On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Yes. Governments are something most voters put up with. Brexit is about personal identity - much much stronger as a motivator. If it truly becomes the major faultline in U.K. politics then the parties will adjust their lines to fit. Labour move to remain, Tories to leave would be my guess
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
Have you thought that they are just being polite to you, rather than admit Corbyn and his entourage are unacceptable to so many
..and what they say now bears no reflection on what they will say post whatever happens on D Day.. NP's canvassing is a bit like those polls you see on the internet ….
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
Soubry's playing to the gallery there. There's no leadership being shown in letting an ISIS traitor who chose to leave this country back into it. She made her choice, she can live with the consequence and the gallery of right-on people who care more about a traitor than the millions who have suffered due to her twisted ideology are showing no leadership.
What gallery? The gallery is overwhelmingly opposed to Soubry's view here. The majority of the public, in their infinite wisdom, appear to agree with you. They are more forgiving of, say, Nigel Farage's apparent youthful support of ideologies that caused suffering to millions ( http://i.imgur.com/kwjIik9.jpg ) than this individual's. I cannot for the life of me think why.
Farage is a prat I have no time for, like Soubry. Two sides of the same coin.
And as I said, the gallery for Soubry is not the public as a whole. It is a subset, but it is still a gallery - and there are many members of it posting here.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
The point is, what were they expected to do instead? Unless you have a reasonable alternative course of action, your criticism isn't valid. It's ridiculous to say 'they should do something' and then say 'I don't know' when asked 'what, exactly?'
Perhaps they should have spotted them. Perhaps they should have tried to do something. But this is ultimately about a 15-year old. She was old enough to know what she was doing. Unfortunately she made a very bad choice. Just as there is a limit to what can be done about a 15 year old boy who joins a gang, so there is a limit to what can be done here.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
Have you thought that they are just being polite to you, rather than admit Corbyn and his entourage are unacceptable to so many
Soubry's playing to the gallery there. There's no leadership being shown in letting an ISIS traitor who chose to leave this country back into it. She made her choice, she can live with the consequence and the gallery of right-on people who care more about a traitor than the millions who have suffered due to her twisted ideology are showing no leadership.
What gallery? The gallery is overwhelmingly opposed to Soubry's view here. The majority of the public, in their infinite wisdom, appear to agree with you. They are more forgiving of, say, Nigel Farage's apparent youthful support of ideologies that caused suffering to millions ( http://i.imgur.com/kwjIik9.jpg ) than this individual's. I cannot for the life of me think why.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Without question. And that is why Labour should be very worried about its 2017 Remain demographic. As ever, Scotland is the canary in the mine on this.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Without question. And that is why Labour should be very worried about its 2017 Remain demographic. As ever, Scotland is the canary in the mine on this.
Wales might be an interesting one to watch. The party has now gone full Corbynista but the electorate hasn't. Their advantage up to now has been that Plaid and the Tories split the opposition vote about evenly and appeal to very different constituencies that prevent any sort of unified opposition emerging.
That said, Labour are now so tired and openly corrupt that I think a collapse when it comes will come very suddenly and dramatically - Scotland 2012-15 on speed.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
Oh, that came out wrong, didn't it?
My goodness sir, you have an awesomely filthy mind.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against Muslims and not brown Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Without question. And that is why Labour should be very worried about its 2017 Remain demographic. As ever, Scotland is the canary in the mine on this.
Wales might be an interesting one to watch. The party has now gone full Corbynista but the electorate hasn't. Their advantage up to now has been that Plaid and the Tories split the opposition vote about evenly and appeal to very different constituencies that prevent any sort of unified opposition emerging.
That said, Labour are now so tired and openly corrupt that I think a collapse when it comes will come very suddenly and dramatically - Scotland 2012-15 on speed.
Twice, the Conservatives have almost broken through in Wales, without managing to (1979-83, and 2015-17).
Soubry's playing to the gallery there. There's no leadership being shown in letting an ISIS traitor who chose to leave this country back into it. She made her choice, she can live with the consequence and the gallery of right-on people who care more about a traitor than the millions who have suffered due to her twisted ideology are showing no leadership.
In fairness, she's not (and nobody will accuse me of being a fan of hers). The gallery, as measured by polling, is overwhelmingly in favour of the Government's policy on this - though as I've said I think opinion has probably shifted somewhat since the last polling a few weeks ago.
There's more than one gallery here. Her gallery isn't the public, she doesn't care what they want as has been shown by her response to the public's vote on Brexit. She's playing to the gallery of bleeding hearts of which there are many on this thread who want her brought back.
I must be a bleeding heart.
The girl should be tried, if not in Syria, then here. Stripping her of citizenship is repressive. As Ken Clarke pointed out in the HoC, he managed to go a whole stint as Home Secretary without taking anyone’s citizenship away.
The only person playing to the gallery is “The Saj”, which seems to be his main MO. He is a marginally more competent Gavin Williamson.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against IS members and not Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against Muslims and not brown Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
You think "Muslims" = "joined IS"?
I think you may have just slandered about 2 billion people there. That's very offensive hate speech you're writing.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against Muslims and not brown Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
I think that IS' theatrical cruelty is what alienates people from her. If an organisation like Khmer Rouge existed today, no doubt some British people would go out to join them, and get the same response.
Thinking about the last election, the curious aspect was that Labour was able to win Leave seats like Peterborough despite Brexit (on small swings) and strong Remain seats like Canterbury (on huge swings).
I wonder whether there was a tendency for Leave voters to discount Brexit when voting because they already had what they wanted (or thought they did) whereas for Remain voters it felt more urgent to vote on Brexit lines (and for whatever reason Labour was perceived to be the best Remain option).
This means that if the next election is fought in an atmosphere of Brexit being lost, or in real peril, then one might expect Leave voters to be more motivated to vote on Brexit lines than Remain voters. This suggests that an election will be bad for whichever side temporarily has the upper hand. If MPs are aware of this then it makes any election exceptionally unlikely, but if one does happen it is likely to increase political instability rather than decrease it - and this is likely to be the case until a compromise can be reached that is acceptable to both sides. Is that possible within the next decade? I have my doubts.
The 2017 GE wasn't all about Brexit.
The reason why Labour gained Canterbury (which was only a marginal Remain constituency) was because of Labour's student fees promises.
It would be interesting to correlate the 2017 results by number of students in each constituency.
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
It does annoy me though.
Like many on this board I am quite comfortable, but like many on this board I started with nothing.
It boils my piss that someone who appears to have been born a multi-millionaire runs around with “please no bourgeoisie” on her Facebook profile while advocating ruination on the wealth makers.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against IS members and not Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
Corrected it for you!
I don't have any issue with cracking down on IS, nor do I defend Ms Begum'. I am a strong believer in people taking responsibility for their actions. My issue is with double standards and treating Begum harshly because she is a particular type of person while not applying the same sanctions on others, who have done much worse things, because at some level they are "our kind of people".
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
There seems to be a desire among some to give 16 year olds the vote. Society is confused.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Without question. And that is why Labour should be very worried about its 2017 Remain demographic. As ever, Scotland is the canary in the mine on this.
Wales might be an interesting one to watch. The party has now gone full Corbynista but the electorate hasn't. Their advantage up to now has been that Plaid and the Tories split the opposition vote about evenly and appeal to very different constituencies that prevent any sort of unified opposition emerging.
That said, Labour are now so tired and openly corrupt that I think a collapse when it comes will come very suddenly and dramatically - Scotland 2012-15 on speed.
Twice, the Conservatives have almost broken through in Wales, without managing to (1979-83, and 2015-17).
Considering how dominant the public sector is in Wales, the heavy industrial heritage and the Welsh language aspect the Conservatives already do pretty well there.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against IS members and not Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
Corrected it for you!
I don't have any issue with cracking down on IS, nor do I defend Ms Begum'. I am a strong believer in people taking responsibility for their actions. My issue is with double standards and treating Begum harshly because she is a particular type of person while not applying the same sanctions on others, who have done much worse things, because at some level they are "our kind of people".
And in your eyes the type of person who "joins IS" is "Muslims". Is that what you're saying?
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
It does annoy me though.
Like many on this board I am quite comfortable, but like many on this board I started with nothing.
It boils my piss that someone who appears to have been born a multi-millionaire runs around with “please no bourgeoisie” on her Facebook profile while advocating ruination on the wealth makers.
It's a very ancient attitude. Plenty of people who inherited great wealth despised "trade."
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
The point is, what were they expected to do instead? Unless you have a reasonable alternative course of action, your criticism isn't valid. It's ridiculous to say 'they should do something' and then say 'I don't know' when asked 'what, exactly?'
Perhaps they should have spotted them. Perhaps they should have tried to do something. But this is ultimately about a 15-year old. She was old enough to know what she was doing. Unfortunately she made a very bad choice. Just as there is a limit to what can be done about a 15 year old boy who joins a gang, so there is a limit to what can be done here.
You’re a teacher, I believe. In loco parentis.
I can only be thankful my children do not attend your school.
TIG taking net votes from Labour, Tories and LDs more or less equally. Makes them into power brokers if so, despite their relatively low total vote share. Party X can't say, we can ignore them, they are damaging Party Y instead.
Soubry's playing to the gallery there. There's no leadership being shown in letting an ISIS traitor who chose to leave this country back into it. She made her choice, she can live with the consequence and the gallery of right-on people who care more about a traitor than the millions who have suffered due to her twisted ideology are showing no leadership.
In fairness, she's not (and nobody will accuse me of being a fan of hers). The gallery, as measured by polling, is overwhelmingly in favour of the Government's policy on this - though as I've said I think opinion has probably shifted somewhat since the last polling a few weeks ago.
There's more than one gallery here. Her gallery isn't the public, she doesn't care what they want as has been shown by her response to the public's vote on Brexit. She's playing to the gallery of bleeding hearts of which there are many on this thread who want her brought back.
I must be a bleeding heart.
The girl should be tried, if not in Syria, then here. Stripping her of citizenship is repressive. As Ken Clarke pointed out in the HoC, he managed to go a whole stint as Home Secretary without taking anyone’s citizenship away.
The only person playing to the gallery is “The Saj”, which seems to be his main MO. He is a marginally more competent Gavin Williamson.
Ken Clarke wasn't facing ISIS. It's apples and oranges.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Why should they agree?
The EU represented the status quo, the campaigns different types of change. If instead of an election we had ballot saying "do you want to Remain with a Conservative government or Leave having a Conservative government" do you think all opposition parties should agree on what not having a Conservative government means anymore?
So long as we leave properly and are not bound forever by what this government agrees it frankly doesn't matter what type of Brexit we have very much. If we don't like it, we change the government and get a new type.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against IS members and not Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
Corrected it for you!
I don't have any issue with cracking down on IS, nor do I defend Ms Begum'. I am a strong believer in people taking responsibility for their actions. My issue is with double standards and treating Begum harshly because she is a particular type of person while not applying the same sanctions on others, who have done much worse things, because at some level they are "our kind of people".
And in your eyes the type of person who "joins IS" is "Muslims". Is that what you're saying?
No I am not saying that. If you really want to find out what I'm saying, you can read it.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
The security services are supposed to be looking for people trying to join ISIS. In this case, three unaccompanied minors flying on (or simply buying tickets for) a known route to ISIS should have raised an official eyebrow.
Really good piece Alastair. To be honest I had either forgotten or not fully appreciated how close May came to a majority. 19 additional seats would have made the course of this Parliament very different.
What is also interesting is what a large part Scotland will play at the next election. Quite a large number of targets and awkward defences there.
Corbyn was in Dundee on Friday. I missed him but it seemed an interesting choice. Both of the Dundee seats are wildly out of reach now and Fife, once a Labour stronghold, is not much better. Scottish Labour are not in a good place but none of the Scottish parties are.
The SNP, and Nicola in particular, are looking tired and slightly tarnished. The ongoing issues with Salmond are a major distraction and the government has very little to show. The ongoing agonies of Brexit are also a major problem. Anyone claiming that leaving the UK would be easy are just going to be laughed at.
The Tories have missed Ruth during her absence. Indeed it has vividly shown once again both how fortunate they are to have her and how shallow the talent pool is. She was and is a staunch remainer so maternity leave during the current shambles has been a useful time out for her. It will be interesting to see how her position evolves in the now unlikely event that the deal goes through.
The Lib Dems continue to struggle to be heard but certainly have aspirations to do better, particularly in Edinburgh. A Scottish leader might make a difference.
Overall Scotland looks pretty messy to me. There are lots of potential losers but the winners are harder to spot.
However David, one thing is clear , there is little choice other than the SNP, good or bad, the other parties are just sh***. Unbelievable dross, liars and charlatans. Hard to see anyone other than SNP getting more seats.
I don't think the UK state and government have responsibility for the death of Shamima Begum's baby. They do however have the obligation, and we owe to ourselves to do so, to treat people equitably, even bad people. White people can go abroad can murder, rape and commit the most bestial paedophilia, crimes that are surely worse than what Begum's appears to done, and no-one stops to think, better not let them back in, let's see if we can find an Irish grandfather so we can toss them across the border at Dundalk.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment.
Ok so we are just discriminating against IS members and not Muslims. I don't think that changes my point.
Corrected it for you!
I don't have any issue with cracking down on IS, nor do I defend Ms Begum'. I am a strong believer in people taking responsibility for their actions. My issue is with double standards and treating Begum harshly because she is a particular type of person while not applying the same sanctions on others, who have done much worse things, because at some level they are "our kind of people".
And in your eyes the type of person who "joins IS" is "Muslims". Is that what you're saying?
No I am not saying that. If you really want to find out what I'm saying, you can read it.
I did read it.
@Sean_F "I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment." @FF43 "Ok so we are just discriminating against Muslims and not brown Muslims. "
Sean said IS he didn't say Muslims. The key variable for Sean was "joined IS" and you respond with "Muslims". Seems to me you're saying "joined IS" and "Muslims" are interchangeable which is vile hate speech of the sort Tommy Robinson could use not something I'd expect from you.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
I don’t have a problem with that argument - but the state nonetheless retains some responsibility for its citizens, and (more saliently from the point of view of public opinion) their young offspring. Deprivation of citizenship is a questionable act, morally and legally, with potentially fatal consequences for those who had no part in the original offence.
The State she chose was the Caliphate. When the decision to join that brigade of barbaric bastards was shown to have been a disastrously bad move - a move she is still unapologetic about - the UK is supposed to provide a safety net?
They should be left to rot out there, amazing how they have suddenly changed their minds. Why anybody would waste any breath even discussing them getting back in amazes me. This country is full of liberal snowflake do-gooders.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Not a single Leaver of any stature has yet advocated a compromise (as opposed to grudgingly accept one) unless it mysteriously was on precisely the terms that they had always sought. All Leavers have chosen an extremist path of purism.
Even grudgingly accepted compromises are only grudgingly accepted for now so that the true path can be pursued later. The idea of a lasting settlement is incomprehensible to them.
What we are seeing here is the equivalent of non-conformist breakaway sects, as each Leaver seeks his own path to enlightenment through his own church.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
The security services are supposed to be looking for people trying to join ISIS. In this case, three unaccompanied minors flying on (or simply buying tickets for) a known route to ISIS should have raised an official eyebrow.
Its a needle in a needlestack. I'm sure there is a mountain of things that the security services can flag or are looking at. Minors who weren't on their radar flying is probably not the highest one on their radar.
Responsibility lies with the people that took action not the security services who won't catch everything unless you want to live under an oppressive SS regime.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know. Confiscate their passports? Give them a stiff talking to and return them home? That is not really the point.
The worrying part is that the security services did not seem to have noticed them leave. Why is MI5 not monitoring ticket sales, let alone the airport?
They are crap is the simple answer, a total waste of money on a bunch of no-marks who would struggle to catch the cold.
Really good piece Alastair. To be honest I had either forgotten or not fully appreciated how close May came to a majority. 19 additional seats would have made the course of this Parliament very different.
What is also interesting is what a large part Scotland will play at the next election. Quite a large number of targets and awkward defences there.
Corbyn was in Dundee on Friday. I missed him but it seemed an interesting choice. Both of the Dundee seats are wildly out of reach now and Fife, once a Labour stronghold, is not much better. Scottish Labour are not in a good place but none of the Scottish parties are.
The SNP, and Nicola in particular, are looking tired and slightly tarnished. The ongoing issues with Salmond are a major distraction and the government has very little to show. The ongoing agonies of Brexit are also a major problem. Anyone claiming that leaving the UK would be easy are just going to be laughed at.
The Tories have missed Ruth during her absence. Indeed it has vividly shown once again both how fortunate they are to have her and how shallow the talent pool is. She was and is a staunch remainer so maternity leave during the current shambles has been a useful time out for her. It will be interesting to see how her position evolves in the now unlikely event that the deal goes through.
The Lib Dems continue to struggle to be heard but certainly have aspirations to do better, particularly in Edinburgh. A Scottish leader might make a difference.
Overall Scotland looks pretty messy to me. There are lots of potential losers but the winners are harder to spot.
However David, one thing is clear , there is little choice other than the SNP, good or bad, the other parties are just sh***. Unbelievable dross, liars and charlatans. Hard to see anyone other than SNP getting more seats.
Whereas the SNP are merely liars and charlatans, they're relatively competent ones and not dross.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
The point is, what were they expected to do instead? Unless you have a reasonable alternative course of action, your criticism isn't valid. It's ridiculous to say 'they should do something' and then say 'I don't know' when asked 'what, exactly?'
Perhaps they should have spotted them. Perhaps they should have tried to do something. But this is ultimately about a 15-year old. She was old enough to know what she was doing. Unfortunately she made a very bad choice. Just as there is a limit to what can be done about a 15 year old boy who joins a gang, so there is a limit to what can be done here.
Your reasoning is absurd. Most of us think the authorities should do "something" about all sorts of things, without our being able to specify exactly what. I think they should screen for cancer, but I don't know how or what treatment should be applied when they find it. I think they should monitor nuclear reactors for cracks but I do not know what should happen if cracks are discovered. Examples are endless. That is what experts are for, assuming Michael Gove hasn't come along and abolished them all.
In this case, however, some interventions do seem obvious, starting with preventing them getting on the plane.
But again, the most important point is the security services did not even seem to be looking.
' To sum up, the Conservatives will win or lose the next election in small and medium sized towns. '
More roads, cheaper buses, better trains.
Instead the Conservatives think that HS2, Crossrail and Crossrail 2 will be vote winners.
If I was May, I'd put £16 bn into the new fund, not £1.6 bn.
That would be approximately what is spent on foreign aid each year.
The next populist MP wanting to be Tory leader is going to raid that overseas sum and spend it on police and schools.
Isn't the number of countries which have subsequently increased overseas aid spending to 0.7% of GDP approximately zero ?
Not to mention that a country which has been running a continuous current account deficit for decades should be rather more careful before it decides to give away tens of billions extra.
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
I'm no art historian, unlike their Royal Highnesses or KGB spies, but it does not look to me much like a typical Picasso, so perhaps that is why it is important. You'd have thought there would be some sort of national acquisition fund rather than the government having to pass the hat round on each occasion.
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
I don’t have a problem with that argument - but the state nonetheless retains some responsibility for its citizens, and (more saliently from the point of view of public opinion) their young offspring. Deprivation of citizenship is a questionable act, morally and legally, with potentially fatal consequences for those who had no part in the original offence.
If she had been 14 when she decided to go, would you take the same view? 13? 12?
At what age does the PB ‘damn her and her bad choices’ logic end?
Its not a simple issue particular with the child factor. But you act as though minors being responsible for their decisions is outrageous, when the age of criminal responsibility is a thing.
Some would say that is set too low as well, but while a damn them all approach might be a bit callous ignoring that at that she she knew damn well what she was doing and joining is also going too far.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know. Confiscate their passports? Give them a stiff talking to and return them home? That is not really the point.
The worrying part is that the security services did not seem to have noticed them leave. Why is MI5 not monitoring ticket sales, let alone the airport?
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
I'm no art historian, unlike their Royal Highnesses or KGB spies, but it does not look to me much like a typical Picasso, so perhaps that is why it is important. You'd have thought there would be some sort of national acquisition fund rather than the government having to pass the hat round on each occasion.
It looks like it was from Picasso's early 'Blue Period' ie before Picasso became Picasso.
Thinking about the last election, the curious aspect was that Labour was able to win Leave seats like Peterborough despite Brexit (on small swings) and strong Remain seats like Canterbury (on huge swings).
I wonder whether there was a tendency for Leave voters to discount Brexit when voting because they already had what they wanted (or thought they did) whereas for Remain voters it felt more urgent to vote on Brexit lines (and for whatever reason Labour was perceived to be the best Remain option).
This means that if the next election is fought in an atmosphere of Brexit being lost, or in real peril, then one might expect Leave voters to be more motivated to vote on Brexit lines than Remain voters. This suggests that an election will be bad for whichever side temporarily has the upper hand. If MPs are aware of this then it makes any election exceptionally unlikely, but if one does happen it is likely to increase political instability rather than decrease it - and this is likely to be the case until a compromise can be reached that is acceptable to both sides. Is that possible within the next decade? I have my doubts.
Some interesting points. I honestly cannot tell how it will shake out.
'We have always been clear on this' - 'let me make this clear' - Starmer talking obfuscation on Sophy Ridge on a second referendum and is so much part of the disaster that is unfolding in front of our eyes
Starmer trying to hide he really, really wants to remain, but doing it very poorly
He doesn't need to hide it as much now. Labour are almost to the point of backing remain fully, but tactically the leadership holds out. But we can all see that they are now for remain.
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
SNIP
SNIP.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
SNIP
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
You would expect they would be checking unaccompanied under 16's flying to certain places.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Not a single Leaver of any stature has yet advocated a compromise (as opposed to grudgingly accept one) unless it mysteriously was on precisely the terms that they had always sought. All Leavers have chosen an extremist path of purism.
Even grudgingly accepted compromises are only grudgingly accepted for now so that the true path can be pursued later. The idea of a lasting settlement is incomprehensible to them.
What we are seeing here is the equivalent of non-conformist breakaway sects, as each Leaver seeks his own path to enlightenment through his own church.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Why should they agree?
The EU represented the status quo, the campaigns different types of change. If instead of an election we had ballot saying "do you want to Remain with a Conservative government or Leave having a Conservative government" do you think all opposition parties should agree on what not having a Conservative government means anymore?
So long as we leave properly and are not bound forever by what this government agrees it frankly doesn't matter what type of Brexit we have very much. If we don't like it, we change the government and get a new type.
Peter Kellner pointed out a couple of months back that referendums often follow a similar pattern in that there is initially support for "change" . When it then comes down to specifying what that "change" should be the majority falls apart.
The Brexit referendum is following that pattern quite closely. We now have some leavers saying they would prefer to remain that have May's Deal and some leavers saying they would rather remain than leave with no deal. 52% was a precarious majority to begin with so it awas always unlikely that a majority were ever going to support any particular "brand" of Brexit.
Really good piece Alastair. To be honest I had either forgotten or not fully appreciated how close May came to a majority. 19 additional seats would have made the course of this Parliament very different.
What is also interesting is what a large part Scotland will play at the next election. Quite a large number of targets and awkward defences there.
Corbyn was in Dundee on Friday. I missed him but it seemed an interesting choice. Both of the Dundee seats are wildly out of reach now and Fife, once a Labour stronghold, is not much better. Scottish Labour are not in a good place but none of the Scottish parties are.
The SNP, and Nicola in particular, are looking tired and slightly tarnished. The ongoing issues with Salmond are a major distraction and the government has very little to show. The ongoing agonies of Brexit are also a major problem. Anyone claiming that leaving the UK would be easy are just going to be laughed at.
The Tories have missed Ruth during her absence. Indeed it has vividly shown once again both how fortunate they are to have her and how shallow the talent pool is. She was and is a staunch remainer so maternity leave during the current shambles has been a useful time out for her. It will be interesting to see how her position evolves in the now unlikely event that the deal goes through.
The Lib Dems continue to struggle to be heard but certainly have aspirations to do better, particularly in Edinburgh. A Scottish leader might make a difference.
Overall Scotland looks pretty messy to me. There are lots of potential losers but the winners are harder to spot.
However David, one thing is clear , there is little choice other than the SNP, good or bad, the other parties are just sh***. Unbelievable dross, liars and charlatans. Hard to see anyone other than SNP getting more seats.
Whereas the SNP are merely liars and charlatans, they're relatively competent ones and not dross.
Yes you would know, ever been outside the M25. Scottish political expert has spoken.
Are the security services supposed to be looking at every schoolgirl?
The security services are supposed to be looking for people trying to join ISIS. In this case, three unaccompanied minors flying on (or simply buying tickets for) a known route to ISIS should have raised an official eyebrow.
Its a needle in a needlestack. I'm sure there is a mountain of things that the security services can flag or are looking at. Minors who weren't on their radar flying is probably not the highest one on their radar.
Responsibility lies with the people that took action not the security services who won't catch everything unless you want to live under an oppressive SS regime.
That is to pose the problem the wrong way round. The girls might not have been on MI5's radar but the question is why was a known travel route not being monitored?
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
I'm no art historian, unlike their Royal Highnesses or KGB spies, but it does not look to me much like a typical Picasso, so perhaps that is why it is important. You'd have thought there would be some sort of national acquisition fund rather than the government having to pass the hat round on each occasion.
It looks like it was from Picasso's early 'Blue Period' ie before Picasso became Picasso.
Appropriate, given that it seems to date from the Murray family’s own Blue Period.
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
The security services don’t care about them leaving, it’s a free country.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Why should they agree?
The EU represented the status quo, the campaigns different types of change. If instead of an election we had ballot saying "do you want to Remain with a Conservative government or Leave having a Conservative government" do you think all opposition parties should agree on what not having a Conservative government means anymore?
So long as we leave properly and are not bound forever by what this government agrees it frankly doesn't matter what type of Brexit we have very much. If we don't like it, we change the government and get a new type.
Peter Kellner pointed out a couple of months back that referendums often follow a similar pattern in that there is initially support for "change" . When it then comes down to specifying what that "change" should be the majority falls apart.
The Brexit referendum is following that pattern quite closely. We now have some leavers saying they would prefer to remain that have May's Deal and some leavers saying they would rather remain than leave with no deal. 52% was a precarious majority to begin with so it awas always unlikely that a majority were ever going to support any particular "brand" of Brexit.
Quite so. And the remainers have played the long game very well while too many leavers acted as though their version of leave was inevitable and will now see no version of it, quite likely.
Two more women from the UK who are being held in Syrian camps with their young children have been stripped of their citizenship, a report says. It comes after the death in a Syrian camp of the baby son of Shamima Begum, who left London to join Islamic State and had her UK citizenship revoked. The Sunday Times quotes legal sources who name the women as Reema Iqbal and her sister, Zara, from east London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47512659
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know. Confiscate their passports? Give them a stiff talking to and return them home? That is not really the point.
The worrying part is that the security services did not seem to have noticed them leave. Why is MI5 not monitoring ticket sales, let alone the airport?
They are crap is the simple answer, a total waste of money on a bunch of no-marks who would struggle to catch the cold.
Given your extremely liberal use of the term, malcolm, are there any marks ?
But I suppose there should be a crumb of comfort in the fact that no one - so far - has disputed my suggestion that if bringing the mothers and children back to Britain had received strong public support, the government would have brought them back.
In other words, what has happened has happened because of political considerations.
One would hope that - regardless of political viewpoints about any particular issue - people could agree that it would be better if such decisions were made by the judiciary rather than by politicians. Surely that's pretty much what "the rule of law" means.
'We have always been clear on this' - 'let me make this clear' - Starmer talking obfuscation on Sophy Ridge on a second referendum and is so much part of the disaster that is unfolding in front of our eyes
Starmer trying to hide he really, really wants to remain, but doing it very poorly
He doesn't need to hide it as much now. Labour are almost to the point of backing remain fully, but tactically the leadership holds out. But we can all see that they are now for remain.
After both Starmer and now McDonnell on Marr just now backing away from a referendum and McDonnell promoting a soft brexit it is far from certain the labour leadership are for remain. They are not even going to put it forward on tuesday either apparently
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
I'm no art historian, unlike their Royal Highnesses or KGB spies, but it does not look to me much like a typical Picasso, so perhaps that is why it is important. You'd have thought there would be some sort of national acquisition fund rather than the government having to pass the hat round on each occasion.
If there was a 'national acquisition fund' it would pay highly inflated figures.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Why should they agree?
The EU represented the status quo, the campaigns different types of change. If instead of an election we had ballot saying "do you want to Remain with a Conservative government or Leave having a Conservative government" do you think all opposition parties should agree on what not having a Conservative government means anymore?
So long as we leave properly and are not bound forever by what this government agrees it frankly doesn't matter what type of Brexit we have very much. If we don't like it, we change the government and get a new type.
Peter Kellner pointed out a couple of months back that referendums often follow a similar pattern in that there is initially support for "change" . When it then comes down to specifying what that "change" should be the majority falls apart.
The Brexit referendum is following that pattern quite closely. We now have some leavers saying they would prefer to remain that have May's Deal and some leavers saying they would rather remain than leave with no deal. 52% was a precarious majority to begin with so it awas always unlikely that a majority were ever going to support any particular "brand" of Brexit.
Quite so. And the remainers have played the long game very well while too many leavers acted as though their version of leave was inevitable and will now see no version of it, quite likely.
The remainers have played the long game? How exactly did they do that?
Every time another child dies The Saj applies fresh coat of scalp wax and smiles.
To have 3 dead children by the age of 19 is desperately sad in anyones book. Hard to protect people from their own pisspoor decisions though.
Doesn’t society have an obligation to protect minors from the consequences of making pisspoor decisions? Safeguarding, I believe the term to be?
No. It has a duty to raise concerns about such children if we are concerned they are about to make such a decision so appropriate help and support can be offered. But if it is refused, it can't when the last comes to the last be forced on them.
Ultimately, any fifteen year old can make bad choices, and many of them do. There is a limit to what can be done to stop them. In this case, for example, the only way to stop Shamima Begum making such a disastrous error would have been to lock her up, which would obviously have really helped convince her that ISIS was a Bad Thing and the West was on her side.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know. Confiscate their passports? Give them a stiff talking to and return them home? That is not really the point.
The worrying part is that the security services did not seem to have noticed them leave. Why is MI5 not monitoring ticket sales, let alone the airport?
They are crap is the simple answer, a total waste of money on a bunch of no-marks who would struggle to catch the cold.
Given your extremely liberal use of the term, malcolm, are there any marks ?
Nigel, they are hard to find in politics for sure. There are a few exceptions, I do like Ken Clarke and there are a handful of very good SNP MP's and MSP's, MEP's but the exception rather than the rule. Angus Robertson and Alex Salmond were superb as well but sadly no longer there.
But surely more could have been done to stop these three schoolgirls joining ISIS?
One curious aspect of this whole affair is that the security services seemed not to notice or wonder about three unaccompanied minors flying on one-way tickets on a known route to ISIS. Burgess and Maclean could escape to Russia because the MI5 teams following Maclean only worked 9 to 5 Monday to Friday. It seems any lessons learned have been forgotten.
By arresting them, yes, if they had been spotted at the airport.
But then what?
I don't know.
I'm afraid those three words are exactly the point.
No they are not because I am not the government or MI5, whose job it is to have a plan. The point is they did not even notice the schoolgirls leaving despite it being fairly obvious, so the only conclusion is the security services were not even looking.
The point is, what were they expected to do instead? Unless you have a reasonable alternative course of action, your criticism isn't valid. It's ridiculous to say 'they should do something' and then say 'I don't know' when asked 'what, exactly?'
Perhaps they should have spotted them. Perhaps they should have tried to do something. But this is ultimately about a 15-year old. She was old enough to know what she was doing. Unfortunately she made a very bad choice. Just as there is a limit to what can be done about a 15 year old boy who joins a gang, so there is a limit to what can be done here.
You’re a teacher, I believe. In loco parentis.
I can only be thankful my children do not attend your school.
How many Brexit parties and movements do we need? Why are leavers seemingly always unable to agree even amongst themselves?
The fact that they couldn't even agree on one campaign before the referendum was a pretty clear indication that they were never going to agree on anything afterwards.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
Not a single Leaver of any stature has yet advocated a compromise (as opposed to grudgingly accept one) unless it mysteriously was on precisely the terms that they had always sought. All Leavers have chosen an extremist path of purism.
Even grudgingly accepted compromises are only grudgingly accepted for now so that the true path can be pursued later. The idea of a lasting settlement is incomprehensible to them.
What we are seeing here is the equivalent of non-conformist breakaway sects, as each Leaver seeks his own path to enlightenment through his own church.
Yes that is a good way of describing it. Leavers trade in articles of faith rather than practicalities.
Tories are exceptionally thick and Davis is one of the front runners. David Davis tells Marr he can think of no example of a sovereign nation joining up for a union where it can only leave “if the other nation allows it do so.” Precisely, of course, the situation Scotland is in.
But I suppose there should be a crumb of comfort in the fact that no one - so far - has disputed my suggestion that if bringing the mothers and children back to Britain had received strong public support, the government would have brought them back.
In other words, what has happened has happened because of political considerations.
One would hope that - regardless of political viewpoints about any particular issue - people could agree that it would be better if such decisions were made by the judiciary rather than by politicians. Surely that's pretty much what "the rule of law" means.
Not really since the law at present is that a politician can make the call. So long as they follow the correct procedure the rule of law has been upheld perfectly. I don't see the value in pretending the current rules are not a manifestation of the rule of law.
However, I agree that many people, myself included, don't like that a politician has that power, even if they think the recent decisions were correct. You are right that means the politics definitely factors into the decisions.
Unfortunately I am far from confident that even those politicians currently criticising the current law would change it if they get the chance. It has remained in place for decades for a reason, and they would probably find they dont want to remove it as an option even if they said they'd make it more difficult.
But I suppose there should be a crumb of comfort in the fact that no one - so far - has disputed my suggestion that if bringing the mothers and children back to Britain had received strong public support, the government would have brought them back.
In other words, what has happened has happened because of political considerations.
One would hope that - regardless of political viewpoints about any particular issue - people could agree that it would be better if such decisions were made by the judiciary rather than by politicians. Surely that's pretty much what "the rule of law" means.
Tories are exceptionally thick and Davis is one of the front runners. David Davis tells Marr he can think of no example of a sovereign nation joining up for a union where it can only leave “if the other nation allows it do so.” Precisely, of course, the situation Scotland is in.
Not all of us Malc and according to 5 live you have snow this am. Got your sledge out !!!!
'We have always been clear on this' - 'let me make this clear' - Starmer talking obfuscation on Sophy Ridge on a second referendum and is so much part of the disaster that is unfolding in front of our eyes
Starmer trying to hide he really, really wants to remain, but doing it very poorly
He doesn't need to hide it as much now. Labour are almost to the point of backing remain fully, but tactically the leadership holds out. But we can all see that they are now for remain.
After both Starmer and now McDonnell on Marr just now backing away from a referendum and McDonnell promoting a soft brexit it is far from certain the labour leadership are for remain. They are not even going to put it forward on tuesday either apparently
G, they are only for what benefits themselves and will change at drop of a hat , hard to believe but more duplicitous than May.
'We have always been clear on this' - 'let me make this clear' - Starmer talking obfuscation on Sophy Ridge on a second referendum and is so much part of the disaster that is unfolding in front of our eyes
Starmer trying to hide he really, really wants to remain, but doing it very poorly
He doesn't need to hide it as much now. Labour are almost to the point of backing remain fully, but tactically the leadership holds out. But we can all see that they are now for remain.
After both Starmer and now McDonnell on Marr just now backing away from a referendum and McDonnell promoting a soft brexit it is far from certain the labour leadership are for remain. They are not even going to put it forward on tuesday either apparently
They can pretend to back a softer Brexit because it's not on offer, its tactical. The key for them is have they done enough to persuade remain voters stay with them. They probably have.
Yes, they're in effect predominantly a centre party split. I was talking to a prominent LibDem on Friday who is close to their London Mayoral campaign - she was politely irritated by the whole TIG thing.
On tòpic, I think Alastair underestimates how many people voted Labour in 2017 to prevent the kind of Brexit May was advocating. If the next General Election takes place after we’ve left - which it almost certainly will - that reason goes away. I think turnout next time will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
FWIW my canvassing is turning up a LOT of people who say they won't vote next time because of the national mess. Most are Brexiteers who think the political class has sold them out (and this is in deepest prosperous Surrey) but some are just generally fed up. If one tries to turn their attention to the local issues that the election is supposed to be about, they shrug and say yes, but Brexit...
I hate to say “I told you so” but I have been banging on for quite some time about how Brexit identity is stronger than party identity.
Without question. And that is why Labour should be very worried about its 2017 Remain demographic. As ever, Scotland is the canary in the mine on this.
And the nightmare for the Scottish Tories there is if Brexit becomes the fault line rather than independence.
Tories are exceptionally thick and Davis is one of the front runners. David Davis tells Marr he can think of no example of a sovereign nation joining up for a union where it can only leave “if the other nation allows it do so.” Precisely, of course, the situation Scotland is in.
Not all of us Malc and according to 5 live you have snow this am. Got your sledge out !!!!
G, I posted poorly, I was referring to MP's not Tories in general. Miserable here but just rain, yesterday was hail and rain, BAU for March mind you. Hope all well with you and family.
But I suppose there should be a crumb of comfort in the fact that no one - so far - has disputed my suggestion that if bringing the mothers and children back to Britain had received strong public support, the government would have brought them back.
In other words, what has happened has happened because of political considerations.
One would hope that - regardless of political viewpoints about any particular issue - people could agree that it would be better if such decisions were made by the judiciary rather than by politicians. Surely that's pretty much what "the rule of law" means.
+1.
I hate to go there, but why did Blair and Brown not remove this power when they had the chance? I know there would be other priorities but seems like their inclinations were to be harder rather than softer in such matters. I could see Corbyn intending to change it, but I can also see many of his MPs backing the law as it stands and the security services lobbying hard not to change it.
"The family of" sounds a bit vague. Does it mean immediate family or are we talking about second cousins twice removed?
We already know that Corbyn is surrounded by posh millionaires. Is this news or just gossip?
The real mystery is who on earth would think £50 million a fair price for that daub. The use of colour is interesting, but that's about as far as its merits extend.
I'm no art historian, unlike their Royal Highnesses or KGB spies, but it does not look to me much like a typical Picasso, so perhaps that is why it is important. You'd have thought there would be some sort of national acquisition fund rather than the government having to pass the hat round on each occasion.
I am not sure, but I believe it's from his 'blue' period, and typical of that period.
Comments
And as I said, the gallery for Soubry is not the public as a whole. It is a subset, but it is still a gallery - and there are many members of it posting here.
Perhaps they should have spotted them. Perhaps they should have tried to do something. But this is ultimately about a 15-year old. She was old enough to know what she was doing. Unfortunately she made a very bad choice. Just as there is a limit to what can be done about a 15 year old boy who joins a gang, so there is a limit to what can be done here.
That said, Labour are now so tired and openly corrupt that I think a collapse when it comes will come very suddenly and dramatically - Scotland 2012-15 on speed.
Saying good brown and Muslim people don't need to worry because we are only targeting bad brown and Muslim people misses the point, if we are not also targeting bad white non-Muslim people the same way.
Who Dares Wins!
WE dare! WE will WIN!
The girl should be tried, if not in Syria, then here. Stripping her of citizenship is repressive.
As Ken Clarke pointed out in the HoC, he managed to go a whole stint as Home Secretary without taking anyone’s citizenship away.
The only person playing to the gallery is “The Saj”, which seems to be his main MO. He is a marginally more competent Gavin Williamson.
I think you may have just slandered about 2 billion people there. That's very offensive hate speech you're writing.
The reason why Labour gained Canterbury (which was only a marginal Remain constituency) was because of Labour's student fees promises.
It would be interesting to correlate the 2017 results by number of students in each constituency.
Like many on this board I am quite comfortable, but like many on this board I started with nothing.
It boils my piss that someone who appears to have been born a multi-millionaire runs around with “please no bourgeoisie” on her Facebook profile while advocating ruination on the wealth makers.
More roads, cheaper buses, better trains.
Instead the Conservatives think that HS2, Crossrail and Crossrail 2 will be vote winners.
It did of course allow them to brush off every criticism with the "we never said that the other campaign did" defense.
I can only be thankful my children do not attend your school.
Or perhaps because they are still seen as part of the Above establishment?
The EU represented the status quo, the campaigns different types of change. If instead of an election we had ballot saying "do you want to Remain with a Conservative government or Leave having a Conservative government" do you think all opposition parties should agree on what not having a Conservative government means anymore?
So long as we leave properly and are not bound forever by what this government agrees it frankly doesn't matter what type of Brexit we have very much. If we don't like it, we change the government and get a new type.
@Sean_F "I expect a white woman who joined IS would have received similar treatment."
@FF43 "Ok so we are just discriminating against Muslims and not brown Muslims. "
Sean said IS he didn't say Muslims. The key variable for Sean was "joined IS" and you respond with "Muslims". Seems to me you're saying "joined IS" and "Muslims" are interchangeable which is vile hate speech of the sort Tommy Robinson could use not something I'd expect from you.
Even grudgingly accepted compromises are only grudgingly accepted for now so that the true path can be pursued later. The idea of a lasting settlement is incomprehensible to them.
What we are seeing here is the equivalent of non-conformist breakaway sects, as each Leaver seeks his own path to enlightenment through his own church.
Responsibility lies with the people that took action not the security services who won't catch everything unless you want to live under an oppressive SS regime.
In this case, however, some interventions do seem obvious, starting with preventing them getting on the plane.
But again, the most important point is the security services did not even seem to be looking.
Not to mention that a country which has been running a continuous current account deficit for decades should be rather more careful before it decides to give away tens of billions extra.
Some would say that is set too low as well, but while a damn them all approach might be a bit callous ignoring that at that she she knew damn well what she was doing and joining is also going too far.
The Brexit referendum is following that pattern quite closely. We now have some leavers saying they would prefer to remain that have May's Deal and some leavers saying they would rather remain than leave with no deal. 52% was a precarious majority to begin with so it awas always unlikely that a majority were ever going to support any particular "brand" of Brexit.
They do care about them coming back though.
"Time's up for a PM who has shown herself to be incompetent, indecisive and weak"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/09/times-pm-has-shown-incompetent-indecisive-weak/
So are her fellow MPs for not defenestrating her after that.
But I suppose there should be a crumb of comfort in the fact that no one - so far - has disputed my suggestion that if bringing the mothers and children back to Britain had received strong public support, the government would have brought them back.
In other words, what has happened has happened because of political considerations.
One would hope that - regardless of political viewpoints about any particular issue - people could agree that it would be better if such decisions were made by the judiciary rather than by politicians. Surely that's pretty much what "the rule of law" means.
David Davis tells Marr he can think of no example of a sovereign nation joining up for a union where it can only leave “if the other nation allows it do so.” Precisely, of course, the situation Scotland is in.
The latter has much more chance of happening. I can’t see the votes in the Commons for a second vote .
However, I agree that many people, myself included, don't like that a politician has that power, even if they think the recent decisions were correct. You are right that means the politics definitely factors into the decisions.
Unfortunately I am far from confident that even those politicians currently criticising the current law would change it if they get the chance. It has remained in place for decades for a reason, and they would probably find they dont want to remove it as an option even if they said they'd make it more difficult.
https://twitter.com/jeffreygoldbium/status/1104395041689210880?s=21