Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just released: Latest PB/Polling Matter podcast with its exclu

SystemSystem Posts: 11,683
edited January 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just released: Latest PB/Polling Matter podcast with its exclusive Opinium poll findings on BREXIT

On this week’s podcast, Keiran is joined by Labour blogger and political activist Jade Azim and Addin365 CEO and tech entrepreneur Suzy Dean to discuss the recent women’s march, feminism and whether Britain made a mistake in deciding to leave the European Union.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335
    Is there a link to the source data of the poll?

    (first)
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    Second! Like Remain & Scottish Tories!
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,067
    Here's the long title of the government's A50 bill:

    https://twitter.com/chrisjames_90/status/824386195253772288
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Who is this Bill? Bill cash?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    Jonathan said:

    Who is this Bill? Bill cash?

    Bill Somebody? Labour's economic policy at GE 2015?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,067
    Jonathan said:

    Who is this Bill? Bill cash?

    A nice gesture really to get him to confer the power on the PM.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    Is there a link to the source data of the poll?

    (first)

    It should go up on the Opinium website within the next couple of days
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    Is there a link to the source data of the poll?

    (first)

    When I get up tomorrow morning I'll make it into a shareable Google doc and posted the link
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Is there a link to the source data of the poll?

    (first)

    When I get up tomorrow morning I'll make it into a shareable Google doc and posted the link
    Daily Express?
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,435
    This might be of interest to Southern, Thameslink and Great Northern passengers:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/25/government-reported-to-be-planning-to-nationalise-southern-rail-franchise
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    Who cares if people think it was the right decision or not? What difference does that make?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,782
    edited January 2017

    Here's the long title of the government's A50 bill...

    Godsdammit, it should have been "Prime Minister. The time has come. Execute Article 50..."
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited January 2017
    So, some Remain voters have changed their minds, whereas very few Leave voters have. In addition, many Remain voters (including your truly) haven't changed their minds, but still think the decision should be implemented without obfuscation.

    Guys'n'gals, we are leaving. Brexit means Brexit. The decision has been taken. It's irreversible. It may well be a mistake, but it's going to happen. The emphasis now should be on getting the best deal with our EU friends - something which is not at all helped by MPs trying to impose conditions, which the EU can exploit as an excuse for a worse deal - and on mitigating the external risks by embracing such advantages as Brexit gives us.

    I don't personally think the results will be on balance favourable, at least in the timescale of say three years, but we are where we are, and need to do the best we can.
  • Options
    DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    No Scottish veto equals no Scottish say? That's similar to saying Trump's inauguration photograph shows more people than Obama's.

    Meanwhile Theresa May says the US and Britain will "lead together again". When have the US and Britain ever led other countries together?


  • Options
    Dromedary said:

    When have the US and Britain ever led other countries together?


    1944 springs to mind.
  • Options
    DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    edited January 2017

    Dromedary said:

    When have the US and Britain ever led other countries together?

    1944 springs to mind.
    The Canadian forces under SHAEF? But that was in a world war, and not even in the most important theatre of it. If that was what she meant, she's batshit.

  • Options
    Dromedary said:

    No Scottish veto equals no Scottish say? That's similar to saying Trump's inauguration photograph shows more people than Obama's.

    Meanwhile Theresa May says the US and Britain will "lead together again". When have the US and Britain ever led other countries together?


    Say it quietly - Iraq
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    edited January 2017

    So, some Remain voters have changed their minds, whereas very few Leave voters have. In addition, many Remain voters (including your truly) haven't changed their minds, but still think the decision should be implemented without obfuscation.

    Guys'n'gals, we are leaving. Brexit means Brexit. The decision has been taken. It's irreversible. It may well be a mistake, but it's going to happen. The emphasis now should be on getting the best deal with our EU friends - something which is not at all helped by MPs trying to impose conditions, which the EU can exploit as an excuse for a worse deal - and on mitigating the external risks by embracing such advantages as Brexit gives us.

    I don't personally think the results will be on balance favourable, at least in the timescale of say three years, but we are where we are, and need to do the best we can.

    A longer version of my post at 11:13... I wholeheartedly agree with you Richard!
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited January 2017
    isam said:

    A longer version of my post at 11:31... I wholeheartedly agree with you Richard

    [Checks time.. 11.26] I look forward to your post of 11.31!
  • Options
    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    https://twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    edited January 2017

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A great poet!
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930

    isam said:

    A longer version of my post at 11:31... I wholeheartedly agree with you Richard

    [Checks time.. 11.26] I look forward to your post of 11.31!
    Yes, sorry! It was 11:13, I have corrected.

    Maybe this or that should have happened in the past, but so what? As you say we are where we are.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Here's the long title of the government's A50 bill:

    https://twitter.com/chrisjames_90/status/824386195253772288

    Oooo.. do we have the wording of the Bill yet? I love a good read....
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    edited January 2017
    RobD said:

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A great poet!
    Is he a Remainer? He has no tweets pre Sep
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A great poet!
    I'm thinking of writing a thread on Sunday in iambic pentameter
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Ouch, just been pwned by Shadsy

    twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/824335763236077572
    twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/824380960657522699
    twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/824392987664846849

    What a burn!
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,067
    Dromedary said:

    Dromedary said:

    When have the US and Britain ever led other countries together?

    1944 springs to mind.
    The Canadian forces under SHAEF? But that was in a world war, and not even in the most important theatre of it. If that was what she meant, she's batshit.
    From the excerpts of her speech she does seem to be breaking all the records for the onset of mad-PM syndrome.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    https://twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A brave choice.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    RobD said:

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A great poet!
    The bog bard, AKA the loo laureate.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited January 2017


    A brave choice.

    Actually he doesn't look a bad choice, that tweet notwithstanding:

    Mr Snell is a Newcastle borough councilor for Silverdale and Parksite, and previously led the authority from 2012 to 2014. He lost his seat in 2014 but returned to the authority in a council by-election last year. Following his victory in the by-election Mr Snell said it had 'nothing to do with Corbyn'.
    ..
    Mr Snell, who previously worked for Dr Hunt, said: "I'm delighted to have been chosen by local Labour members here in Stoke-on-Trent Central to be the voice of local people. I'm proud to come from the Potteries and even prouder to be standing to represent our home in Parliament.

    "Labour has always stood up for local people here in Stoke-on-Trent, whether it's building our first hospital in 100 years or defending vital children's centres.

    "The Tories haven't done anything for our city and now they're trying to sell of £1.2 billion of cancer and end-of-life care in North Staffordshire. And Ukip's plans for our NHS are clear - sell it off to the highest bidder.

    "Only Labour will do what is needed to get a fair deal for the people of Stoke-on-Trent Central."


    http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/labour-members-choose-stoke-on-trent-central-candidate/story-30087428-detail/story.html
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Gareth Snell retweeted OGH as well...

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/822028909420150784
  • Options

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    https://twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A brave choice.
    Yup, I've seen the Labour attack ads on Nuttall, I wonder if UKIP will reply in kind.
  • Options
    Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237
    It's surely becoming more obvious by the day that the Americans have elected a complete lunatic.
  • Options
    When someone tweeted that poem, this is what Mr Snell replied with

    https://twitter.com/gareth_snell/status/824256333000146944
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548


    A brave choice.

    Actually he doesn't look a bad choice, that tweet notwithstanding:

    Mr Snell is a Newcastle borough councilor for Silverdale and Parksite, and previously led the authority from 2012 to 2014. He lost his seat in 2014 but returned to the authority in a council by-election last year. Following his victory in the by-election Mr Snell said it had 'nothing to do with Corbyn'.
    ..
    Mr Snell, who previously worked for Dr Hunt, said: "I'm delighted to have been chosen by local Labour members here in Stoke-on-Trent Central to be the voice of local people. I'm proud to come from the Potteries and even prouder to be standing to represent our home in Parliament.

    "Labour has always stood up for local people here in Stoke-on-Trent, whether it's building our first hospital in 100 years or defending vital children's centres.

    "The Tories haven't done anything for our city and now they're trying to sell of £1.2 billion of cancer and end-of-life care in North Staffordshire. And Ukip's plans for our NHS are clear - sell it off to the highest bidder.

    "Only Labour will do what is needed to get a fair deal for the people of Stoke-on-Trent Central."


    http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/labour-members-choose-stoke-on-trent-central-candidate/story-30087428-detail/story.html
    Another strong local grassroots activist, not a party A lister parachuted in.

    I like Jezzas hands off approach to selections.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited January 2017


    A brave choice.

    Actually he doesn't look a bad choice, that tweet notwithstanding:

    Mr Snell is a Newcastle borough councilor for Silverdale and Parksite, and previously led the authority from 2012 to 2014. He lost his seat in 2014 but returned to the authority in a council by-election last year. Following his victory in the by-election Mr Snell said it had 'nothing to do with Corbyn'.

    http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/labour-members-choose-stoke-on-trent-central-candidate/story-30087428-detail/story.html
    He's local and clearly no Corbynite which suggests he's got some sense. Brexit isn't everything but I wouldn't be picking a Remainer in Labour's shoes. No doubt he'll be all about "respecting the result" now...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Chris_A said:

    It's surely becoming more obvious by the day that the Americans have elected a complete lunatic.

    Narcisstic personality disorder and sociopathy, rather than lunacy, I reckon.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    Have Labour really chosen a Remainer for Stoke Central?

    Good grief they have even less sense than I thought.

    And I didn't think they had much to start with....
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548


    A brave choice.

    Actually he doesn't look a bad choice, that tweet notwithstanding:

    Mr Snell is a Newcastle borough councilor for Silverdale and Parksite, and previously led the authority from 2012 to 2014. He lost his seat in 2014 but returned to the authority in a council by-election last year. Following his victory in the by-election Mr Snell said it had 'nothing to do with Corbyn'.

    http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/labour-members-choose-stoke-on-trent-central-candidate/story-30087428-detail/story.html
    He's local and clearly no Corbynite which suggests he's got some sense. Brexit isn't everything but I wouldn't be picking a Remainer in Labour's shoes. No doubt he'll be all about "respecting the result" now...
    That is about the size of it

    https://twitter.com/gareth_snell/status/824229458940989442
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A great poet!
    The bog bard, AKA the loo laureate.
    Potty poetry for the Potteries.
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Thanks to Suzy for tearing apart Jade's disgusting political essentialism. Until the Left remembers that people are individuals with their own thoughts and feelings, rather than mindless drones who must naturally share opinions due to their gender/race/etc, they will never win another election.

    We have now come full circle. The Left is now in favour of racial and sexual apartheid, the only difference being that the hierarchy has been reversed rather than abolished.

    No thanks!
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    Chris_A said:

    It's surely becoming more obvious by the day that the Americans have elected a complete lunatic.

    Narcisstic personality disorder and sociopathy, rather than lunacy, I reckon.
    That's what I'd go for. The man clearly can function successfully in society, after a fashion. So lunacy, at least as we usually understand it, would not seem to fit.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    RoyalBlue said:

    Thanks to Suzy for tearing apart Jade's disgusting political essentialism. Until the Left remembers that people are individuals with their own thoughts and feelings, rather than mindless drones who must naturally share opinions due to their gender/race/etc, they will never win another election.

    We have now come full circle. The Left is now in favour of racial and sexual apartheid, the only difference being that the hierarchy has been reversed rather than abolished.

    No thanks!

    Suzy made some good points on identity politics, and Jade even doubled down on the need for more identity politics! But Suzy was a bit mad.......

    Following someone to the cubicle etc is not O.K.
  • Options
    I don't know if this has been reported

    Opinium Research 25th January 2017

    Brexit

    Right decision 52%

    Wrong decision 38%

    Dont know 9%

    From those figures it looks like the Country just wants to get on and leave
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,999
    What are the constitutional mechanisms for removing POTUS when, as is the case here, it becomes increasingly apparent that he is mentally impaired? Can some of the usual wiki-geniuses on here opine?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Dura_Ace said:

    What are the constitutional mechanisms for removing POTUS when, as is the case here, it becomes increasingly apparent that he is mentally impaired? Can some of the usual wiki-geniuses on here opine?

    Probably has to be declared incapacitated by the Cabinet.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,444
    edited January 2017
    Dura_Ace said:

    What are the constitutional mechanisms for removing POTUS when, as is the case here, it becomes increasingly apparent that he is mentally impaired? Can some of the usual wiki-geniuses on here opine?

    Section IV of the XXV Amendment is what you need to read up on.
  • Options
    Section 4: Vice Presidential–Cabinet declaration

    Section 4 is the only part of the amendment that has never been invoked.[24] It allows the Vice President, together with a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide", to declare the President disabled by submitting a written declaration to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. As with Section 3, the Vice President would become Acting President.

    Section 4 is meant to be invoked should the President's incapacitation prevent him from discharging his duties, but he is unable or unwilling to provide the written declaration called for by Section 3. The President may resume exercising the Presidential duties by sending a written declaration to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House.

    Should the Vice President and Cabinet believe the President is still disabled, they may within four days of the President's declaration submit another declaration that the President is incapacitated. If not already in session, the Congress must then assemble within 48 hours. The Congress has 21 days to decide the issue. If within the 21 days two-thirds of each house of Congress vote that the President is incapacitated, the Vice President would "continue" to be Acting President. Should the Congress resolve the issue in favor of the President, or make no decision within the 21 days allotted, then the President would "resume" discharging the powers and duties of his office. The use of the words "continue" and "resume" imply that the Vice President remains Acting President while Congress deliberates.

    However, the President may again submit a written declaration of recovery to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House. That declaration could be responded to by the Acting President and the Cabinet in the same way as stated earlier. The specified 21-day Congressional procedure would start again.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_4:_Vice_Presidential.E2.80.93Cabinet_declaration
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,067
    edited January 2017
    So May is going to tell the Republicans that the UK and US can 'lead the world again' at the same time as they are preparing an escalation in Syria. What will she do if they ask her to put her troops where her mouth is?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/25/donald-trump-orders-establishment-safe-zones-syria/

    President Trump is ordering the Pentagon and State Department to develop a series of “safe zones” in Syria, a move that administration critics claims could draw the U.S. military deeper into the country’s civil war.
  • Options
    ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819
    Mortimer said:

    Have Labour really chosen a Remainer for Stoke Central?

    Good grief they have even less sense than I thought.

    And I didn't think they had much to start with....

    Labour probably have a shortage of decent Leave supporting candidates. Their voters may have gone for leave but members and activists were heavily for Remain. Even then among the Labour members supporting leave a decent chunk will be far-left leavers closer to Corbyn than the average Stoke voter.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Dura_Ace said:

    What are the constitutional mechanisms for removing POTUS when, as is the case here, it becomes increasingly apparent that he is mentally impaired? Can some of the usual wiki-geniuses on here opine?

    Section IV of the XXV Amendment is what you need to read up on.
    Good to see Don Brind getting some healthy competition in the fiction department
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125

    I don't know if this has been reported

    Opinium Research 25th January 2017

    Brexit

    Right decision 52%

    Wrong decision 38%

    Dont know 9%

    From those figures it looks like the Country just wants to get on and leave

    Yep - Remain would have to capture ALL the "don't knows" just to stand still from last year's result.

    The more the EU look to be jerking us around after Article 50 is triggered, the more will think it the right decision. And if the EU decide to play nice, and don't actually want half the dog - then the fears around Brexit will subside - and the more will be satisfied it was the right decision.

    With the LibDems looking like Brussels' useful idiots.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125

    Labour have selected a candidate for Stoke, and well

    https://twitter.com/JonCollett/status/824394258190921728

    A brave choice.
    Soft Left, Hard Left,
    Massive pile of Sh*t
    Sloppy Labour, Messy Labour,
    Quit Quit Quit....
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    I don't know if this has been reported

    Opinium Research 25th January 2017

    Brexit

    Right decision 52%

    Wrong decision 38%

    Dont know 9%

    From those figures it looks like the Country just wants to get on and leave

    Yep - Remain would have to capture ALL the "don't knows" just to stand still from last year's result.

    The more the EU look to be jerking us around after Article 50 is triggered, the more will think it the right decision. And if the EU decide to play nice, and don't actually want half the dog - then the fears around Brexit will subside - and the more will be satisfied it was the right decision.

    With the LibDems looking like Brussels' useful idiots.
    I declare this poll Good For Leave (trademark pending) ;)
  • Options
    peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,875
    edited January 2017

    I don't know if this has been reported

    Opinium Research 25th January 2017

    Brexit

    Right decision 52%

    Wrong decision 38%

    Dont know 9%

    From those figures it looks like the Country just wants to get on and leave

    Yep - Remain would have to capture ALL the "don't knows" just to stand still from last year's result.

    The more the EU look to be jerking us around after Article 50 is triggered, the more will think it the right decision. And if the EU decide to play nice, and don't actually want half the dog - then the fears around Brexit will subside - and the more will be satisfied it was the right decision.

    With the LibDems looking like Brussels' useful idiots.
    Most EU leaders appear either incapable or unwilling to accept that it was a majority of ordinary, fair-minded British citizens who took the brave decision to leave the EU and NOT our politicians who in the main were actually in favour the UK remaining within the EU.
    That being the case, one might have hoped and expected that instead of all the talk about the need to severely "punish" Britain and the British for our foolishness, our once close partners would turn their attention instead to trying to understand why it was that we came to take such a traumatic decision.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    I don't envy May her trip to Washington - its the first time Trump's met anyone remotely approaching an equal (as head of government, and no, I don't think the British PM is the "equal" of the US President) - but for decades he's only had to deal with subordinates - and I'm guessing is unaccustomed to anyone saying 'no' to him.....or 'up to a point, Mr President' - oh well, I guess May can have fun slipping in lots of allusions that will go sailing over the orange quiff.....
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    I don't envy May her trip to Washington - its the first time Trump's met anyone remotely approaching an equal (as head of government, and no, I don't think the British PM is the "equal" of the US President) - but for decades he's only had to deal with subordinates - and I'm guessing is unaccustomed to anyone saying 'no' to him.....or 'up to a point, Mr President' - oh well, I guess May can have fun slipping in lots of allusions that will go sailing over the orange quiff.....

    Well let's hope they get on!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    edited January 2017
    Wonder if this is one of the things on the Trump-May agenda:

    @pwnallthethings
    But torture really is a red line. UK and US will both be cripplingly harmed if the US restarts the torture program. Let me go thru the steps

    Step1 is the UK goes to a lot of work to check if it's actually true. What is the US really up to? Is it really as bad as it sounds?

    Step 2 is the UK summons the US ambassador for a "meeting without coffee". Basically UK's F-Sec explains what happens if policy goes ahead.

    Step 3 is the frighteningly lame sounding "Exchange of Letters". But it's basically a last warning.

    Step 4 is where shit gets real. GCHQ cancels UK-US CT sharing in theatres of operation where torture might reasonably take place

    Step 5 is the UK evicts the NSA integrees and recalls the GCHQ integrees. The loss to both here is really pretty unimaginable.

    Step 6 is UK basically puts the US into the tier set of IC partners that need caution. Also in this set: Pakistan, Saudi, Afghanistan etc.

    No matter how much info beating the shit out of a detainee gives CIA, it's unlikely it'll be worth sacrificing the NSA-GCHQ CT relnship over
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    @CarlottaVance

    The article says "restarts the torture program". Why did what was outlined not happen before (or maybe it did)?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    edited January 2017
    RobD said:

    @CarlottaVance

    The article says "restarts the torture program". Why did what was outlined not happen before (or maybe it did)?

    It didn't happen because the US deliberately kept the UK (& the rest of the world) in the dark when it did - and there was a furious row when it emerged:

    British involvement in controversial and clandestine rendition operations provoked an unprecedented row between the UK’s domestic and foreign intelligence services, MI5 and MI6, at the height of the “war on terror”, the Guardian can reveal.

    The head of MI5, Eliza Manningham-Buller, was so incensed when she discovered the role played by MI6 in abductions that led to suspected extremists being tortured, she threw out a number of her sister agency’s staff and banned them from working at MI5’s headquarters, Thames House.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/31/revealed-britain-rendition-policy-rift-between-spy-agencies-mi6-mi5

    Following the Law Lords ruling in 2008 (which would have standing in the other Five Eyes countries) that torture and its fruits have no place in Common Law jurisdictions - and haven't for 500 years - it could also end cooperation between the US and balance Five Eyes and the EU (for what its worth) too....
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    @CarlottaVance .. thanks!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    edited January 2017
    RobD said:

    @CarlottaVance .. thanks!

    If you want more background here's a transcript of Manningham-Buller's Reith lecture:

    http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/radio4/transcripts/2011_reith4.pdf

    Torture is illegal in our national law and in international law. It is wrong and never justified. It is a sadness and worse that the previous government of our great ally, the United States, chose to water-board some detainees. The argument that life- saving intelligence was thereby obtained, and I accept it was, still does not justify it. Torture should be utterly rejected even when it may offer the prospect of saving lives.

    I am proud my Service refused to turn to the torture of high-level German prisoners in the Second World War, when, in the early years, we stood alone and there was a high risk of our being invaded and becoming a Nazi province. So if not then, why should it be justified now?

    I believe that the acquisition of short-term gain through water-boarding and other forms of mistreatment was a profound mistake and lost the United States moral authority and some of the widespread sympathy it had enjoyed as a result of 9/11.

    And I am confident that I know the answer to the question of whether torture has made the world a safer place. It hasn’t.

  • Options
    swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    and of course, lets not forget the routine use of rendition whereby suspects were sent to enlightened security personnel from Morocco, Syria and even Gadaffi's Libya to be routinely tortured for the benefit of our "national security", we are hardly clean on the matter, RAF bases both in UK, Cyprus and the rest of the world were part of the network.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677

    we are hardly clean on the matter

    There is, inevitably, dispute over 'who knew what, when' - which we may find out more about when the Jack Straw case comes to trial.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/17/libyan-dissident-abdel-hakim-belhaj-wins-right-to-sue-uk-government-over-rendition
  • Options
    swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    fair point but I cant help but think there is a touch of "holier than....." going on. The Labour government in particular wholeheartedly joined the War on Terror's less publicised muck. Straw was busy justifying invading Iraq at the time so I could well imagine he's not sure what voltage was used on whom, where and when.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677

    fair point but I cant help but think there is a touch of "holier than....." going on.

    I'm sure there is - but the Law Lords were unequivocal - it's illegal (if there was any doubt) and any UK official or politician who signs off on it is breaking the law and is personally liable.....
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    Looks like Congress may spare May the trouble:

    A top Republican leader pushed back against a proposed presidential order that would reexamine more aggressive interrogation techniques against terrorist detainees, telling reporters that torture is illegal.

    Employing waterboarding again "would take a change in the law, and Congress is on record," Senate Republican Conference Chair John Thune told reporters Wednesday afternoon. "With respect to torture, that's banned… we view that to be a matter of settled law."


    http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/25/waterboarding-john-thune-executive-order-interrogation-terrorism.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    RobD said:

    @CarlottaVance .. thanks!

    If you want more background here's a transcript of Manningham-Buller's Reith lecture:

    http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/radio4/transcripts/2011_reith4.pdf

    Torture is illegal in our national law and in international law. It is wrong and never justified. It is a sadness and worse that the previous government of our great ally, the United States, chose to water-board some detainees. The argument that life- saving intelligence was thereby obtained, and I accept it was, still does not justify it. Torture should be utterly rejected even when it may offer the prospect of saving lives.

    I am proud my Service refused to turn to the torture of high-level German prisoners in the Second World War, when, in the early years, we stood alone and there was a high risk of our being invaded and becoming a Nazi province. So if not then, why should it be justified now?

    I believe that the acquisition of short-term gain through water-boarding and other forms of mistreatment was a profound mistake and lost the United States moral authority and some of the widespread sympathy it had enjoyed as a result of 9/11.

    And I am confident that I know the answer to the question of whether torture has made the world a safer place. It hasn’t.

    Very interesting link - thanks for sharing.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    Wonder if this is one of the things on the Trump-May agenda:

    @pwnallthethings
    But torture really is a red line. UK and US will both be cripplingly harmed if the US restarts the torture program. Let me go thru the steps

    Step1 is the UK goes to a lot of work to check if it's actually true. What is the US really up to? Is it really as bad as it sounds?

    Step 2 is the UK summons the US ambassador for a "meeting without coffee". Basically UK's F-Sec explains what happens if policy goes ahead.

    Step 3 is the frighteningly lame sounding "Exchange of Letters". But it's basically a last warning.

    Step 4 is where shit gets real. GCHQ cancels UK-US CT sharing in theatres of operation where torture might reasonably take place

    Step 5 is the UK evicts the NSA integrees and recalls the GCHQ integrees. The loss to both here is really pretty unimaginable.

    Step 6 is UK basically puts the US into the tier set of IC partners that need caution. Also in this set: Pakistan, Saudi, Afghanistan etc.

    No matter how much info beating the shit out of a detainee gives CIA, it's unlikely it'll be worth sacrificing the NSA-GCHQ CT relnship over

    Would we really do this?
    I would love to think we would take a principled stand against torture... But would we really cut off things with the Us like this?
  • Options
    Morning all. Fabulously busy at work so can only dip in and out. A few thoughts:

    1. Full blown denial amongst many in the party over the Copeland canvass return leak. Have heard internally that the leak was accurate, so things really are that bad on the ground. Can be turned around of course but not the place any campaign would like to start.

    2. Selection of a hard Remainer in Stoke an inspired move. He's now moved on to "we have to hold the Tories to account on A50" whereas Eddie Hitler for UKIP will be doing the piedmont piper bit and telling people to follow the pretty pipe music to a WTO deal and ignore the cowards warning against. If Labour retain the seat a nuanced argument on Brexit can be rolled out everywhere.

    3. If we lose both - and I think we probably will - even my local Momentum activists are saying it's the end for Corbyn. They describe "the nutters" as disagreeing, but apparently there was a showdown with "the nutters" over the new Momentum constitution where they put up an argument against internal democracy and the need for party membership (as Trots they're barred from the party), we're voted down and promptly invited to leave the meeting. Perhaps there is a place for Jeremy for Labour Ltd after all...
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,990

    So May is going to tell the Republicans that the UK and US can 'lead the world again' at the same time as they are preparing an escalation in Syria. What will she do if they ask her to put her troops where her mouth is?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/25/donald-trump-orders-establishment-safe-zones-syria/

    President Trump is ordering the Pentagon and State Department to develop a series of “safe zones” in Syria, a move that administration critics claims could draw the U.S. military deeper into the country’s civil war.

    Surely the whole point of Trumps inauguaral speech was that he doesn’t want the US to lead the world; he doesn’t give a whatsit about the rest of the world, he is only interested in the US’s interests.

    Suggesting to him that ‘together we can lead the world’ would mean to him that the UK will do what the US wants and that everyone else can go hang.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    rkrkrk said:

    Wonder if this is one of the things on the Trump-May agenda:

    @pwnallthethings
    But torture really is a red line. UK and US will both be cripplingly harmed if the US restarts the torture program. Let me go thru the steps

    Step1 is the UK goes to a lot of work to check if it's actually true. What is the US really up to? Is it really as bad as it sounds?

    Step 2 is the UK summons the US ambassador for a "meeting without coffee". Basically UK's F-Sec explains what happens if policy goes ahead.

    Step 3 is the frighteningly lame sounding "Exchange of Letters". But it's basically a last warning.

    Step 4 is where shit gets real. GCHQ cancels UK-US CT sharing in theatres of operation where torture might reasonably take place

    Step 5 is the UK evicts the NSA integrees and recalls the GCHQ integrees. The loss to both here is really pretty unimaginable.

    Step 6 is UK basically puts the US into the tier set of IC partners that need caution. Also in this set: Pakistan, Saudi, Afghanistan etc.

    No matter how much info beating the shit out of a detainee gives CIA, it's unlikely it'll be worth sacrificing the NSA-GCHQ CT relnship over

    Would we really do this?
    I would love to think we would take a principled stand against torture... But would we really cut off things with the Us like this?
    Trump has already said that while he thinks "enhanced interrogation' (sic) works he'll take advice - the 2005 Law Lords ruling makes it pretty difficult to reinstate legally:

    ...the English common law has regarded torture and its fruits with abhorrence for over 500 years

    https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldjudgmt/jd051208/aand.pdf
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    Interesting that May is first speaking (behind closed doors) to the GOP, rather than Trump.....'rolling the pitch' springs to mind - and whether by accident or design is canny.....talking of which, I bet someone's spitting feathers over the present May is taking Trump.....

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/25/theresa-may-to-tell-the-us-we-can-lead-together-again-donald-trump
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    It is catastrophic that were forced to get close to Trump.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Jonathan said:

    It is catastrophic that were forced to get close to Trump.

    Catastrophic?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @GuardianHeather: Off to US today with the PM, who's hoping to strike up what Number 10 calls a "grown up" relationship with Trump. theguardian.com/politics/2017/…

    How can she have a "grown up" relationship with a giant man-baby?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Scott_P said:

    @GuardianHeather: Off to US today with the PM, who's hoping to strike up what Number 10 calls a "grown up" relationship with Trump. theguardian.com/politics/2017/…

    How can she have a "grown up" relationship with a giant man-baby?

    Sad.

    ;)
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,718
    First poll I have seen that shows a proportion of Remainers embracing the fait accompli. I know they exist because am acquainted with a couple of them, including my wife. It will be interesting to see if that acceptance spreads to a consensus.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,677
    FF43 said:

    First poll I have seen that shows a proportion of Remainers embracing the fait accompli. I know they exist because am acquainted with a couple of them, including my wife. It will be interesting to see if that acceptance spreads to a consensus.

    It also shows there is more acceptance than remorse.......
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    A particularly good podcast by Keiran. Both girls very articulate and well adjudicated by Keiran. The BBC ought to give him Marr's slot on Sunday morning. Much better able to create a discussion and unlike Marr able to think on his feet so his segues work.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Maybe Trump was water boarding in Russia.


    Is this the special relationship were looking for?
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    edited January 2017
    Scott_P said:
    Wow.

    Edit... One of the dangers with Trump is that because I believe him capable of some crazy stuff... I'm likely to believe crazy stories like this.
    The story might not be true.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,548
    Astonishing days. Has this one been mentioned?

    McCluskey have his UNITE leadership warming a disciplinary final written warning for speaking to a meeting of Labour MPs.

    https://twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/824306705622245377
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    rkrkrk said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/braddjaffy/status/824401933976961027

    Wow.

    Edit... One of the dangers with Trump is that because I believe him capable of some crazy stuff... I'm likely to believe crazy stories like this.
    The story might not be true.
    Without video/audio, who knows!
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    FF43 said:

    First poll I have seen that shows a proportion of Remainers embracing the fait accompli. I know they exist because am acquainted with a couple of them, including my wife. It will be interesting to see if that acceptance spreads to a consensus.

    There is a slight movement in that direction, but not much 7 months on, before the real process starts. It is going to be a divided nation for the foreaable, with not much margin if it all goes tits up.
  • Options
    Conservatives have selected Trudy Harrison to be the candidate in the Copeland by-election. I know no more than that.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    rkrkrk said:

    Wonder if this is one of the things on the Trump-May agenda:

    @pwnallthethings
    But torture really is a red line. UK and US will both be cripplingly harmed if the US restarts the torture program. Let me go thru the steps

    Step1 is the UK goes to a lot of work to check if it's actually true. What is the US really up to? Is it really as bad as it sounds?

    Step 2 is the UK summons the US ambassador for a "meeting without coffee". Basically UK's F-Sec explains what happens if policy goes ahead.

    Step 3 is the frighteningly lame sounding "Exchange of Letters". But it's basically a last warning.

    Step 4 is where shit gets real. GCHQ cancels UK-US CT sharing in theatres of operation where torture might reasonably take place

    Step 5 is the UK evicts the NSA integrees and recalls the GCHQ integrees. The loss to both here is really pretty unimaginable.

    Step 6 is UK basically puts the US into the tier set of IC partners that need caution. Also in this set: Pakistan, Saudi, Afghanistan etc.

    No matter how much info beating the shit out of a detainee gives CIA, it's unlikely it'll be worth sacrificing the NSA-GCHQ CT relnship over

    Would we really do this?
    I would love to think we would take a principled stand against torture... But would we really cut off things with the Us like this?
    It sounds like a Love Actually fantasy to me. The job of the UK PM is to protect the people of the UK and intelligence cooperation with the US is very important for that. It would be a dereliction of duty to turn our back on it.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Conservatives have selected Trudy Harrison to be the candidate in the Copeland by-election. I know no more than that.

    She lives in Bootle, is 40, and has four daughters... now you know a lot more :D

    http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2017/01/trudy-harrison-is-selected-as-conservative-candidate-for-copeland-cchq-is-economical-with-her-cv.html
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    FF43 said:

    First poll I have seen that shows a proportion of Remainers embracing the fait accompli. I know they exist because am acquainted with a couple of them, including my wife. It will be interesting to see if that acceptance spreads to a consensus.

    The pre-referendum polling conducted for Dominic Cummings showed that the instinctive feeling towards Leave as the right option was around 70-30 in favour. The 52-48 was essentially the swing to Remain of 18% that would have voted Leave but for economic worries/project fear.

    Given that the prophesies of doom have not materialised to any substantial extent, and that talk of back of the queue can be seen to be nonsense now, it's inevitable that some will conclude they were misled by the Remain campaign.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    Scott_P said:
    Whether you agree or disagree with her on this particular issue Sarah Wallaston has become a royal pain in the ass for the party leadership and has almost singlehandedly put me off primaries for selecting candidates. It encourages a degree of independence not compatible with good governance, especially when there is only a small majority.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613
    Is there a market on the nominee for the US Supreme Court anywhere ?
    Some of the runners...
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/william_pryor_has_no_place_on_the_supreme_court.html
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:
    Whether you agree or disagree with her on this particular issue Sarah Wallaston has become a royal pain in the ass for the party leadership and has almost singlehandedly put me off primaries for selecting candidates. It encourages a degree of independence not compatible with good governance, especially when there is only a small majority.
    Hasn't May said she wouldn't be afraid to speak candidly on such issues with him? Whether he pays any attention is another matter!
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Jonathan said:

    Maybe Trump was water boarding in Russia.


    Is this the special relationship were looking for?

    The realisation is slowly dawning that they haven't voted for an entertaining games show host who they thought would enliven politics but someone totally insane. Watching people tiptoeing around this fact is starting to look awkward. He's modelled himself on Dr Strangelove and no one seems to know what to do about it
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Nigelb said:

    Is there a market on the nominee for the US Supreme Court anywhere ?
    Some of the runners...
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/william_pryor_has_no_place_on_the_supreme_court.html

    Are their any judges in or married to the Trump family?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    RobD said:

    Conservatives have selected Trudy Harrison to be the candidate in the Copeland by-election. I know no more than that.

    She lives in Bootle, is 40, and has four daughters... now you know a lot more :D

    http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2017/01/trudy-harrison-is-selected-as-conservative-candidate-for-copeland-cchq-is-economical-with-her-cv.html
    All 4 main parties are fielding female candidates, the Green is a bloke.
This discussion has been closed.