Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whilst it is understandable national campaigning has been susp

1234568

Comments

  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,767
    MJW said:

    IanB2 said:

    Barnesian said:

    I agree with Mrs May that things have got to change.

    I'd add:

    1) Tackle the Saudi issue. Their finance and malign influence on British schools and mosques is unacceptable. UK arms suppliers will complain but our security is more important.

    2) Increase resources for policing and anti-terrorism (and for God's sake don't mention the magic money tree). The issue doesn't seem to be in identifying suspects but in monitoring and managing them. More mass surveillance isn't the answer. More manpower is.

    3) More explicitly support the Palestinian cause e.g. by recognising Palestine and risk upsetting Israel. This would have widespread support in the UK but it also helps neutralise the grievances exploited by the radicalisers of weak young men.

    If I were Corbyn, I would go with these.

    Agree with one, two is inevitable. The problem with three is that, while if we could somehow get move significantly towards an Israeli-Palestinian solution to the conflict tomorrow it might help, it's a hostage to fortune linking it with terrorism as any sort of justification. Firstly, because it's an intractable, possibly insoluble issue and you're setting yourself up for failure down the line and appearing to concede Jihadis may have a point won't help when you can't deliver. We recognise fully recognise Palestine, but then what? When there's little movement for a year or two, we'll be accused of treachery to the cause. Furthermore, one of the defining traits of extremists is that they don't differentiate between their opponents. Countries that vehemently opposed Iraq, for example, or who have a generally compassionate stance on the middle-East are just as much targets as us and America. More Muslims, many from resolutely anti-Israel nations, are killed by Islamist terrorists than westerners as anyone who doesn't buy the ideology hook-line-and-sinker is a collaborator with the enemy. They would find another issue to use as a wedge against us. It's one of the reasons Israel is so militaristic - the understandable fear that when it came down to it, prominent groups either running or with political influence in neighbouring nations wouldn't blink about wiping it out even if they offered compromise. It's not the IRA where the things we had in our gift - governmental autonomy, investment etc, can bring people to the table.

    That's not to say we shouldn't be asking Israel to rein in some excesses and to move towards a long term solution and promoting political reform in the ME in general, but not as part of an effort to stop these vile lunatics.
    Amber Rudd might disagree with point one - see her reaction to the Saudi issue being raised at a recent election husting.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEcMW6RmC_w&feature=youtu.be
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    What do you base your expectation on? Wouldn't that constitute a betrayal of those who voted Labour?
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,907
    ydoethur said:

    rkrkrk said:



    Forget Ideological craziness. VAT on private school fees will cost the country vast sums of money. How do you expect the state system to cope when all those schools shut down and there is a huge influx of pupils back into the system. 615,000 children are in private education. Where are the state schools to teach them?

    Those schools won't shut down. They will cut costs, parents will pay more or downshift to a cheaper private option. Fees have gone up massively - parents still pay them. And schools are spending loads of money on impressive facilities to show off.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-charts-that-shows-how-private-school-fees-have-exploded-a7023056.html
    Richard is right and you are wrong. That article's figures are entirely wrong and appear to be actually forged. Just to take one instant example, the AVERAGE private day school fee is £14,000, where the article you link to implies it is a minimum of £15,500. It also fails to mention that teachers salaries have doubled since 1998 alone, which accounts for much of the cost pressure on both sectors.

    The state sector will have to take up a huge amount of dropouts from the private sector, with no extra money, if this goes ahead. At this moment, the state sector is already grossly over-extended and underfunded. This would lead to collapse. And who would escape it? Only those who could still afford private school fees - the likes of say Diane Abbott.

    It is the policy of greed and envy and damn the consequences drawn up by a man who in effect failed all his exams at a boarding school and a woman who has repeatedly demonstrated she would have failed them had she not taken steps to avoid sitting them.
    I very much doubt the independent has 'forged' the figures.
    The difference between 15,500 and 14,000 isn't very big and I imagine is just methodological. Maybe one figure includes nurseries or has a different school population or something else. They actually cite their sources too...

    What is beyond question is that private school fees have risen very fast, much more than inflation and yet numbers of pupils rise.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,378
    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    Barnesian said:

    I agree with Mrs May that things have got to change.

    I'd add:

    1) Tackle the Saudi issue. Their finance and malign influence on British schools and mosques is unacceptable. UK arms suppliers will complain but our security is more important
    If I were Corbyn, I would go with these.

    1 is the right thing to do, but the Tories never will. As much of a blind spot for them as some of the Corbyn baggage. 2 is inevitable now anyway, surely? 3 is also right, but impossible to do now without it looking as if we have been bombed into it.

    We got away with 3 in Northern Ireland by maintaining an overly hard-line against any concliliation in public whilst working away furiously in private to try and resolve or neutralise the discrimination and grievances, and talking to the terrorists whilst insisting that we weren't. But the Middle East isn't our conflict to manage, and besides Mr Trump wants to sort it out himself.
    Agree on point 1 very strongly and said as much two and a half years at the time of the Hebdo killings. We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    Corbyn won't do this because such steps would upset some of his core voters. The Tories should do this if May's words are to mean something but, sadly, won't. BaE should not be allowed to determine our policies. The Lib Dems stupidly want to abolish Prevent.

    The government would do well to listen to Nazir Afzal (see the Times interview with him yesterday).

    "Sadly, there's an industry which is trying to undermine Prevent......some of them are Islamists." "It [Prevent] has done phenomenally good work. It's stopped at least 150 people from going to Syria."

    Well worth reading all of it. That's who the government should be listening to not what he describes as self- appointed community leaders with the wrong priorities. There are plenty of Muslims who want to change things for the better. But it is the noisy and malicious groups such as Cage who get the attention and airtime.
    Agreed. Prevent, while far from perfect (and necessarily evolving over time), is an eminently sensible long term effort to separate the extremists and death cultists from their communities, and to hamper the recruitment/indoctrination of more extremists.

    'Islamist' is a useful term to make the distinction between those who will abide by the rules of a liberal democracy, and those who won't.

  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.

    May has admitted she has failed.

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017
    Nigelb said:



    Agreed. Prevent, while far from perfect (and necessarily evolving over time), is an eminently sensible long term effort to separate the extremists and death cultists from their communities, and to hamper the recruitment/indoctrination of more extremists.

    'Islamist' is a useful term to make the distinction between those who will abide by the rules of a liberal democracy, and those who won't.

    Majjid Nawaz makes a very clear case for why politicians should have been using the term Islamist and Islamism for years and not the bullshit about nothing to do with Islam.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,919
    Yorkcity said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    Blair asked Conservatives like May and Davis to stand up and be counted over control orders and 90 day detention.However they stood together in opposition with Corbyn and Abott
    And they were absolutely right. When the former head of MI5 is saying your idea is rubbish and will do nothing to help fight terrorism and your own former Attorney General and Lord Chancellor say the same thing, chances are your idea is bollocks. Both the 42 and 90 day retention ideas were utter garbage which would have done nothing to help fight terrorism.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,287

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    If Corbyn left either of those two out, it would be a huge error of judgement. Abbott has no experience as a minister, left on the backbenches by Blair and Brown for very good reasons. She is simply not up the job.
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.
    I will only stop bedwetting when I hear DimbleBore in a depressed voice say the BBC Exit Poll predicts a Tory Majority of 100.
    I will be happy with any majority, May weakened or no, because it stops Corbyn from becoming PM. That is now the only thing that matters.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,581

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    What do you base your expectation on? Wouldn't that constitute a betrayal of those who voted Labour?
    Corbyn would need the PLP on-side to get anything through parliament. The only way to do that is to get all wings of the PLP into cabinet.

    Now I am off....
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.
    What? And lose all those defence orders? All those exports????

    Personally I would remove the UK assets of every wahabist and salafsist supporter and donate them to charities opposing ISIS violence. If that included those members of the House of Saud then so be it.


    Tessy & the PB Tories have the St Augustine approach to the Saudis: Lord, make them virtuous, but not until we've sold a shitload of weaponry to them.
    And all those engines Rolls Royce sell for the A380s and 777s and such. RR have £0.5bn worth with Saudi and £6.5bn worth with Emirates. That is nearly one year's EU nett contribution so maybe after Brexit we can afford to give them all the two fingered salute???
    Can you tell us who the last PM was who did not visit Saudi Arabia while in office?
    No I cannot tell you, because every PM goes. That is why we will swallow hard and put up with people getting killed on our streets. It is money first, people second no matter who is in charge. Corbyn would be no different from May.

  • Options
    oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455

    OchEye said:



    ... lots of idiotic whining snipped ...

    The Cameron and May Tory administrations have incredibly, managed, in 7 years, to increase the level by more than all the Labour Party administrations in history.

    Yes, the Tories have a great record, wonder why they don't try to make more about it?????

    Bollocks.

    Brown didnt just leave the UK with a debt, it left it with a deficit, the first being what we owe, and the second the rate at which the first number is getting bigger. When Brown left office the first number was getting bigger at the rate of 160 thousand million pounds EVERY year.

    If Camborne had done nothing we would now be 7 * 160bn = 1.12tn FURTHER in debt, actually quite a lot more than that because of the debt interest acrued. In 2010 the UK public debt was £1.52tn, today it is around £1.96tn, rather less of an increase than it would be if the Tories had just kept going like Brown.

    Could Camborne have cut the deficit faster, you bet your arse they could, by spending less, do you think the left might have complained if they had reduced public spending by 160 thousand million PER YEAR to balance the books ? You have to admit its a faint possibility.


    Neither of these things are altogether right. A reduction in year one of £160bn of public spending would have been unsustainably painful, but no further cuts would then have been needed in future years from the new baseline.

    In addition it ignores the heavy lifting of reducing the deficit is, really, done in the main neither by cuts or by tax rises, but by economic growth.

    Did we need to address the structural element of the deficit? Sure. Would the 2015-6 deficit have been the same as the 2009-10 deficit if we hadn't? Of course not.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017
    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.
    I will only stop bedwetting when I hear DimbleBore in a depressed voice say the BBC Exit Poll predicts a Tory Majority of 100.
    I will be happy with any majority, May weakened or no, because it stops Corbyn from becoming PM. That is now the only thing that matters.
    Well yes, but if he says 50 or 100, I means I can stop bedwetting then and there. If he says 10, well it will be a night of feeling sick.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Alas, Sunday cooking beckons...

    c u l8r folks ;)
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852

    Yorkcity said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    Blair asked Conservatives like May and Davis to stand up and be counted over control orders and 90 day detention.However they stood together in opposition with Corbyn and Abott
    And they were absolutely right. When the former head of MI5 is saying your idea is rubbish and will do nothing to help fight terrorism and your own former Attorney General and Lord Chancellor say the same thing, chances are your idea is bollocks. Both the 42 and 90 day retention ideas were utter garbage which would have done nothing to help fight terrorism.
    Not to mention the police's complete inability to produce a single case in which their investigation had been hampered by not being able to hold the suspect long enough without charging them.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    3: May - Enough is enough
    4: Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    calum said:
    About ff ING time.Tories are idiots getting rid of control orders.They were just opposing for short term reasons.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262
    edited June 2017
    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    How a Tory can "unmitigatingly" throw a leftwinger through a window I don't know. And that's regardless of whether the Tory is wearing knuckledusters with pictures of the monarch on, or whether their hands are dripping with foxblood.

    Your strength of feeling comes across well. And it's not the Labour promise to increase inheritance tax you're so concerned with, right? Perish the thought! Your concern is national security alone - for oiks, office cleaners, single mothers on council estates, property developers, and privately-schooled bankers who flash their Rolexes and swap tips on tax-dodging, all without distinction. Right?

    Hahaha! The Brechtian phrase "Do you really think your opponents are so powerful?" comes to mind.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    What do you base your expectation on? Wouldn't that constitute a betrayal of those who voted Labour?
    Corbyn would need the PLP on-side to get anything through parliament. The only way to do that is to get all wings of the PLP into cabinet.

    Now I am off....
    If Corbyn wins most seats and the PLP start playing silly buggers there will be hell to pay.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,907
    dr_spyn said:

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    If Corbyn left either of those two out, it would be a huge error of judgement. Abbott has no experience as a minister, left on the backbenches by Blair and Brown for very good reasons. She is simply not up the job.
    Cooper was shadow home secretary for Miliband wasn't she?
    Corbyn has praised her on refugee issues.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,966

    tlg86 said:

    SeanT said:

    SandyRentool:

    "Anyone who believes that the county would be less secure in the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday needs to think again."

    ****

    "In the unlikely event that Labour forms a government on Friday"... our Home Secretary would be Diane Abbott.

    That is, really, all we need to know. Just that. Just that one fact.

    Vote Conservative.

    Abbott would be shuffled off into a corner. If we were to win I would fully expect the likes of Cooper, Benn et al to be taking on the big jobs.
    Sorry Sandy, but you are utterly deluded.
    I would say 'we'll see' but of course we won't because May will still be PM.


    Anyway, I need to go and fit a curtain poll...
    '25% when asked preferred a heavy, lined damask..'
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.
    I will only stop bedwetting when I hear DimbleBore in a depressed voice say the BBC Exit Poll predicts a Tory Majority of 100.
    I will be happy with any majority, May weakened or no, because it stops Corbyn from becoming PM. That is now the only thing that matters.
    I wouldn't be sure it did mean that. May with a small majority visibly screwing up brexit from the word go, and her party split about it, would be entirely vulnerable to a better prepared Corbyn beating her in another GE this year or next.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157
    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-34836582/jeremy-corbyn-opposes-shoot-to-kill-policy

    Old news (November) but I just saw this trending at Number 5 on the BBC News website.

    Now, moments later, it doesn't seem to be listed in top 10 anymore.

    Some manipulation going on here?

    Lefty BBC protecting Labour? Who'd have thunk it.
    I've found Laura Kuennsberg very good this campaign to be honest.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.
    I will only stop bedwetting when I hear DimbleBore in a depressed voice say the BBC Exit Poll predicts a Tory Majority of 100.
    I will be happy with any majority, May weakened or no, because it stops Corbyn from becoming PM. That is now the only thing that matters.
    I wouldn't be sure it did mean that. May with a small majority visibly screwing up brexit from the word go, and her party split about it, would be entirely vulnerable to a better prepared Corbyn beating her in another GE this year or next.
    This is the worst thing (and the most bizarre thing about the Tory non-campaign). They have allowed Corbynism to be legitimized.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-34836582/jeremy-corbyn-opposes-shoot-to-kill-policy

    Old news (November) but I just saw this trending at Number 5 on the BBC News website.

    Now, moments later, it doesn't seem to be listed in top 10 anymore.

    Some manipulation going on here?

    Lefty BBC protecting Labour? Who'd have thunk it.
    People regularly try to game the "most read".
    And if they're Tories, they blame reds under the bed when they don't succeed to at least the full extent of their expectations.

    What I'm wondering is whether the Tory machine is seeking to kill its already badly wounded prey, or whether it's absolutely cacking it.

  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852

    OchEye said:



    ... lots of idiotic whining snipped ...

    The Cameron and May Tory administrations have incredibly, managed, in 7 years, to increase the level by more than all the Labour Party administrations in history.

    Yes, the Tories have a great record, wonder why they don't try to make more about it?????

    Bollocks.

    Brown didnt just leave the UK with a debt, it left it with a deficit, the first being what we owe, and the second the rate at which the first number is getting bigger. When Brown left office the first number was getting bigger at the rate of 160 thousand million pounds EVERY year.

    If Camborne had done nothing we would now be 7 * 160bn = 1.12tn FURTHER in debt, actually quite a lot more than that because of the debt interest acrued. In 2010 the UK public debt was £1.52tn, today it is around £1.96tn, rather less of an increase than it would be if the Tories had just kept going like Brown.

    Could Camborne have cut the deficit faster, you bet your arse they could, by spending less, do you think the left might have complained if they had reduced public spending by 160 thousand million PER YEAR to balance the books ? You have to admit its a faint possibility.


    Neither of these things are altogether right. A reduction in year one of £160bn of public spending would have been unsustainably painful, but no further cuts would then have been needed in future years from the new baseline.

    In addition it ignores the heavy lifting of reducing the deficit is, really, done in the main neither by cuts or by tax rises, but by economic growth.

    Did we need to address the structural element of the deficit? Sure. Would the 2015-6 deficit have been the same as the 2009-10 deficit if we hadn't? Of course not.
    I am sure you will agree its not quite as simple as just cutting 160bn from public spending, it would have to be cuts that amount to a permanent reduction. Defering capital projects would not count, infact defering anything wouldnt really count, it would have to come from salaries, benefits and increased taxation. To do it we would need a Chrétien sort of budget where the state just stopped doing whole catagories of stuff, trimming and pruning would not remotely cut the mustard.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    May's speech this morning was markedly different in tone and content to the one after Manchester. It was very deliberate in its purpose. To sound tough, and to lure Labour into a trap.

    It's already working, I would suggest. The whole tone has changed, especially from the Tories, and Labour are left looking weak and equivocal.

    Three days of 'Enough is Enough' is gold dust for the Tories, let's not pretend otherwise.
    I will only stop bedwetting when I hear DimbleBore in a depressed voice say the BBC Exit Poll predicts a Tory Majority of 100.
    I will be happy with any majority, May weakened or no, because it stops Corbyn from becoming PM. That is now the only thing that matters.
    I wouldn't be sure it did mean that. May with a small majority visibly screwing up brexit from the word go, and her party split about it, would be entirely vulnerable to a better prepared Corbyn beating her in another GE this year or next.
    This is the worst thing (and the most bizarre thing about the Tory non-campaign). They have allowed Corbynism to be legitimized.
    That is why Boris is revving up his tanks and charting a course for May's lawn.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.
    What? And lose all those defence orders? All those exports????

    Personally I would remove the UK assets of every wahabist and salafsist supporter and donate them to charities opposing ISIS violence. If that included those members of the House of Saud then so be it.


    Tessy & the PB Tories have the St Augustine approach to the Saudis: Lord, make them virtuous, but not until we've sold a shitload of weaponry to them.
    And all those engines Rolls Royce sell for the A380s and 777s and such. RR have £0.5bn worth with Saudi and £6.5bn worth with Emirates. That is nearly one year's EU nett contribution so maybe after Brexit we can afford to give them all the two fingered salute???
    Can you tell us who the last PM was who did not visit Saudi Arabia while in office?
    No I cannot tell you, because every PM goes. That is why we will swallow hard and put up with people getting killed on our streets. It is money first, people second no matter who is in charge. Corbyn would be no different from May.

    Corbyn no different from May over Saudi Arabia ?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    Wow! The government is lying says the Police Federation.
    https://twitter.com/andysearson/status/871339149630070784
  • Options
    chloechloe Posts: 308

    Jason said:

    I think the conservatives really need to take the gloves off now and go hard after Corbyn and his record. The thought that next week, this man and his team of terrorist sympathisers could be running this country, is truly terrifying.

    Could not agree more. These final three days could sway hundreds of thousands of voters in marginal seats all over the UK. The Tories need to tell those waverers the terrible reality of what a Corbyn government would look like - and the 'friends' he would legitimise at the stroke of a pen.

    A relentless, unmitigating and uncompromising defenestration of Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott. All of the Tories must now sing from the same hymn sheet, no equivocation on this subject.

    Who cares how this appears in the Westminster bubble. UKIP waverers will love it, and so will a good deal of the WWC.

    Time for the Tories to stand up and be counted.
    We have been waiting for this for weeks...and nothing....I just can't see it coming. There has been no sustained attack on some of the dodgiest people ever with a chance to gain high office.

    Cameron go a right going over because he smoked a few joints and was member of a posho drinking club and Miliband got the full on shit show for weeks.
    I don't understand why they haven't been attacked, there are so many possibilities. What has Lynton being doing? They have let Corbyn have the limelight and not be challenged. And now they may be on the verge of government.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,847
    dr_spyn said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-34836582/jeremy-corbyn-opposes-shoot-to-kill-policy

    Old news (November) but I just saw this trending at Number 5 on the BBC News website.

    Now, moments later, it doesn't seem to be listed in top 10 anymore.

    Some manipulation going on here?

    Lefty BBC protecting Labour? Who'd have thunk it.
    The Corbyn and Shoot to kill clip is still trending on BBC at no 5.
    Good. It needs to get to a bigger, mainstream audience, especially the day after our armed police took down three terrorists on a rampage in central London.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,291
    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262
    edited June 2017
    Ishmael_Z said:

    That is why Boris is revving up his tanks and charting a course for May's lawn.

    Perhaps Labour should focus on Boris. Who in their right mind would want that man as prime minister? Must Britain ape the United States in everything?
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Press TV ? Wasn't there a prominent politician who regularly opined for them and was happy to collect their largess ? Name escapes me for the moment.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187
    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.
    What are they bloody doing.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,291

    Wow! The government is lying says the Police Federation.
    https://twitter.com/andysearson/status/871339149630070784

    That's not too bad - the Police Federation can be dismissed as having a personal gripe against Theresa. IDS's proclamation that the Labour's more effective policies were 'watered down' by the government is far more dangerous.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

  • Options
    Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,060
    calum said:
    Looking closely I can see some heroic truncating of the y-axis to make things look far worse than they actually are. Is this a Lib-Dem tweet?
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,378
    The death cultists slaughter their co-religionists too:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40146724
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

    After Thursday, can we have a redraw for leaders of all 3 major English parties? Need The Donald or Sir Alllllllan to sit them down and tell them they are all fired.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited June 2017
    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    The ironic thing is that they could probably do a lot more damage in a provincial market town but that wouldn't have the "impact" they seek, in their perverse way of thinking.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670


    What name ?

    I've never seen the Conservative party described as the Conservative and Unionist party on any leaflets or ballot papers I've ever received.

    And the Unionist part relates to Irish Unionism in any case.

    They're calling themselves the Conservative and Unionist party on my partner's postal ballot paper. Since they haven't a scooby in our constituency, I assume that's the title on all the Scottish ballot papers.

    Tbf it's not all that evident on their literature, it's mostly the Ruth Davidson party & the Ruth Davidson candidate.

    https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/871254955721723904
    Ruth looks like she's just noticed a particularly nasty smell in the room...
    More like the social media account for another one of her councillors has been brought to her attention.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046

    calum said:
    Looking closely I can see some heroic truncating of the y-axis to make things look far worse than they actually are. Is this a Lib-Dem tweet?
    Eoin RT - he's Labour
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017
    calum said:

    calum said:
    Looking closely I can see some heroic truncating of the y-axis to make things look far worse than they actually are. Is this a Lib-Dem tweet?
    Eoin RT - he's Labour
    And notorious for his dodgy data presentation.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Press TV ? Wasn't there a prominent politician who regularly opined for them and was happy to collect their largess ? Name escapes me for the moment.
    Two prominent politicians. One of them had a thing about a certain Mr H.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,378
    AndyJS said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    The ironic thing is that they could probably do a lot more damage in a provincial market town but that wouldn't have the "impact" they seek, in their perverse way of thinking.
    Given the arrests in Huddersfield last week, no releasing to assume these wouldn't also be targets.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
    It's similar in a sense to living in the country. You accept that response times for ambulance, fire brigade etc will be (in some cases) far longer.

    There is no sensible argument for having armed police permanently circulating in say, Loughborough, Kings Lynn or Oswestry.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    matt said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
    It's similar in a sense to living in the country. You accept that response times for ambulance, fire brigade etc will be (in some cases) far longer.

    There is no sensible argument for having armed police permanently circulating in say, Loughborough, Kings Lynn or Oswestry.
    Residents of Hereford won't have to worry about response times for such an incident.
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    edited June 2017
    Test
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Nigelb said:

    AndyJS said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    The ironic thing is that they could probably do a lot more damage in a provincial market town but that wouldn't have the "impact" they seek, in their perverse way of thinking.
    Given the arrests in Huddersfield last week, no releasing to assume these wouldn't also be targets.
    Will they really sh1t in their own garden?
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    SeanT said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Iran, for all its faults, is much more palatable than Saudi Arabia. Iran is more pluralistic, and less mysoginistic. It has a proud Persian history which long predates Islam, it has a literature and a culture which draws on many sources, not just the Koran.

    If there is hope for longterm reform in Islam - an Enlightenment - my guess is that it will come from Iran, where, ironically and relatedly, the jihadist revolution first caught fire.

    So we should keep our distance from Tehran, but not give up on them.

    The only reason we should have any dealing with Saudi is because, if the royal family was toppled, it would almost certainly be replaced by something much much worse. ISIS with a trillion dollars.
    Plus, we already have a man in a prominent position with links to the Iranian State. His initials are JC.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

    Police union bod opposes Tory PM in shocker.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    Alistair said:


    What name ?

    I've never seen the Conservative party described as the Conservative and Unionist party on any leaflets or ballot papers I've ever received.

    And the Unionist part relates to Irish Unionism in any case.

    They're calling themselves the Conservative and Unionist party on my partner's postal ballot paper. Since they haven't a scooby in our constituency, I assume that's the title on all the Scottish ballot papers.

    Tbf it's not all that evident on their literature, it's mostly the Ruth Davidson party & the Ruth Davidson candidate.

    https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/871254955721723904
    Ruth looks like she's just noticed a particularly nasty smell in the room...
    More like the social media account for another one of her councillors has been brought to her attention.
    Hopefully not another one of mine - already down 2 out of 9 !
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Y0kel said:

    There is a background connection between at least one of those London attackers and members of the Manchester circle.

    I was wondering where you were....
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,919
    matt said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
    It's similar in a sense to living in the country. You accept that response times for ambulance, fire brigade etc will be (in some cases) far longer.

    There is no sensible argument for having armed police permanently circulating in say, Loughborough, Kings Lynn or Oswestry.
    In the days after Manchester there were armed police on patrol in Newark.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157
    SeanT said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Iran, for all its faults, is much more palatable than Saudi Arabia. Iran is more pluralistic, and less mysoginistic. It has a proud Persian history which long predates Islam, it has a literature and a culture which draws on many sources, not just the Koran.

    If there is hope for longterm reform in Islam - an Enlightenment - my guess is that it will come from Iran, where, ironically and relatedly, the jihadist revolution first caught fire.

    So we should keep our distance from Tehran, but not give up on them.

    The only reason we should have any dealing with Saudi is because, if the royal family was toppled, it would almost certainly be replaced by something much much worse. ISIS with a trillion dollars.
    Iran qua Persia: you may be right.

    The Iranian regime: no. It is not "less mysogynistic". One of the first decisions of the Iranian regime was to bring the age of consent down (to 9, I think.) It uses rape as a punishment in prisons.

    Its values are revolting.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    This "police cuts" spin line is, quite frankly, a nonsense. The three attacks were not the result of police failings and in all cases the police response appears to have been exemplary.

    Having 2000, or 20,000, or 2 million extra police officers wouldn't have made the blindest bit of difference.
  • Options
    RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    AndyJS said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    The ironic thing is that they could probably do a lot more damage in a provincial market town but that wouldn't have the "impact" they seek, in their perverse way of thinking.
    It might have more - London and Manchester are big cities and they're viewed (to some extent) as different and decadent. Kendal or Nuneaton or Doncaster? Well that's everywhere.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    matt said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
    It's similar in a sense to living in the country. You accept that response times for ambulance, fire brigade etc will be (in some cases) far longer.

    There is no sensible argument for having armed police permanently circulating in say, Loughborough, Kings Lynn or Oswestry.
    In the days after Manchester there were armed police on patrol in Newark.
    Permanently. Which appears to be the suggestion.
  • Options
    OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    calum said:

    Alistair said:


    What name ?

    I've never seen the Conservative party described as the Conservative and Unionist party on any leaflets or ballot papers I've ever received.

    And the Unionist part relates to Irish Unionism in any case.

    They're calling themselves the Conservative and Unionist party on my partner's postal ballot paper. Since they haven't a scooby in our constituency, I assume that's the title on all the Scottish ballot papers.

    Tbf it's not all that evident on their literature, it's mostly the Ruth Davidson party & the Ruth Davidson candidate.

    https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/871254955721723904
    Ruth looks like she's just noticed a particularly nasty smell in the room...
    More like the social media account for another one of her councillors has been brought to her attention.
    Hopefully not another one of mine - already down 2 out of 9 !
    Inch long and an inch thick wasn't it xD ?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,847
    AndyJS said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    The ironic thing is that they could probably do a lot more damage in a provincial market town but that wouldn't have the "impact" they seek, in their perverse way of thinking.
    Quite. While the police response last night was swift and hard, nowhere outside central London could guarantee such a timely and forceful reaction. Most provincial towns away from major police stations could find the closest ARV is tens of miles away. Let's hope the scumbags don't work this out.
  • Options
    OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-34836582/jeremy-corbyn-opposes-shoot-to-kill-policy

    Old news (November) but I just saw this trending at Number 5 on the BBC News website.

    Now, moments later, it doesn't seem to be listed in top 10 anymore.

    Some manipulation going on here?

    Lefty BBC protecting Labour? Who'd have thunk it.
    I've found Laura Kuennsberg very good this campaign to be honest.
    But, even the Kuennsberg's of the world can see which way things are going and is hedging her bets for the future....
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

    The question is...why. I don't doubt she is absolutely fuming from both, but why the change in response. Either it is enough is enough, I am not doing the middle way crap, or is it because Crosby has told her the attempted middle way crap is killing you in the polls.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,919
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    It is not the same as Saudi Arabia at all. Where are the Christian Churches or Jewish Synagogues in Saudi Arabia? - They are certainly practicing openly in Iran. There are similar numbers of synagogues in Tehran and London.

    Iran is not a 'good' country but it is a whole lot better than Saudi Arabia.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

    After Thursday, can we have a redraw for leaders of all 3 major English parties? Need The Donald or Sir Alllllllan to sit them down and tell them they are all fired.
    Sadly, I suspect this is the first election in an age where the main leaders will remain in situ.

    Farron might go, I suppose.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Pulpstar said:

    3: May - Enough is enough
    4: Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill.

    May - Enough is enough - 20,000 fewer police.
    Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill - Restore 20,000 police posts.

    Discuss .... :smile:
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Weird that Ladbrokes changes the rules on F1 title bets (presumably not retroactively, of course). Now there's no each way bet. Initially, pre-season, that was 1/5 the odds for top 3. Then it was 1/3 the odds for top 2.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437
    JackW said:

    Pulpstar said:

    3: May - Enough is enough
    4: Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill.

    May - Enough is enough - 20,000 fewer police.
    Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill - Restore 20,000 police posts.

    Discuss .... :smile:
    Police numbers weren't the reason that Manchester and London happened.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,919
    matt said:

    matt said:

    tlg86 said:

    @SouthamObserver - I saw that live this morning. Kay Burley was rather taken aback by the comment about TMay badmouthing the police. He made the point about if this happened in a provincial town the response time would be much longer. Not sure what can be done about that, but so far the bad guys seem intent on going after city centre locations.

    Sounds a bit fatuous to me, at any previous time under any government the response time would be pretty poor in the province. At no time has there been ARVs circulating in provincial towns, and that's unlikely to chance even in the face of a persistent campaign, we dont have remotely enough specialists, and 20,000 bobbies in panda's won't help.
    It's similar in a sense to living in the country. You accept that response times for ambulance, fire brigade etc will be (in some cases) far longer.

    There is no sensible argument for having armed police permanently circulating in say, Loughborough, Kings Lynn or Oswestry.
    In the days after Manchester there were armed police on patrol in Newark.
    Permanently. Which appears to be the suggestion.
    I have no idea. It is not long enough to know.
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    edited June 2017
    JackW said:

    Pulpstar said:

    3: May - Enough is enough
    4: Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill.

    May - Enough is enough - 20,000 fewer police.
    Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill - Restore 20,000 police posts.

    Discuss .... :smile:
    Is this like Trident, in which Corbyn wants to keep it but won't use it? He wants loadsa cops but won't let them take down terrorists?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Weird that Ladbrokes changes the rules on F1 title bets (presumably not retroactively, of course). Now there's no each way bet. Initially, pre-season, that was 1/5 the odds for top 3. Then it was 1/3 the odds for top 2.

    Every bookmaker does that for every long term each way bet
  • Options
    oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455

    OchEye said:



    ... lots of idiotic whining snipped ...

    The Cameron and May Tory administrations have incredibly, managed, in 7 years, to increase the level by more than all the Labour Party administrations in history.

    Yes, the Tories have a great record, wonder why they don't try to make more about it?????

    Bollocks.

    Brown didnt just leave the UK with a debt, it left it with a deficit, the first being what we owe, and the second the rate at which the first number is getting bigger. When Brown left office the first number was getting bigger at the rate of 160 thousand million pounds EVERY year.

    If Camborne had done nothing we would now be 7 * 160bn = 1.12tn FURTHER in debt, actually quite a lot more than that because of the debt interest acrued. In 2010 the UK public debt was £1.52tn, today it is around £1.96tn, rather less of an increase than it would be if the Tories had just kept going like Brown.

    Could Camborne have cut the deficit faster, you bet your arse they could, by spending less, do you think the left might have complained if they had reduced public spending by 160 thousand million PER YEAR to balance the books ? You have to admit its a faint possibility.


    Neither of these things are altogether right. A reduction in year one of £160bn of public spending would have been unsustainably painful, but no further cuts would then have been needed in future years from the new baseline.

    In addition it ignores the heavy lifting of reducing the deficit is, really, done in the main neither by cuts or by tax rises, but by economic growth.

    Did we need to address the structural element of the deficit? Sure. Would the 2015-6 deficit have been the same as the 2009-10 deficit if we hadn't? Of course not.
    I am sure you will agree its not quite as simple as just cutting 160bn from public spending, it would have to be cuts that amount to a permanent reduction. Defering capital projects would not count, infact defering anything wouldnt really count, it would have to come from salaries, benefits and increased taxation. To do it we would need a Chrétien sort of budget where the state just stopped doing whole catagories of stuff, trimming and pruning would not remotely cut the mustard.
    If the structural deficit were £160bn, yes I would agree.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437

    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

    The question is...why. I don't doubt she is absolutely fuming from both, but why the change in response. Either it is enough is enough, I am not doing the middle way crap, or is it because Crosby has told her the attempted middle way crap is killing you in the polls.
    They fear UKIP making a running on this. It is the stubbornness of the UKIP vote refusing to shift back from the Tories at the moment that is keeping them in the lead.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,378
    Cyclefree said:

    SeanT said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Iran, for all its faults, is much more palatable than Saudi Arabia. Iran is more pluralistic, and less mysoginistic. It has a proud Persian history which long predates Islam, it has a literature and a culture which draws on many sources, not just the Koran.

    If there is hope for longterm reform in Islam - an Enlightenment - my guess is that it will come from Iran, where, ironically and relatedly, the jihadist revolution first caught fire.

    So we should keep our distance from Tehran, but not give up on them.

    The only reason we should have any dealing with Saudi is because, if the royal family was toppled, it would almost certainly be replaced by something much much worse. ISIS with a trillion dollars.
    Iran qua Persia: you may be right.

    The Iranian regime: no. It is not "less mysogynistic". One of the first decisions of the Iranian regime was to bring the age of consent down (to 9, I think.) It uses rape as a punishment in prisons.

    Its values are revolting.
    True. But Iran is not just the regime, and I think Sean is right about the medium/long term possibility of a more liberal society there.
    The west's no compromise attitude to the regime has only strengthened it over the years. One of the few foreign policy successes under Obama was nascent engagement - which is now being reversed.
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    JackW said:

    Pulpstar said:

    3: May - Enough is enough
    4: Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill.

    May - Enough is enough - 20,000 fewer police.
    Corbyn - Opposes shoot to kill - Restore 20,000 police posts.

    Discuss .... :smile:
    20,000 bobbies wont make any difference, the key is specialist armed police and intelligence services, both of which Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell want to abolish. No further discussion required.
  • Options
    TudorRoseTudorRose Posts: 1,662

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

    After Thursday, can we have a redraw for leaders of all 3 major English parties? Need The Donald or Sir Alllllllan to sit them down and tell them they are all fired.
    Sadly, I suspect this is the first election in an age where the main leaders will remain in situ.

    Farron might go, I suppose.
    He might not have a choice.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,847

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Weird that Ladbrokes changes the rules on F1 title bets (presumably not retroactively, of course). Now there's no each way bet. Initially, pre-season, that was 1/5 the odds for top 3. Then it was 1/3 the odds for top 2.

    Because they are pretty sure about the top 2 now, that's why. Top 3 bet would be much more interesting as there's four contenders.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,378
    I think Sean's wrong about an Enlightenment, though. That's far more likely to take hold first in Europe's moslem communities.
  • Options
    CyanCyan Posts: 1,262
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    I did not make the argument that any enemy of Saudi should be considered Britain's friend. That would be idiotic. Iran does not fund terrorist networks in Britain or anywhere else. The country is no longer controlled by crazy ayatollahs. The only reason Iran is demonised, and the only reason that Britain has proscribed Hezbollah, is to help Israel.

    There are many British citizens in foreign jails, including some who have broken foreign laws which are different from British ones. There are also many foreign citizens in British jails.

    Salafist jihadists literally call for the murder of all Shiites.

    Iran is also much more tolerant internally than not only Saudi and Qatar but also some poorer Arab regimes. (That was not true 30 years ago.) There is the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, yes. But although I would not in any way support any kind of physical attack on Rushdie, he knew what he was doing when he wrote a book depicting the prophet Mohammed as a pig-f*cking son of a wh*re. The fatwa is wrong and should be removed, but there is such a thing as provocation.

    Why do friends have to share your values on everything? I would agree, though, that Britain should not condone the use of the death penalty or the brutality of corporal punishment in any other country - whether that's Iran, Singapore or the United States.

  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,059

    alex. said:

    David Davis on BBC now

    Will he mention why it was a good idea to call a by-election in 2008 in order to curb the detention time for alleged terror suspects?
    Complete bollocks from you there.

    No one who actually knew anything about counter terrorist work actually wanted the extension. It was just another stupid statist, control freak stunt by Gordon Brown. When the former head of MI5 says your idea is dumb it might be worth listening to them.
    Didn't really appreciate the un-parliamentary observation but hey-ho!

    Unlike yourself I am no expert on counter-terrorism although I seem to recall that there were conflicting arguments from both sides.

    I don't particularly want to defend Brown, but the tag of 'stunt' was, most people agreed at the time, appropriate for Davis' ridiculous by-election.

    As has been stated further down Davis was on the same page as Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott over this issue. Interesting company to keep!
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    To paraphrase Crocodile Dundee:

    Call that "Enough is Enough", this is "Enough is Enough" ;)
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614

    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

    Yes, and very deliberate. May had no choice really. 'Keep calm, and bury your head in the sand' will not cut it any more.

    Part political - yes, of course, but she could have made that speech during any part of a Parliament. Very effective in seizing the headlines and the narrative, done in unfortunate circumstances, but necessary all the same. She had to make that speech for all sorts of reasons.

    She is also correct - enough is enough with the institutional appeasement and turning a blind eye mentality that has spread in this country like a cancer. It has to stop, and if that also means pissing off the Saudis, then so be it.


  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    calum said:
    The Tories need to be bloody careful here. Their campaign has been bad enough. If they contrive to make anti-terrorism policy a negative for themselves, then that really will put the tin hat on it.

    That plus what the Police Federation is saying do make Enough is Enough sound like empty rhetoric, nothing more. As ever, May is exceptionally fortunate to be facing Corbyn.

    After Thursday, can we have a redraw for leaders of all 3 major English parties? Need The Donald or Sir Alllllllan to sit them down and tell them they are all fired.
    Sadly, I suspect this is the first election in an age where the main leaders will remain in situ.

    Farron might go, I suppose.
    Depressing isn't it. I really hoped that the Lib Dem might make some gains, Corbynism destroyed and not too big a Tory majority.

    Now it looks like at best small Tory majority, Corbynism legitimized and here to stay and Lib Dem screwed.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157
    edited June 2017

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    It is not the same as Saudi Arabia at all. Where are the Christian Churches or Jewish Synagogues in Saudi Arabia? - They are certainly practicing openly in Iran. There are similar numbers of synagogues in Tehran and London.

    Iran is not a 'good' country but it is a whole lot better than Saudi Arabia.
    It may not be quite as ghastly as Saudi Arabia but it is quite ghastly enough. A country which uses rape as a punishment, hangs gay men from cranes, permits children to be married and sponsors Holocaust denial conferences does not have values compatible with Western values.

    We should not fall into the trap of giving it a free pass simply because it hates Saudi Arabia. Both countries drink deep from the well of extremism and both have used - and continue to use - their money and influence to spread their extremist versions of Islam, both of which are utterly incompatible with life in a civilised Western liberal democracy.
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614

    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

    The question is...why. I don't doubt she is absolutely fuming from both, but why the change in response. Either it is enough is enough, I am not doing the middle way crap, or is it because Crosby has told her the attempted middle way crap is killing you in the polls.
    Both.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Nigelb said:

    I think Sean's wrong about an Enlightenment, though. That's far more likely to take hold first in Europe's moslem communities.

    It already has in some countries like Bosnia, but there is now Saudi funding pouring into Bosnia and Albania so things have started going backwards just like it did here. The younger Muslims are more radicalised than their parents ever were.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2017
    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:

    I think Sean's wrong about an Enlightenment, though. That's far more likely to take hold first in Europe's moslem communities.

    It already has in some countries like Bosnia, but there is now Saudi funding pouring into Bosnia and Albania so things have started going backwards just like it did here. The younger Muslims are more radicalised than their parents ever were.
    That's the scary thing about the common profile of these people. They are 2nd / 3rd generation, often uni students, you would hope think this ain't bad compared to what parents tell me what life was like.

    Your Indian, Chinese etc immigrants are often more "British" than "native" Brits. Henning Wehn does quite a funny gag about a 2nd generation Chinese Cockney Cabbie in London told Henning the reason I think you are still a foreigner is cause people can tell you are a foreigner cos of like the way you speak innit...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cyclefree said:

    SeanT said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Iran, for all its faults, is much more palatable than Saudi Arabia. Iran is more pluralistic, and less mysoginistic. It has a proud Persian history which long predates Islam, it has a literature and a culture which draws on many sources, not just the Koran.

    If there is hope for longterm reform in Islam - an Enlightenment - my guess is that it will come from Iran, where, ironically and relatedly, the jihadist revolution first caught fire.

    So we should keep our distance from Tehran, but not give up on them.

    The only reason we should have any dealing with Saudi is because, if the royal family was toppled, it would almost certainly be replaced by something much much worse. ISIS with a trillion dollars.
    Iran qua Persia: you may be right.

    The Iranian regime: no. It is not "less mysogynistic". One of the first decisions of the Iranian regime was to bring the age of consent down (to 9, I think.) It uses rape as a punishment in prisons.

    Its values are revolting.
    Certainly so, and it hangs gays.

    Nonetheless, in Iran women can vote, go out without a male guardian, and outnumber male students at university. Just a couple of weeks ago Iran re-elected a leader who wants to continue reforms. They are still in a bad place, but travelling in the right direction, albeit slowly and fitfully.

    Saudi is trying to lead the Sunni world into Salafism, and thinks it can control its Frankenstein. It will not be able to for much longer. Saudi will become the ultimate failed state, and we should not be arming it.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Isam, cheers for that, didn't realise (in the past, I've usually just backed and laid one chap).

    Mr. Sandpit, maybe. Could see a Red Bull getting into 3rd maybe.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,919
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We should stop all funding by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran and Pakistan (itself heavily funded/influenced by the Saudis) of schools, mosques, madrassas, university chairs etc in this country. Politicians who appear on their propaganda arms should be called out for such stupidly naive behaviour.

    It's about time a British government stood up to the Saudi dictatorship.

    Why do you include Iran on your list?
    Iran funds terrorist groups. It imprisons our citizens for no good reason and has incited people here to kill someone for writing a book. Its propaganda arm, Press TV, is a disgrace. It propagates views about women, gays and Jews which are wholly incompatible with Western values in just the same way as the Saudi view is. Just because it is the enemy of the Saudis does not make it our friend.
    Press TV ? Wasn't there a prominent politician who regularly opined for them and was happy to collect their largess ? Name escapes me for the moment.
    Two prominent politicians. One of them had a thing about a certain Mr H.
    Looking at the wiki page at least 4 former British MPs have served as presenters for them

    George Galloway
    Ken Livingstone
    Derek Conway
    Lembit Opik
  • Options
    PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    Jason said:

    Been out at church and watching May's speech now.

    "There is, to be frank, far too much tolerence of extremism in our country."

    Different tone to after Manchester.

    Yes, and very deliberate. May had no choice really. 'Keep calm, and bury your head in the sand' will not cut it any more.

    Part political - yes, of course, but she could have made that speech during any part of a Parliament. Very effective in seizing the headlines and the narrative, done in unfortunate circumstances, but necessary all the same. She had to make that speech for all sorts of reasons.

    She is also correct - enough is enough with the institutional appeasement and turning a blind eye mentality that has spread in this country like a cancer. It has to stop, and if that also means pissing off the Saudis, then so be it.


    It's difficult to frame a convincing response when her position can be summarised as "I've had my head in the sand for seven years and this just shows I should pull it out."
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,242

    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:

    I think Sean's wrong about an Enlightenment, though. That's far more likely to take hold first in Europe's moslem communities.

    It already has in some countries like Bosnia, but there is now Saudi funding pouring into Bosnia and Albania so things have started going backwards just like it did here. The younger Muslims are more radicalised than their parents ever were.
    That's the scary thing about the common profile of these people. They are 2nd / 3rd generation, often uni students, you would hope think this ain't bad compared to what parents tell me what life was like.
    It's an old, old story - young, educated, modern... suddenly the world looks wrong. So back to the faith of your fathers. The radical re-mix version.

    Oliver Cromwell etc.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901

    Mr. Isam, cheers for that, didn't realise (in the past, I've usually just backed and laid one chap).

    Mr. Sandpit, maybe. Could see a Red Bull getting into 3rd maybe.

    They change the each way terms as the possible winners/placers decrease
This discussion has been closed.