politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ex-LAB MP Nick Palmer says “Don’t underestimate the interes

Interesting

Which is bigger

1) The disconnect between the Lab MPs and Corbyn

2) The disconnect between Lab MPs and the members

3) The disconnect between Corbyn & Lab members and the wider electorate

"Mad fanatics are a rarity"

So Corbyn is rare?

One thing to be grateful for.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Which is bigger

1) The disconnect between the Lab MPs and Corbyn

2) The disconnect between Lab MPs and the members

3) The disconnect between Corbyn & Lab members and the wider electorate

The disconnect between Osborne and reality.

Being more royalist than the king, isn't always a good route to political success. Not all of the Corbynites were helping Labour in May, much to the dismay of those who went out knocking on doors.

Labour has painted itself into a corner, electing the holy fool, and they can't afford the luxury of opposition for another 9 years. They were pulverised in Scotland, the result in England was almost back to pre 1935 levels of support. Current polling would suggest that Corbyn would out perform in Miliband and Brown, taking Labour further out of sight and away from power.

Playing the long game, remind me how many elections the Tories needed to undo their catastrophic defeat of 1997. Labour can't wait 18 years.

dr_spyn said:

Being more royalist than the king, isn't always a good route to political success. Not all of the Corbynites were helping Labour in May, much to the dismay of those who went out knocking on doors.

Labour has painted itself into a corner, electing the holy fool, and they can't afford the luxury of opposition for another 9 years. They were pulverised in Scotland, the result in England was almost back to pre 1935 levels of support. Current polling would suggest that Corbyn would out perform in Miliband and Brown, taking Labour further out of sight and away from power.

Playing the long game, remind me how many elections the Tories needed to undo their catastrophic defeat of 1997. Labour can't wait 18 years.

The underlying problem they face is the more their core voters get in to the habit of not voting for them the easier it becomes to vote for someone else. Loyalty once lost is hard to regain.

This sentence at the end caught my attention:

Politicians, generally, play the long game. In Britain, it’s often the only game in town.

Politics is disastrously short term in the UK. The the ambition for the survival of an individual politician may be long term, in the eyes and actions of the politician.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Which is bigger

1) The disconnect between the Lab MPs and Corbyn

2) The disconnect between Lab MPs and the members

3) The disconnect between Corbyn & Lab members and the wider electorate

The disconnect between Osborne and reality.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the point I made yesterday.

When the prospect of Osborne no longer being Chancellor looked likely, the voters came out in force and gave Dave a majority to ensure Osborne remained Second Lord of the Treasury.

Vox populi, vox Dei

Podex et maximus

FPT (in response to @NickPalmer):

And what's coherent or attractive about what Corbyn is offering? Voting both for and against the same motion depending on the time of the month, abstaining on key matters like defence, having the party and leader take diametrically opposed positions, and being against the peace process in Northern Ireland.

All those things you don't find attractive are designed to help real people. Small steps, maybe. Worthy - yes - but telling that you seem to imply that being worthy is not attractive. But above all focused on what politicians can do to help people. It may not be much but it's a lot better than someone focused on not sullying his precious principles with the reality of life as the rest of us live it, even to the extent of not being able to say in clear words that of course he would take all necessary action to stop maniacs slaughtering people on the streets of Britain.

I mean how F**king hard would that have been?! And yet plain speaking principled Mr Corbyn could only come out with some tortuous paragraph about stopping maniacs getting hold of guns.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34907983

Turkish warplanes have shot down a Russian military aircraft on the border with Syria.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said the Su-24 was hit by air-to-air missiles fired by Turkish F-16s while it was flying over Syrian territory.

But Turkish military officials said the plane was engaged after being warned that it was violating Turkish airspace.

Mr Putin described the incident as a "stab in the back" committed by "accomplices of terrorists".

The crew ejected before the jet crashed in Latakia province, but Syrian rebels said at least one was dead.

TheScreamingEagles said:

@thehistoryguy: @almurray @chrisdeerin Alan Johnson is Cincinnatus, ploughing his rustic furrow, when a sweat-flecked messenger appears from distant Rome

For Morris Dancer, if you need me to explain the above tweet I'll happy educate you on it later on today.

Did the messenger say Hannibal's in town tell Julius to put his dress on and ride to Bythinia ?

This is why Ruth Davidson is awesome

@RuthDavidsonMSP: Thought I'd try to Crowdfund 5k in a month. We're on course to hit target in a week. Thanks to everyone who's helped
https://t.co/50R3QfdNtD

@RuthDavidsonMSP: To be clear - as political crowdfunders seem under the spotlight at the moment - I have no access to the cash myself. #probity

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Hence they lay in wait until Russia flew over a 'finger' of Turkish territory (you can see where it sticks out on the map), and planned to shoot the plane down. The Russians deny an incursion but I'm not sure I believe them. But on the other hand, looking at this slither of territory, the Russian plane would have been over it in seconds. There is no way that Turkey would have had time to scramble jets, let alone give the '10 warnings' it claims. Pilots landed over Syria too. It looks highly premediated.

Turkey was evidently to me I) taking revenge and II) hoping that Russia would retaliate and provoke a bigger conflict.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

@JamieRoss7: Natalie McGarry is deleting comments about Women For Independence from her Facebook page. https://t.co/i1NHoVrdCH

Vermin Supreme filed in New Hampshire yesterday for the presidential primary. He said in his administration, every American will receive a pony. He also plans to defeat ISIS by going back in time. Oh, and he wears a large boot on his head.

Nick, trust me, this guy is slightly less bonkers than Jeremy Corbyn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin_Supreme

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Hence they lay in wait until Russia flew over a 'finger' of Turkish territory (you can see where it sticks out on the map), and planned to shoot the plane down. The Russians deny an incursion but I'm not sure I believe them. But on the other hand, looking at this slither of territory, the Russian plane would have been over it in seconds. There is no way that Turkey would have had time to scramble jets, let alone give the '10 warnings' it claims. Pilots landed over Syria too. It looks highly premediated.

Turkey was evidently to me I) taking revenge and II) hoping that Russia would retaliate and provoke a bigger conflict.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

So we can expect Turkey to start shooting down US jets too ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34906011

Survation not happy with The Sun

Survation do not support or endorse the way in which this poll’s findings have been interpreted.
Neither the headline nor the body text of articles published were discussed with or approved by Survation prior to publication. For reference, our own coverage and analysis can be found here:

Furthermore, Survation categorically objects to the use of any of our findings by any group, as has happened elsewhere on social networks, to incite racial or religious tensions.

In Conclusion.

Our view remains that the most meaningful way to interpret the results of this polling is in the proper context alongside a comparable sample of non-muslims, as we did in March of this year using identical methodology and the same question wording.

This comparison shows that “sympathy with” (distinct from “support for”) those travelling to fight in Syria (among any group) exists as a limited, minority view among both muslims and non-muslims, particularly among young people of both groups.

Such comparative polling was reported in March in a balanced way by Sky News “Poll: Majority Have No Sympathy With Extremists” and was uncontroversial at the time, despite the fact that that poll found higher levels of "sympathy" as described.

This latest poll in fact shows a fall in sympathy with fighters travelling to Syria among Muslims since March, something which we would consider the most pertinent new finding of that particular question.

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Hence they lay in wait until Russia flew over a 'finger' of Turkish territory (you can see where it sticks out on the map), and planned to shoot the plane down. The Russians deny an incursion but I'm not sure I believe them. But on the other hand, looking at this slither of territory, the Russian plane would have been over it in seconds. There is no way that Turkey would have had time to scramble jets, let alone give the '10 warnings' it claims. Pilots landed over Syria too. It looks highly premediated.

Turkey was evidently to me I) taking revenge and II) hoping that Russia would retaliate and provoke a bigger conflict.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

Also from FPT:

Or alternatively, Russian aircraft should not have overflown Turkish territory.

Again. (If they did so this time, which is looking distinctly possible).

Especially when those aircraft are of the same type as those from another combatant nation.

You could easily argue the opposite: Putin wants to make Turkey the outsider, allowing his puppet Assad to mop up the areas of the country Putin wants ...

Josias "Erdogan" Jessop

@joepike: .@NicolaSturgeon says she needs more information before taking action re Natalie McGarry MP.

@alexmassie: The thing you have to remember about the Corbynites is that they hate the Labour party. https://t.co/t5H0U5YnNN

It's a bold attempt from Mr Palmer to try and draw universal conclusions from the particular of the Labour Party's current travails, but it's ultimately unsuccessful. Trying to ask "How do Political Parties change" cannot distract from the uniqueness of the position that Labour now finds itself in.

Political Parties have always changed their policies over time, often over a relatively short timescale and often successfully, with no surprise or disconnect from the public. Sometimes small groups of MPs and members sometimes accept that they're out of step with their party's mainstream on a particular issue but are in line with general principles enough that it is inconceivable that they could be anywhere else. Labour's trouble is twofold. A small group of very left wing Labour MPs but apparently a larger number of members increasingly began to feel during the Blair/Brown years that the general principles of the Party had changed and that they weren't sure that they did agree any more - and then they got elected to the Leadership.

Ms Cyclefree,

I think it was a clever move by Ms Kuenssberg to ask such a daft question as "if the worst came to the worst, would you authorise a shoot to kill policy by the police?" There's only one possible answer to that - and that's why its a daft question.

Only to Jezza would it be a difficult question and obviously, she'd taken that into account. And she hit the jackpot. He could have said told her it was a silly question ... "Of course, there are circumstances where that was allowable but .." Then he could have gone on to go on to urge caution.

She left a gigantic elephant trap for him and he blundered in. She must think he's the biggest idiot she's ever interviewed, And she's right.

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Hence they lay in wait until Russia flew over a 'finger' of Turkish territory (you can see where it sticks out on the map), and planned to shoot the plane down. The Russians deny an incursion but I'm not sure I believe them. But on the other hand, looking at this slither of territory, the Russian plane would have been over it in seconds. There is no way that Turkey would have had time to scramble jets, let alone give the '10 warnings' it claims. Pilots landed over Syria too. It looks highly premediated.

Turkey was evidently to me I) taking revenge and II) hoping that Russia would retaliate and provoke a bigger conflict.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

Also from FPT:

Or alternatively, Russian aircraft should not have overflown Turkish territory.

Again. (If they did so this time, which is looking distinctly possible).

Especially when those aircraft are of the same type as those from another combatant nation.

You could easily argue the opposite: Putin wants to make Turkey the outsider, allowing his puppet Assad to mop up the areas of the country Putin wants ...

I'd have thought invading Turkey would be the last thing on Assad's mind, seeing as he doesn't even have control of Raqqa; Aleppo, and is fighting to keep control of Damascus.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CD13 said:

Ms Cyclefree,

I think it was a clever move by Ms Kuenssberg to ask such a daft question as "if the worst came to the worst, would you authorise a shoot to kill policy by the police?" There's only one possible answer to that - and that's why its a daft question.

Only to Jezza would it be a difficult question and obviously, she'd taken that into account. And she hit the jackpot. He could have said told her it was a silly question ... "Of course, there are circumstances where that was allowable but .." Then he could have gone on to go on to urge caution.

She left a gigantic elephant trap for him and he blundered in. She must think he's the biggest idiot she's ever interviewed, And she's right.

He is in a weird way the living, breathing, talking, embodiment of the classic critical example of what is wrong with the grammar school system, which having been through himself, he despises as unfair and ineffective.

I went to Grammar School too, you know!

And I presume you did a bit better than getting 2 E's in your A-Levels :-) Not sure what his excuse was after going to one of the best non-fee paying schools in the country, being thick is probably the answer.

Scott_P said:

@alexmassie: The thing you have to remember about the Corbynites is that they hate the Labour party. https://t.co/t5H0U5YnNN

The way I see it, the Labour Party was founded by Socialists. Socialists got their party back on September 12th.

But - it doesn't necessarily mean that's a good thing!

dr_spyn said:

Being more royalist than the king, isn't always a good route to political success. Not all of the Corbynites were helping Labour in May, much to the dismay of those who went out knocking on doors.

Labour has painted itself into a corner, electing the holy fool, and they can't afford the luxury of opposition for another 9 years. They were pulverised in Scotland, the result in England was almost back to pre 1935 levels of support. Current polling would suggest that Corbyn would out perform in Miliband and Brown, taking Labour further out of sight and away from power.

Playing the long game, remind me how many elections the Tories needed to undo their catastrophic defeat of 1997. Labour can't wait 18 years.

Playing the speculation game and assuming labour remain moribund in Scotland and were to lose badly in England and Wales, then even this would not necessarily translate into a defeat for corbynism.
A corbynist party with even as low as 150 seats would be a triumph given its lunatic policies. Why would Corbyn resign even then? Why would even age cause him to resign Thank's to him his clique have their hands on labour power. With any luck for them an election defeat would sweep away the moderates, and that's before boundary changes and deselections.
He would stay until a replacement version of him can be promoted forward for his cultist followers to elect.
How could this cult collapse? Money. Or rather lack of it. And only if serious money could be raised d to oppose it could be expect an alternative.

CD13 said:

Ms Cyclefree,

I think it was a clever move by Ms Kuenssberg to ask such a daft question as "if the worst came to the worst, would you authorise a shoot to kill policy by the police?" There's only one possible answer to that - and that's why its a daft question.

Only to Jezza would it be a difficult question and obviously, she'd taken that into account. And she hit the jackpot. He could have said told her it was a silly question ... "Of course, there are circumstances where that was allowable but .." Then he could have gone on to go on to urge caution.

She left a gigantic elephant trap for him and he blundered in. She must think he's the biggest idiot she's ever interviewed, And she's right.

Sometimes asking the obvious question is precisely what is needed. You may think that the answer is obvious. And that's why people don't ask the obvious question. Because they assume they will get the obvious answer and so there's no point.

But it's amazing how often you don't get the obvious answer and how revealing the answers you do get are.

Alanbrooke said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Hence they lay in wait until Russia flew over a 'finger' of Turkish territory (you can see where it sticks out on the map), and planned to shoot the plane down. The Russians deny an incursion but I'm not sure I believe them. But on the other hand, looking at this slither of territory, the Russian plane would have been over it in seconds. There is no way that Turkey would have had time to scramble jets, let alone give the '10 warnings' it claims. Pilots landed over Syria too. It looks highly premediated.

Turkey was evidently to me I) taking revenge and II) hoping that Russia would retaliate and provoke a bigger conflict.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

So we can expect Turkey to start shooting down US jets too ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34906011

I'd take that with a pinch of salt - the fact that PBS had to illustrate its news peice on the US blowing up ISIS oil infrastructure with footage of Russian bombers doing so doesn't inspire confidence: https://www.rt.com/usa/323070-pbs-isis-video-russian/

It also begs the question of why they were allowing such activities to continue unhindered for the past 13 months.

Pulpstar said:

I'd have thought invading Turkey would be the last thing on Assad's mind, seeing as he doesn't even have control of Raqqa; Aleppo, and is fighting to keep control of Damascus.

Of course Assad doesn't want to 'invade' Turkey; I was talking about the parts of Syria.

Remember, two Syrian aircraft were shot down in previous years for going over the Turkish border.

Why would Turkey shoot them down? Because the last thing they want are unknown foreign combat planes flying out of a war zone into their country. Not only does it break their sovereignty, as they're warplanes, they could bomb anywhere, whether on purpose or accidentally (if they're so off course as to overfly the wrong country, their bomb aiming might be similarly askew).

What do you expect Turkey to do in that situation?

(This all presupposes that the plane did overfly Turkey).

Graeme Demianyk ‏@GraemeDemianyk 1m1 minute ago
Labour's @JWoodcockMP really going for it with the SNP on Trident: "I would be happy to take on every one of you robots."

Luckyguy1983 said:

Alanbrooke said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT...

Luckyguy1983 said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

This could get entertaining.....Putin accuses Turkey of supporting ISIS - yet the Russian jet was shot down in an area not controlled by ISIS......

Crickey, that them fighting words.

Edit: Did he says ISIS or as quoted by BBC, terrorists?

According to Russia Today (who I'd regard as reliable on the words of Putin, if not much else):

IS now not only receives revenue from the smuggling of oil, but also has the protection of a nation’s military, Putin said. This may explain why the terrorist group is so bold in taking acts of terrorism across the world,

https://www.rt.com/news/323240-russia-turkey-warplane-downed/

Edit - but the jet was shot down in an area not controlled by IS.....

Yes - I think the two things are unrelated. I think Putin is just taking the chance to strongly criticise Turkey's actions supporting ISIS, of which there is now overwhelming evidence.

My reading of the story is that Turkey has been extremely angered at Russia bombing the 'Turkmen' anti-Assad rebels in the area concerned. These people are of Turkish origin.

Oh, further to this, I've now read Russia has been making massive attacks on ISIS' Oil operation recently: https://www.rt.com/news/323065-syria-airstrikes-terrorists-russia/

So Putin's implication would appear to be this was a revenge attack for putting a stop to Turkey's cut price oil racket.

So we can expect Turkey to start shooting down US jets too ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34906011

I'd take that with a pinch of salt - the fact that PBS had to illustrate its news peice on the US blowing up ISIS oil infrastructure with footage of Russian bombers doing so doesn't inspire confidence: https://www.rt.com/usa/323070-pbs-isis-video-russian/

It also begs the question of why they were allowing such activities to continue unhindered for the past 13 months.

So you're saying they didn't attack the tankers then ?

surbiton said:

Do you have proof that the Russian aircraft overflew Turkish territory or are you accepting Erdogan's word ? If a different Russian aircraft overflew does not mean this one should be shot down.

I've said all along *if* it happened.

But remember that the Russians have apologised in the recent months for overflying Turkey, including planes allegedly locking on to Turkish planes:

http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151005/1028036764/russia-turkey-airspace-border-violation.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/nato-chief-jens-stoltenberg-russia-turkish-airspace-violations-syria

Therefore there is precedent. Also, at this early stage the Turkish flight plan seems more persuasive than the Russian picture released. Both might be accurate (they need not be inconsistent), or one or both faked or inaccurate.

As for why shoot it down: see my previous post. The last thing a country wants is an unknown foreign aircraft flying over your border without permission from a war zone.

This was bound to happen: some on here (including me) have been warning about it for ages. There was a scare a few weeks ago that turned out to be just a rumour.

From last thread

NickPalmer said:

HopiSen said:

This is a deceptively attractive argument, but it's self-justification. The other candidates at the leadership election all put forward such policies - whether it was Liz on early years and decentralisation, or Yvette on Infrastructure/investment/childcare or Andy on supporting small business and improving opportunities for those who didn't go to university.

It's just that Corbyn supporters preferred what he was offering, and derided the alternatives as empty.

To argue that 'Centrists' need to offer members such policies just after having rejected them in favour of something more radical is merely refusing to take responsibility for your own choices.

Decentralisation, infrastructure, small business- they're all worthy things, but they don't make a coherent, attractive project. Sorry - they just don't!

That's a shame, because each of them featured prominently in Corbyn's speech on what would be his political agenda as leader at the weekend. Sorry to hear you have been disillusioned so rapidly.

MikeSmithson said:

TGOHF said:

A rather ironic thread.

An ex MP who slavishly and sycophantically supported 2 dreadful Labour leaders whose unelectability resulted in candidates like him losing 2 back to back elections tells us that Labour MPs may be wise to slavishly and sycophantically support an even worse leader.

What am I missing ?

What a load of rubbish. Blair shares with Maggie the honour of being the most successful main party leaders ever. They both fought 3 elections as leader and both won working majorities.

Nick's failure to continue as an MP followed the booting out of Blair.

Please get basic facts right.

I think TGOHF meant Brown and Miliband, no?

LondonBob said:

"Ιf Greece had downed every Turkish aircraft for THAT level of airspace violation, today Turkey would only fly kites."

A Greek's response to Turkey's claim of overflight of Turkish airspace.

Time to suspend NATO membership of Turkey? If we had done that before then the Turks would likely not have done this.

Are you talking about the disputed Aegean areas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegean_dispute#Turkish_Military_overflights

If so, it it easy to see the problems with your argument, and also why it is a very different matter. Even then accidents do occur, as in 2006.

But that's very different from an unknown plane entering an undisputed area of a country from an active, hot war zone.

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

FrancisUrquhart said:

CD13 said:

Ms Cyclefree,

I think it was a clever move by Ms Kuenssberg to ask such a daft question as "if the worst came to the worst, would you authorise a shoot to kill policy by the police?" There's only one possible answer to that - and that's why its a daft question.

Only to Jezza would it be a difficult question and obviously, she'd taken that into account. And she hit the jackpot. He could have said told her it was a silly question ... "Of course, there are circumstances where that was allowable but .." Then he could have gone on to go on to urge caution.

She left a gigantic elephant trap for him and he blundered in. She must think he's the biggest idiot she's ever interviewed, And she's right.

He is in a weird way the living, breathing, talking, embodiment of the classic critical example of what is wrong with the grammar school system, which having been through himself, he despises as unfair and ineffective.

Some poor kid, who was much brighter than him, more than likely missed out on a place at the same school.

Did he not get there via the 11 plus? Or was it in effect a private fee paying school?
My suggestion is he is one of those people whose notions arose without being taught indeed learning could be problematic if it conflicted with preconceptions.
I see he only lasted one year at polytechnic and that was doing trade union studies. It seems to me he does not like to 'think' too much.
It's a shame he seems to have given up wearing his Lenin cap

Anorak said:

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

I am glad you think - because the author of that 'article' clearly doesn't know how to engage their brain to form coherent thoughts.

It amazes me how entitled some people think they are.

(This comment does not come with a trigger warning - if you are feeling oppressed by it, please take to Tumblr and complain loudly to your 2 followers there)

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

I am glad you think - because the author of that 'article' clearly doesn't know how to engage their brain to form coherent thoughts.

It amazes me how entitled some people think they are.

(This comment does not come with a trigger warning - if you are feeling oppressed by it, please take to Tumblr and complain loudly to your 2 followers there)

Reminds me of the scene in 'Holy Grail' where Arthur inadvertently 'oppresses' a peasant

Also: 'Trigger Warnings' are such a piece of eye-roll-tastic bullshit from the professionally offended. Tossers, all.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

surbiton said:

Do you have proof that the Russian aircraft overflew Turkish territory or are you accepting Erdogan's word ? If a different Russian aircraft overflew does not mean this one should be shot down.

I've said all along *if* it happened.

But remember that the Russians have apologised in the recent months for overflying Turkey, including planes allegedly locking on to Turkish planes:

http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151005/1028036764/russia-turkey-airspace-border-violation.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/nato-chief-jens-stoltenberg-russia-turkish-airspace-violations-syria

Therefore there is precedent. Also, at this early stage the Turkish flight plan seems more persuasive than the Russian picture released. Both might be accurate (they need not be inconsistent), or one or both faked or inaccurate.

As for why shoot it down: see my previous post. The last thing a country wants is an unknown foreign aircraft flying over your border without permission from a war zone.

This was bound to happen: some on here (including me) have been warning about it for ages. There was a scare a few weeks ago that turned out to be just a rumour.

The Turkish flight path map shows an incursion over a sticky out part of Turkey that with the Russian plane flying at speed, it would have taken approximately 15 seconds to cross.

Syria has claimed Hatay Province since 1938.

Anorak said:

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

I am glad you think - because the author of that 'article' clearly doesn't know how to engage their brain to form coherent thoughts.

It amazes me how entitled some people think they are.

(This comment does not come with a trigger warning - if you are feeling oppressed by it, please take to Tumblr and complain loudly to your 2 followers there)

Reminds me of the scene in 'Holy Grail' where Arthur inadvertently 'oppresses' a peasant

Also: 'Trigger Warnings' are such a piece of eye-roll-tastic bullshit from the professionally offended. Tossers, all.

*finger-clicks approval* (though am happy to use jazz hands if that is less triggering for you)

JosiasJessop said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

osias "Erdogan" Jessop

Sunil "Wrong" Prasannan

BTW, I dislike Erdogan. I shouldn't really need to say that, but the more frenetic on here need to be reminded occasionally ...

Note: the subject Josias "Erdogan" Jessop responds to the stimulus as predicted!

TheScreamingEagles said:

Which is bigger

1) The disconnect between the Lab MPs and Corbyn

2) The disconnect between Lab MPs and the members

3) The disconnect between Corbyn & Lab members and the wider electorate

3

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

I am glad you think - because the author of that 'article' clearly doesn't know how to engage their brain to form coherent thoughts.

It amazes me how entitled some people think they are.

(This comment does not come with a trigger warning - if you are feeling oppressed by it, please take to Tumblr and complain loudly to your 2 followers there)

Reminds me of the scene in 'Holy Grail' where Arthur inadvertently 'oppresses' a peasant

Also: 'Trigger Warnings' are such a piece of eye-roll-tastic bullshit from the professionally offended. Tossers, all.

*finger-clicks approval* (though am happy to use jazz hands if that is less triggering for you)

Stop flaunting your hand-owning privilege! Don't you realise some of us have to type with our toes?!?

Finger clicking is so Addams Family

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

oxfordsimon said:

Anorak said:

AndyJS said:

O/T:

The latest PC madness — yoga is racist and a form of "cultural appropriation"

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/this-obsession-with-cultural-appropriation-is-leading-us-down-a-very-dark-path/

FFS. That article linked to this insanity. It is not a parody: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/11/foodie-without-appropriation/

When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about.

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

So, next time you have a Lamb Biryani you should remember that you are racist scum continuing the vile oppression of Indians, Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis. I think.

I am glad you think - because the author of that 'article' clearly doesn't know how to engage their brain to form coherent thoughts.

It amazes me how entitled some people think they are.

(This comment does not come with a trigger warning - if you are feeling oppressed by it, please take to Tumblr and complain loudly to your 2 followers there)

Reminds me of the scene in 'Holy Grail' where Arthur inadvertently 'oppresses' a peasant

Also: 'Trigger Warnings' are such a piece of eye-roll-tastic bullshit from the professionally offended. Tossers, all.

*finger-clicks approval* (though am happy to use jazz hands if that is less triggering for you)

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Scott_P said:

@alexmassie: The thing you have to remember about the Corbynites is that they hate the Labour party. https://t.co/t5H0U5YnNN

The way I see it, the Labour Party was founded by Socialists. Socialists got their party back on September 12th.

But - it doesn't necessarily mean that's a good thing!

Exactly. Tell Hardie, Clynes, Lansbury, Arthur Henderson and the like that what Corbyn stands for isn't true to the Labour Party.

You never know. Maybe those middle class Liberals that migrated to and then took over the Labour Party, after their own party was shattered might go back home now.