of the 3 main parties, the Lib Dems were perceived as the most centrist, followed by Labour, with the Tories the furthest away from the centre. Yet their respective performances in the election were the exact reverse of how centrist they were perceived.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
Why are you bringing Israel into it? I'm pleased that Corbyn has criticised the Saudis. I'm wondering whether he'll follow the logic of his own criticism or whether he's only criticising them because they're allies (allegedly) of the US.
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
Indeed, and as I said earlier, Corbyn's welfare for self-employed people could be next: it is easily reframed as a Conservative policy.
For those not familiar with it the case was resolved on the Scottish test of relevancy. This means that if you assume that everything the petitioners has said is true, can they win the case?
They have decided that the conduct complained of could fall within s106 of the 1983 Act. They now have to hear evidence as to whether it did in fact amount to a misrepresentation as a candidate or whether it was a misrepresentation by the Secretary of State. Not many good options there for Carmichael although one wins and one loses.
They then have to decide if the false statement was made for "the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at the election”?
Again, not great but probably ought to have been Carmichael's biggest hope. As the attack was really directed at Sturgeon was it a statement that was designed to affect the outcome of the election in Carmichael's seat?
The Court have addressed this in the first instance by concluding that a statement that "I didn't leak it" is a statement that goes to the standing of the candidate in the election he is standing in. That will be the most worrying part of the decision for Carmichael since it does not seem to be in dispute that he told a lie. It is also a very broad proposition which might make a number of elected politicians twitch. If every, eh, misstatement, can be brought back to your own election in this way the distinction that was previously thought to exist between public and election statements, at least during the election period, may not exist.
It is very difficult to see a positive way forward from here for Carmichael. He might be able to appeal this decision but I seem to recall that appeals under the 1983 Act are quite problematic. It seems that a proof is more likely and he really didn't want that.
That would make a great deal of sense - I worked in Crawley during the 80s when it became the first town to have an official 0% unemployment rate. It was impossible to find anyone with skills or even basic reading/writing - wages went up and up sucking in thousands from elsewhere.
Don't know if this is new news - Morrison's are to pay Living Wage as well. It seems to be catching on.
I wonder if this actually is a sign of the tightening of the labour market - companies making virtue out of necessity.
Are Labour really aware now just how much credit that the Tories are going to get for this? Osborn, fairly or not, has captured the 'living wage' as something the government is actively in favour of.
Indeed, and as I said earlier, Corbyn's welfare for self-employed people could be next: it is easily reframed as a Conservative policy.
One that I hope George stays well clear of. It's a shocking idea and I for one won't be changing my mind on it whether it's a Tory or Labour idea.
The "the Tories have claimed the centre ground" meme is almost as baffling to me as the "Osborne is a wildly popular political colossus". The public see the Tories as extreme right-wing ideologues, but competent extreme right-wing ideologues.
As the country is shifting right, that article seems about right.
After all, a living wage is given by a right wing Government,,, which shows how useless a left wing one was.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
To be fair it was 1948 when the Israelis last attempted to blow up British soldiers or civilians. The others have more recent form.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
Bravo! I waded through a lot of treacle for something like that and they were pretty much my thoughts too. It's too early to tell which way the zeitgeist is going. He seemed different which I found refreshing
"About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well"
Absolute rubbish born of a primeval prejudice. Do you consider a majority of Egyptians to be so stupid or malevolent to vote overwhelmingly for the Muslim Brotherhood if they are as you describe? Your prejudices are as profound as anything I've read on these boards. I can only assume you have an unhealthy hatred of Muslims.
The Salafist Al-Nour Party got more than a quarter of the vote in Egypt's 2011/12 elections.
If that doesn't alarm you, then you should spend more time talking with your British Muslim friends. I assume you've got loads.
A lot of my Muslim friends are absolutely s**ting themselves about the "rise" of Salafism in Britain, even though it is a fringe movement here and well outside the Muslim mainstream, albeit its ideas are spreading quickly through the internet. And that includes my most conservative Muslim friends, the self-declared political Islamist type who are actively working to bring Britain under Shariah law (by converting the majority of the country to Islam, by convincing us all of how great the religion is and how it doesn't live up to all the nasty media stereotypes... they're not planning violent revolution, and the Salafists massively annoy them because it's antithetical to their message).
If one of the Middle East's most developed, educated and economically/strategically important countries is voting 28% for a Salafist party then the region is stuffed.
He began with some jokes at the expense of the press. These were funny, although one of them was a bit odd (he mocked the press for reporting that he'd once expressed a wish to see the Earth wiped out by an asteroid; the audience guffawed at the press's absurdity, evidently unaware that the story was in fact true).
Holy Cow - I thought it was EdM talking - and it was. That Speccy article is a corker in plagiarism.
Nevertheless, what was new was not good and what was good was not new. Much of it, actually, was not new at all. A significant chunk of Corbyn’s speech was, in its essentials, written in 2011. Not by Corbyn, of course, but by the writer Richard Heller.
"About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well"
Absolute rubbish born of a primeval prejudice. Do you consider a majority of Egyptians to be so stupid or malevolent to vote overwhelmingly for the Muslim Brotherhood if they are as you describe? Your prejudices are as profound as anything I've read on these boards. I can only assume you have an unhealthy hatred of Muslims.
The Salafist Al-Nour Party got more than a quarter of the vote in Egypt's 2011/12 elections.
If that doesn't alarm you, then you should spend more time talking with your British Muslim friends. I assume you've got loads.
A lot of my Muslim friends are absolutely s**ting themselves about the "rise" of Salafism in Britain, even though it is a fringe movement here and well outside the Muslim mainstream, albeit its ideas are spreading quickly through the internet. And that includes my most conservative Muslim friends, the self-declared political Islamist type who are actively working to bring Britain under Shariah law (by converting the majority of the country to Islam, by convincing us all of how great the religion is and how it doesn't live up to all the nasty media stereotypes... they're not planning violent revolution, and the Salafists massively annoy them because it's antithetical to their message).
If one of the Middle East's most developed, educated and economically/strategically important countries is voting 28% for a Salafist party then the region is stuffed.
Roger drinks the KoolAid. I don't think he has ever left Barnes and the cosy confines of BBC Shepherds Bush.
"About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well"
Absolute rubbish born of a primeval prejudice. Do you consider a majority of Egyptians to be so stupid or malevolent to vote overwhelmingly for the Muslim Brotherhood if they are as you describe? Your prejudices are as profound as anything I've read on these boards. I can only assume you have an unhealthy hatred of Muslims.
I do not consider Egyptians either stupid or malevolent. But I suggest that you do a bit of research on the intellectual origins of the Muslim Brotherhood and its founder. Paul Berman has writen expensively on the subject. The Brotherhood has absorbed far more from Fascism and Communism than some of its admirers care to admit. It has had a social side - as indeed has Hezbollah - which is attractive to poor people often disregarded by their arrogant and corrupt rulers and I don't blame those people for being grateful for such help. But its world view is not a nice one, however much you may scream.
And in regard to its intellectual antecedents, it is probably true to say that these Islamist groupuscules do not properly represent Islam properly understood. That they are seen - wrongly - as the face of Islam is a great sadness for true Muslims as it is for the rest of us, me included.
I have said before on this site that I have never been to a Muslim country (Turkey and Kashmir) where I have not been made to feel welcome and I have never been in a mosque which has not had an air of often sublime peace about it.
Genuine Muslims must be in despair at how their religion has been abused and perverted.
I wish I could quote an article written by a famous Egyptian jouralist in the leading Egyptian newspaper shortly after the Beslan siege where he despairs at what some of the followers of the peaceful religion he and his family so loved had turned into. It is very sad and moving. I have kept a hard copy. If only there were more like him or more of them spoke up, there would be more hope in that part of the world.
One day when I find it I will quote it to you. You might learn something.
"Pretty notable that he only spent two sentences in that entire speech on Scotland."
If you had listened to what he was saying and you had any idea what socialism is about you'd understand why he wouldn't indulge nationalism. I suggest you attend a fascist conference
Ah, Roger, Roger. Always, and perpetually, wrong, and always in the most complacent and condescending manner possible.
I have a few Muslim friends in England though plenty in Egypt Lebanon Turkey and throughout the Middle East where I have worked probably over a hundred times. For the most part I find them more intelligent and considered than the people here. Certainly more politically aware which is why it's no surprise that Corbyn's speech was run live in Iran and elsewhere in the region. Who here would even know the name of the Egyptian leader let alone the leader of the opposition?
If we continue to see them all as ragheads then we're making a very big mistake. In my experience they have the sort of intelligence that comes with very old civilizations and it's very rare to find the sweeping political generalizations that you get in this country and on here all the time.
Hesbollah are popular in Lebanon because they care for the schooling and social work in the areas they control. Likewise Hamas in Gaza. They are not considered corrupt or evil nor do their populations live in fear of them. I'm so tired of the prejudice here knowing it to be the complete opposite of the reality. Even the Lebaneses Christians accept the reason's for Hezbollah's popularity and their lack of corruption.
"Police Scotland confirms it has been instructed by the Crown Office to launch an investigation into “alleged irregularities relating to property deals” following the Tribunal which saw SNP MP Michelle Thomson’s solicitor struck off for professional misconduct"
You missed the bit that she is not involved in any way in the investigation ......... LOL
Comments
https://www.holyrood.com/articles/news/police-scotland-investigates-alleged-irregularities-relating-property-deals-after-mps
"Police Scotland confirms it has been instructed by the Crown Office to launch an investigation into “alleged irregularities relating to property deals” following the Tribunal which saw SNP MP Michelle Thomson’s solicitor struck off for professional misconduct"
41,000 tweets, higher than Ed's 2014 speech, and hugely more +ve #Twitter reaction: 76% cheers vs 22% for Ed #Lab15
This is Labour we're talking about here. They only sack winners
Have to say the PM looks knackered.
The thought of Jeremy Corbyn speaking at the UN, just makes me despair.
Personally I think we should dispense with elections at let the twittersphere decide.
"Well done, Roger.
Now actually read some of his tweets.
Or is your prejudice so overwhelming that you'd actually stoop to the level of not being disgusted by what he says?"
No I hadn't. I don't have the time to read every post on a thread like this. I'd come on to get a rough idea of what people made of Corbyn's speech but as so often the usual suspects made it an exercise in wading through treacle. Sorry to pick on a post by you (one of the least deserving) to vent my frustration. And no I don't think anyone should be gassed at Auschwitz.
(R)evolutionary spirit. Jezza, in all of his forms; Jezza for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Jezza, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
= So to my fellow MPs STFU.
"It's a trap!" - Admiral Ackbar, in The Return of the Jedi
And the fact it never quite materialises in the way that everyone says it's going to, suggests to me that there are some deeper structural issues that folk are sticking heads deep into sand about. (Electorally unpalatable realities, perhaps, about planning restrictions for instance?)
http://order-order.com/2015/09/29/lefty-commentariat-pan-corbyns-dire-speech/
Which is funny, of course, because the LibDem 2010 manifesto contained a "pledge" to reduce seats, IIRC.
'There are times when the law of libel are really really annoying"
Well tell the truth and you'll be safe.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34388544
Edited extra bit: cheers for the heads up, Mr. 1000.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/637020695478824960
Similar to the child benefit cut dog that never barked.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11899501/Jeremy-Corbyn-is-a-humble-man-and-this-speech-showed-he-has-much-to-be-humble-about.html
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/much-of-jeremy-corbyns-speech-today-was-written-for-ed-miliband-in-2011/
http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2015/09/labour-party
That said....
If your shtick is that you arent smooth, and a teflon smiling PR man selling shoddy washing powder, this kind of thing can work.
A humble ordinary man trying earnestly to do whats best. There are people this genuinely will work for.
There is a fair point to make that judging a politician on his capacity to give a speech is a bit like judging a plumber on the neatness of his handwriting on the invoice.
Can he sustain that kind of thing though? People dont mind you being rough round the edges if you polish up into a diamond.
Is he going to polish, or is this all we get?
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/29/jeremy-corbyn-twice-left-wing-ed-miliband/
The "the Tories have claimed the centre ground" meme is almost as baffling to me as the "Osborne is a wildly popular political colossus". The public see the Tories as extreme right-wing ideologues, but competent extreme right-wing ideologues.
But don't worry about such details
"About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well"
Absolute rubbish born of a primeval prejudice. Do you consider a majority of Egyptians to be so stupid or malevolent to vote overwhelmingly for the Muslim Brotherhood if they are as you describe? Your prejudices are as profound as anything I've read on these boards. I can only assume you have an unhealthy hatred of Muslims.
I’ve made my own position on one issue clear. And I believe I have a mandate from my election on it.
I don’t believe £100 billion on a new generation of nuclear weapons taking up a quarter of our defence budget is the right way forward.
I believe Britain should honour our obligations under the Non Proliferation Treaty and lead in making progress on international nuclear disarmament.
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/130135691169/speech-by-jeremy-corbyn-to-labour-party-annual
No, they're not.
This year of the 3 main parties, the Lib Dems were perceived as the most centrist, followed by Labour, with the Tories the furthest away from the centre. Yet their respective performances in the election were the exact reverse of how centrist they were perceived.
I think he will be seriously disappointed.
For those not familiar with it the case was resolved on the Scottish test of relevancy. This means that if you assume that everything the petitioners has said is true, can they win the case?
They have decided that the conduct complained of could fall within s106 of the 1983 Act. They now have to hear evidence as to whether it did in fact amount to a misrepresentation as a candidate or whether it was a misrepresentation by the Secretary of State. Not many good options there for Carmichael although one wins and one loses.
They then have to decide if the false statement was made for "the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at the election”?
Again, not great but probably ought to have been Carmichael's biggest hope. As the attack was really directed at Sturgeon was it a statement that was designed to affect the outcome of the election in Carmichael's seat?
The Court have addressed this in the first instance by concluding that a statement that "I didn't leak it" is a statement that goes to the standing of the candidate in the election he is standing in. That will be the most worrying part of the decision for Carmichael since it does not seem to be in dispute that he told a lie. It is also a very broad proposition which might make a number of elected politicians twitch. If every, eh, misstatement, can be brought back to your own election in this way the distinction that was previously thought to exist between public and election statements, at least during the election period, may not exist.
It is very difficult to see a positive way forward from here for Carmichael. He might be able to appeal this decision but I seem to recall that appeals under the 1983 Act are quite problematic. It seems that a proof is more likely and he really didn't want that.
After all, a living wage is given by a right wing Government,,, which shows how useless a left wing one was.
Bravo! I waded through a lot of treacle for something like that and they were pretty much my thoughts too. It's too early to tell which way the zeitgeist is going. He seemed different which I found refreshing
If that doesn't alarm you, then you should spend more time talking with your British Muslim friends. I assume you've got loads.
A lot of my Muslim friends are absolutely s**ting themselves about the "rise" of Salafism in Britain, even though it is a fringe movement here and well outside the Muslim mainstream, albeit its ideas are spreading quickly through the internet. And that includes my most conservative Muslim friends, the self-declared political Islamist type who are actively working to bring Britain under Shariah law (by converting the majority of the country to Islam, by convincing us all of how great the religion is and how it doesn't live up to all the nasty media stereotypes... they're not planning violent revolution, and the Salafists massively annoy them because it's antithetical to their message).
If one of the Middle East's most developed, educated and economically/strategically important countries is voting 28% for a Salafist party then the region is stuffed.
New Thread
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/much-of-jeremy-corbyns-speech-today-was-written-for-ed-miliband-in-2011/
Nice to see stuff not going to waste.
And in regard to its intellectual antecedents, it is probably true to say that these Islamist groupuscules do not properly represent Islam properly understood. That they are seen - wrongly - as the face of Islam is a great sadness for true Muslims as it is for the rest of us, me included.
I have said before on this site that I have never been to a Muslim country (Turkey and Kashmir) where I have not been made to feel welcome and I have never been in a mosque which has not had an air of often sublime peace about it.
Genuine Muslims must be in despair at how their religion has been abused and perverted.
I wish I could quote an article written by a famous Egyptian jouralist in the leading Egyptian newspaper shortly after the Beslan siege where he despairs at what some of the followers of the peaceful religion he and his family so loved had turned into. It is very sad and moving. I have kept a hard copy. If only there were more like him or more of them spoke up, there would be more hope in that part of the world.
One day when I find it I will quote it to you. You might learn something.
I have a few Muslim friends in England though plenty in Egypt Lebanon Turkey and throughout the Middle East where I have worked probably over a hundred times. For the most part I find them more intelligent and considered than the people here. Certainly more politically aware which is why it's no surprise that Corbyn's speech was run live in Iran and elsewhere in the region. Who here would even know the name of the Egyptian leader let alone the leader of the opposition?
If we continue to see them all as ragheads then we're making a very big mistake. In my experience they have the sort of intelligence that comes with very old civilizations and it's very rare to find the sweeping political generalizations that you get in this country and on here all the time.
Hesbollah are popular in Lebanon because they care for the schooling and social work in the areas they control. Likewise Hamas in Gaza. They are not considered corrupt or evil nor do their populations live in fear of them. I'm so tired of the prejudice here knowing it to be the complete opposite of the reality. Even the Lebaneses Christians accept the reason's for Hezbollah's popularity and their lack of corruption.
This Tube map shows the cost of renting a one-bedroom flat at every stop on the Underground