Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
I am amazed we have Labour supporters on here criticising the intervention in Yugoslavia against right wing genocidal maniac Milosevic. Once upon a time left wingers believed in protecting the vulnerable against rape and murder.
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
You can tell the far left lunatics on here would downplay any attack on us when they shruge their shoulders at chemical weapons being deployed in English towns. Truly a despicable class of people that have sold out any left wing principle of human rights.
You're a bit worked up tonight Elliot - been on the sauce?
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Or the Tories RT money has not gone to anyone that would be in charge of defending Britain against Russia, you idiot.
Like lawmakers of the governing party? Or do they bear no responsibility for defending the country? No obviously not.
Are you really too stupid to see the gulf in influence over foreign policy between a backbench MP and , potentially, a Prime Minister?
Your abuse betrays your lack of intellectual clarity. So is beneath a response.
Because there is no credible response you can give. You and your ilk have sold out the great Labour movement for a man that coddles up to mass murdering regimes.
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
Could you identify a couple of these feral wars against smaller countries, please? The more recent the better.
I said feral ruling class, if you can read. As for wars, well Iraq, Libya and Syria (the latter mainly via revolting jihadi proxies) for starters. Countries that couldn't really fight back, unlike Russia. Hence the endless reds under the bed style hysteria about the place. Its inconvenient relative invincibility has our feral overlords hot under the collar.
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Nor is their "closeness" in any way as near.
But today it was the labour MP's demanding Russia Today was blocked
Maybe because they take only 25% of the money Tory MP's take. Were they demanding it blocked?
Correcting my entry.
They had no need to after so many labour mps asked for it
Personally, I wouldn't like to have the government decide who I get my news from.
For the first time in weeks I watched RT news at eight. They led with accusations that the Russian government was behind the poisoning, and film of May speaking in the Commons. Not very different to the other channels IMO.
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
You can tell the far left lunatics on here would downplay any attack on us when they shruge their shoulders at chemical weapons being deployed in English towns. Truly a despicable class of people that have sold out any left wing principle of human rights.
You're a bit worked up tonight Elliot - been on the sauce?
I oppose murder on British soil by foreign dictators. Who cares when it's not Tories responsible, right?
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Nor is their "closeness" in any way as near.
But today it was the labour MP's demanding Russia Today was blocked
I think Dixie was being ironic. I certainly was. Tory MPs have taken four times as much money from RT than Labour MPs. That's the key point to remmeber.
I don't recall anyone of the tories being supportive of the Russian point of view - can't say the same about team Trot
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
Could you identify a couple of these feral wars against smaller countries, please? The more recent the better.
I said feral ruling class, if you can read. As for wars, well Iraq, Libya and Syria (the latter mainly via revolting jihadi proxies) for starters. Countries that couldn't really fight back, unlike Russia. Hence the endless reds under the bed style hysteria about the place. Its inconvenient relative invincibility has our feral overlords hot under the collar.
The war in Syria began when Putin's man in Aleppo started putting democracy protesters in mass graves.
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Nor is their "closeness" in any way as near.
But today it was the labour MP's demanding Russia Today was blocked
Maybe because they take only 25% of the money Tory MP's take. Were they demanding it blocked?
Correcting my entry.
They had no need to after so many labour mps asked for it
Personally, I wouldn't like to have the government decide who I get my news from.
For the first time in weeks I watched RT news at eight. They led with accusations that the Russian government was behind the poisoning, and film of May speaking in the Commons. Not very different to the other channels IMO.
Their propaganda is more subtle than the likes of PressTV. Hence why they previously haven't run into trouble. But for avoidance of doubt it is the propaganda arm of the Putin regime.
A historic debate unifying the Country , apart from Comrade Corbyn, against Putin
The next few days will be interesting but it is now time to say goodnight
We all have different views over many things but to see such political unity for our Country when we come under attack from a foreign power is very reassuring.
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Or the Tories RT money has not gone to anyone that would be in charge of defending Britain against Russia, you idiot.
Like lawmakers of the governing party? Or do they bear no responsibility for defending the country? No obviously not.
Are you really too stupid to see the gulf in influence over foreign policy between a backbench MP and , potentially, a Prime Minister?
Your abuse betrays your lack of intellectual clarity. So is beneath a response.
Because there is no credible response you can give. You and your ilk have sold out the great Labour movement for a man that coddles up to mass murdering regimes.
Me and my ilk don't call people who disagree idiots and stupid at the drop of a hat. There are plenty of people on here to disagree with who don't use such terms. So I will disagree with them thank you.
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
You can tell the far left lunatics on here would downplay any attack on us when they shruge their shoulders at chemical weapons being deployed in English towns. Truly a despicable class of people that have sold out any left wing principle of human rights.
Ah yes who can forget those "Democratic communist states" that would stick dissenters in mental health facilities and treat them appallingly - they must be mad you see, they couldn't see the glories of socialism.
Corbyn and his ilk just can't support their own people over a dictatorship - at the end of the day that is what everyone should take from this.
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Nor is their "closeness" in any way as near.
But today it was the labour MP's demanding Russia Today was blocked
I think Dixie was being ironic. I certainly was. Tory MPs have taken four times as much money from RT than Labour MPs. That's the key point to remmeber.
After today the thing I will remember is Corbyn being trashed by his own MPs. Utterly amazing
Hardly unknown tbh - but been a while that's for sure.
I can't see how England pulling out of the WC would hurt Putin. They'd just pull in another European team (Italy probably). It would only hurt England.
True. And worse, because Britain (for which, in this case, read England), had made a pointless and self-defeating gesture, but a gesture all the same, it would assuage the 'something must be done' brigade and make a meaningful response less likely.
The England team should go. Might be worth advising fans against travel though.
Can tell the extreme right wing nutcases on here are rattled today from all the spit-flecks.
All this extreme anti-russia hysteria the westminster bubble is enjoying getting lathered into is bizarre. And would be worrying if it weren't for the fact that the noise is inversely proportional to the ability to go to war, the otherwise usual response to smaller countries that happen to be inconvenient to our feral ruling class and their various lucrative overseas entanglements.
Could you identify a couple of these feral wars against smaller countries, please? The more recent the better.
I said feral ruling class, if you can read. As for wars, well Iraq, Libya and Syria (the latter mainly via revolting jihadi proxies) for starters. Countries that couldn't really fight back, unlike Russia. Hence the endless reds under the bed style hysteria about the place. Its inconvenient relative invincibility has our feral overlords hot under the collar.
I think that Putin's Russia is not a "reds under the beds" panic, but rather a fear of a right wing autocracy of an expansionist regime, more like Czarist Russia than anything. This is true domestically, for example promotion of the Orthodox Church, suppression of Protestant churches, and a tendency to mix loyalty to the leader with loyalty to the state.
Putin is a right wing nationalist, which is why he has covertly and overtly promoted other right wing nationalist movements across the West, from Brexit, to Trump, to Le Pen to Orban. His goal is to destabilise Liberal democracy. I must admit that I find his promotion of German neo Nazis a bit beyond the pale, but they seem to have plenty of cheerleaders in the UK too. How soon we forget the lessons of history.
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Or the Tories RT money has not gone to anyone that would be in charge of defending Britain against Russia, you idiot.
Like lawmakers of the governing party? Or do they bear no responsibility for defending the country? No obviously not.
Are you really too stupid to see the gulf in influence over foreign policy between a backbench MP and , potentially, a Prime Minister?
Your abuse betrays your lack of intellectual clarity. So is beneath a response.
Because there is no credible response you can give. You and your ilk have sold out the great Labour movement for a man that coddles up to mass murdering regimes.
Me and my ilk don't call people who disagree idiots and stupid at the drop of a hat. There are plenty of people on here to disagree with who don't use such terms. So I will disagree with them thank you.
No, you just downplay state sanctioned murder and a would-be PM taking money from a mass murdering regime hostile to the UK.
A historic debate unifying the Country , apart from Comrade Corbyn, against Putin
The next few days will be interesting but it is now time to say goodnight
We all have different views over many things but to see such political unity for our Country when we come under attack from a foreign power is very reassuring.
Hope everyone has a good restful night.
Good night
Yep, time for this 'idiot' to call it a day too - goodnight all!
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Or the Tories RT money has not gone to anyone that would be in charge of defending Britain against Russia, you idiot.
Like lawmakers of the governing party? Or do they bear no responsibility for defending the country? No obviously not.
Are you really too stupid to see the gulf in influence over foreign policy between a backbench MP and , potentially, a Prime Minister?
Your abuse betrays your lack of intellectual clarity. So is beneath a response.
Because there is no credible response you can give. You and your ilk have sold out the great Labour movement for a man that coddles up to mass murdering regimes.
Me and my ilk don't call people who disagree idiots and stupid at the drop of a hat. There are plenty of people on here to disagree with who don't use such terms. So I will disagree with them thank you.
No, you just downplay state sanctioned murder and a would-be PM taking money from a mass murdering regime hostile to the UK.
I can't see how England pulling out of the WC would hurt Putin. They'd just pull in another European team (Italy probably). It would only hurt England.
True. And worse, because Britain (for which, in this case, read England), had made a pointless and self-defeating gesture, but a gesture all the same, it would assuage the 'something must be done' brigade and make a meaningful response less likely.
The England team should go. Might be worth advising fans against travel though.
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
A majority of Britons do not. He is a loser and will lose in 2022. He is a vile old man
Donations are a complete red herring in all this. There is no evidence that any of them broke the rules regarding such matters. No evidence that it has bought influence to make the UK more symosympath towards Russia. It is just a distraction from the real closeness. And that is the Corbynite closeness to many regimes. The money taken by Labour MPs from RT is far more tainted. The praise lauded on Venezuela and the utter lack.of outright condemnation of the political violence being perpetrated out there. The friendship with Hamas and Hezbollah. All of this and more is why many on the Left are bleating about legal.donations in attempt to divert attention from their close links to objectionable regimes round the globe.
Putin is a stain on the world community. And whilst there is little we can do to practically stop him, we need to take a lead against him. The World Cup should be boycotted. Russia should not be able to compete in any international event whether sporting or cultural. A stand has to be taken.
Except Conservative MP's take more money from RT...
Ah but the Tories' RT money is not as tainted as the Labour RT money.
Nor is their "closeness" in any way as near.
But today it was the labour MP's demanding Russia Today was blocked
Maybe because they take only 25% of the money Tory MP's take. Were they demanding it blocked?
Correcting my entry.
They had no need to after so many labour mps asked for it
Personally, I wouldn't like to have the government decide who I get my news from.
For the first time in weeks I watched RT news at eight. They led with accusations that the Russian government was behind the poisoning, and film of May speaking in the Commons. Not very different to the other channels IMO.
Their propaganda is more subtle than the likes of PressTV. Hence why they previously haven't run into trouble. But for avoidance of doubt it is the propaganda arm of the Putin regime.
Of course. Their 19:30 documentary was an attempt to tie the Pope into paedophile cover ups, an example of how RT tries to discredit other sects than the Russian Orthodox.
What is the Finchley Road conspiracy? Anyone able to give me a 100-word summary?
Oh no, please, not again....Mr Meeks call the Leave campaign Xenophobic or something again, anything, not this.
This is truly bizarre!
I, like Cookie, have absolutely no idea what the 'Finchley Road conspiracy' is. Nor do I understand Nunghman's references to Christopher Wood and RT. Now maybe I am just being dense as usual... but will somebody please explain, just a little?
I genuinely can't help. I have been on this site for a decade or more now and have never understood what Hunchman is getting at about this even though I find him a very nice chap to take to and agree on a lot of other stuff with.
I have tended just to skim over it all as it eventually dies down after a day or so.
While we are on this kind of stuff...just to clarify I have never bought a property to rent. I have lived in Italy and rented out my own house...I have bought lots of properties, renovated them and sold them on...but sometimes I have held onto properties longer than a year or so to minimise capital gains, and rather than leaving them empty have rented them out. I have a flat that was difficult to sell about 12 years ago, and have left a tenant alone because she is nice without rising her rent in this period.
I have no malice against people who buy to rent...but I do not buy to rent. I buy to sell, but when you play the property game you sometimes end ups with a few properties.
I don't have to justify my actions to the likes of Seant and Casino.. BUT.there are other people who read this site who might the wrong impression based on poisonous, and misleading posting about me.
FWIW..I don't really care how people make their money. As long as its legal and they pay tax, good luck to them...so people who buy to rent, well done.
Are any of your portfolio of properties on Finchley Road Tyson? We're through the looking glass here...
Tyson talks about "as long as people pay their taxes" and talks of "minimising capital gains" in same post
Floater...I'm not stupid...I've built up my assets from nothing, literally nothing...but I really do not mind paying fair taxes...
but then you minimise your tax payments - from your own lips fella.
Interesting - but then you appear to be saying that tax isn't "fair"
Other people might think other taxes are unfair, should they seek to minimise their tax payments then?
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
The Tories and the DUP would win the election on the new boundaries with these numbers.
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
A majority of Britons do not. He is a loser and will lose in 2022. He is a vile old man
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
The Tories and the DUP would win the election on the new boundaries with these numbers.
They may well do. However. winning the election on fewer votes would hardly be a recipe for sweetness, light and good governance would it? See USA.
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
The Tories and the DUP would win the election on the new boundaries with these numbers.
They may well do. However. winning the election on fewer votes would hardly be a recipe for sweetness, light and good governance would it? See USA.
I expect the Tories to do better when they select a new leader for the next election. I can't believe they'll go into another election with Mrs May as leader.
"But none of this went far enough for some Labour MPs. Chris Leslie all but rubbished Corbyn to his face, while John Woodcock went so far as to observe that Britain’s national security would be at risk if the Labour leader was ever to become prime minister."
I think Britons are fed up of foreign wars, though stopping the money laundering in the City of dirty Russian money would probably be popular with the Mob.
The Tories and the DUP would win the election on the new boundaries with these numbers.
They may well do. However. winning the election on fewer votes would hardly be a recipe for sweetness, light and good governance would it? See USA.
I expect the Tories to do better when they select a new leader for the next election.
Well, yes. However there is a heck of a long way from here to there. We are more than 4 years from a GE...anything can happen. For evidence think back to the polls 4 years ago. Then look at them a year ago. All to play for imho.
Basically Russia’s primary crime in the eyes of our establishment is to get in the way of further wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia. Iran was next on the hit-list and now that is impossible, due to Russia’s help in defeating the (shamefully) western-backed genocidal jihadis in Syria. Hence the endless 1984 style propaganda. Luckily its mainly impotent rage.
Basically Russia’s primary crime in the eyes of our establishment is to get in the way of further wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia. Iran was next on the hit-list and now that is impossible, due to Russia’s help in defeating the (shamefully) western-backed genocidal jihadis in Syria. Hence the endless 1984 style propaganda. Luckily its mainly impotent rage.
Wait.
So, it's OK for the Russian government to order the assassination of British citizens, because we clashed with them over "wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia"?
I'm glad we've sorted that out. It means I won't have to waste time reading your posts any more.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Basically Russia’s primary crime in the eyes of our establishment is to get in the way of further wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia. Iran was next on the hit-list and now that is impossible, due to Russia’s help in defeating the (shamefully) western-backed genocidal jihadis in Syria. Hence the endless 1984 style propaganda. Luckily its mainly impotent rage.
Wait.
So, it's OK for the Russian government to order the assassination of British citizens, because we clashed with them over "wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia"?
I'm glad we've sorted that out. It means I won't have to waste time reading your posts any more.
Yeah, that’s not what I said. BTW, how are those Ecuador and Venezuela defaults you predicted going?
FU - indeed, some people have revealed their true colours today. Deeply, deeply unpleasant attitudes - defending the indefensible and then abusing those who challenge them.
Basically Russia’s primary crime in the eyes of our establishment is to get in the way of further wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia. Iran was next on the hit-list and now that is impossible, due to Russia’s help in defeating the (shamefully) western-backed genocidal jihadis in Syria. Hence the endless 1984 style propaganda. Luckily its mainly impotent rage.
Wait.
So, it's OK for the Russian government to order the assassination of British citizens, because we clashed with them over "wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia"?
I'm glad we've sorted that out. It means I won't have to waste time reading your posts any more.
No, it is certainly not OK. The issue is of what we should do in response.
The problem is that even the most outraged on here can only come up with a few lame actions on dirty money, and those probly hit our financiers as much as any Russian.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Agree. Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published. Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage? We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not? Putin would.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Putin is a right wing nationalist, which is why he has covertly and overtly promoted other right wing nationalist movements across the West, from Brexit, to Trump, to Le Pen to Orban. His goal is to destabilise Liberal democracy. I must admit that I find his promotion of German neo Nazis a bit beyond the pale, but they seem to have plenty of cheerleaders in the UK too. How soon we forget the lessons of history.
What modern Russia most resembles is the Soviet propaganda depictions of Western capitalists states. Utterly corrupt from top to bottom with wealth and hence power concentrated in a tiny group of people.
There has been no concrete proof offered that this was actually the work of the Russian authorities. Does noone think it a bit odd that neither target died, when supposedly some super communist soviet nerve agent a million times stronger than VX was used?
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Seeing an obvious textbook hysterical propaganda storm driven by a pretty nakedly clear geopolitical agenda for what it is, does not equal being fond of Russia. It just involves common sense and a tiny bit of knowledge about the past.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Agree. Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published. Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage? We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not? Putin would.
Putin is going to be damaged by Western authentication of the fact that he is richer than Bill gates, is he? And is the suggestion that this is because his country is a third world sink hole more likely to turn his country men against him, or cause them to rally behind him against the foreigners making that claim?
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
More seriously, there seems to have been a general relief at the end of the Cold War, followed by a long period of hoping for the best, and taking the money, without wanting to look too deeply into what was going on. Which has encompassed both of our Parties.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Seeing an obvious textbook hysterical propaganda storm driven by a pretty nakedly clear geopolitical agenda for what it is, does not equal being fond of Russia. It just involves common sense and a tiny bit of knowledge about the past.
Is protecting Salisbury a geopolitical agenda that you disagree with?
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Agree. Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published. Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage? We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not? Putin would.
Putin is going to be damaged by Western authentication of the fact that he is richer than Bill gates, is he? And is the suggestion that this is because his country is a third world sink hole more likely to turn his country men against him, or cause them to rally behind him against the foreigners making that claim?
I don't know. You may be right. Any better ideas? Cos boycotting the World Cup, etc doesn't seem that great. What would you suggest?
But anyone remotely patriotic - whether remainer or leaver - should realise that Britain leaving the EU hands a huge victory to Putin's Russia, and weakens our security. That's not theoretical: ppl right now in Salisbury are having to deal with what it means. 5/5
Given we haven't left yet, I am curious how it is not theoretical that what happened in Salisbury is because of our security being weakened because of Brexit/
Couple of things
1. The government was briefed not that long ago on Russian attempts to run interference around the EU referendum. There isn't a 100% agreement by any stretch about the significance of its impact. There are voices who believe it was possibly enough to affect the integrity of the vote. I've made some references, including in the last week, to some of flows from Russia. There is no massive secret to them, they just aren't much publicised. I voted to leave the EU, but I have little doubt that some figures on the Leave side were notably and surreptitiously funded from interests linked to the Russian state.
2. UK security impacts of leaving the EU are limited. The UK is by far the most significant provider of intelligence & security information to other countries within the EU not the other way around. Comparatively little of that is framed within some EU based context, its usually bilateral and those associations will carry on. Policing authorities sharing may be more impacted but again this kind if stuff doesn't ultimately need an over-riding EU framework or membership to work well. Indeed if the UK actually properly gets a fuller control over its borders, then security may well benefit but thats largely down to the UK.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
Dislikes NATO: yep Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep Thinks the government should spend more money: yep Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
A father from south London allowed female genital mutilation to be carried out on his daughter as a form of punishment when she was nine, a court heard on Monday. The 50-year-old, who is west African but whose children were born in the UK, allegedly allowed his daughter, now 16, to be cut on two occasions after accusing her of stealing money from the family home.
Mr Crace, normally fairly sympathetic to Mr Corbyn, isn't today:
Fair to say that many on the opposition benches weren’t that impressed, either. There’s a time and place to take on the Tories over their links to Russian money – and this probably wasn’t it....
Most Labour MPs tried to make the statesmanlike response they had been expecting from their leader. Yvette Cooper was the most measured.....
But none of this went far enough for some Labour MPs. Chris Leslie all but rubbished Corbyn to his face.....
There will be blood. And not all of it will be Russian.
Mr Crace, normally fairly sympathetic to Mr Corbyn, isn't today:
Fair to say that many on the opposition benches weren’t that impressed, either. There’s a time and place to take on the Tories over their links to Russian money – and this probably wasn’t it....
Most Labour MPs tried to make the statesmanlike response they had been expecting from their leader. Yvette Cooper was the most measured.....
But none of this went far enough for some Labour MPs. Chris Leslie all but rubbished Corbyn to his face.....
There will be blood. And not all of it will be Russian.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Agree. Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published. Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage? We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not? Putin would.
Putin is going to be damaged by Western authentication of the fact that he is richer than Bill gates, is he? And is the suggestion that this is because his country is a third world sink hole more likely to turn his country men against him, or cause them to rally behind him against the foreigners making that claim?
I don't know. You may be right. Any better ideas? Cos boycotting the World Cup, etc doesn't seem that great. What would you suggest?
Short term? Cool diplomatic relations markedly. Impose Financial restrictions. Impose Trade restrictions. Make it difficult for Russia and Russians to access capital markets and Western banking institutions; make it clear that this is done because the leadership of Russia doesn't obey political norms or respect a rules based order.
Long term? Encourage Europe away from Russian gas, and stop leaving vacuums of power where Russian military/strategic interests can dominate; in the middle east, for example. Oh, and suggest to Europe that paying for their own defence is a better strategy than relying upon the Americans.
All of this should have been done after Ukraine, and especially after the passenger jet was shot down.
A father from south London allowed female genital mutilation to be carried out on his daughter as a form of punishment when she was nine, a court heard on Monday. The 50-year-old, who is west African but whose children were born in the UK, allegedly allowed his daughter, now 16, to be cut on two occasions after accusing her of stealing money from the family home.
A father from south London allowed female genital mutilation to be carried out on his daughter as a form of punishment when she was nine, a court heard on Monday. The 50-year-old, who is west African but whose children were born in the UK, allegedly allowed his daughter, now 16, to be cut on two occasions after accusing her of stealing money from the family home.
The mentality that permits such acts is just revolting
Not only that, but by the sounds of it this man went and found a "professional" cutter to come and do it, here in the UK. Not as often been reported kids been sent off to Africa to then be cut there.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
Dislikes NATO: yep Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep Thinks the government should spend more money: yep Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
Paid for by taxes on the rich?
Nope. Paid for future generations: yep.
Keynes? yep. Sexual libertarian? Yep.
Well then. You and me agree surprisigly often. Trump is the most left-wing President since FDR? Discuss Not "loony left" though (as commonly understood)/
A father from south London allowed female genital mutilation to be carried out on his daughter as a form of punishment when she was nine, a court heard on Monday. The 50-year-old, who is west African but whose children were born in the UK, allegedly allowed his daughter, now 16, to be cut on two occasions after accusing her of stealing money from the family home.
The mentality that permits such acts is just revolting
Not only that, but by the sounds of it this man went and found a "professional" cutter to come and do it, here in the UK. Not as often been reported kids been sent off to Africa to then be cut there.
A man who works as a SOLICITOR - and thus has an understanding of the law. I was particularly sickened to read that his barrister was trying to pin the blame on an acrimonious divorce - effectively saying it was the fault of his wife. I know you have to work with what the client gives you - but, if guilty, this sort of act deserves a very, very long sentence. Probably longer than the law currently allows.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
I didn't know who Luke Harding was either, until I googled him five minutes ago. I now know that he is absolutely central to any study of relations between this country and Russia in the 21st century. How odd that you don't know that.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Agree. Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published. Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage? We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not? Putin would.
Putin is going to be damaged by Western authentication of the fact that he is richer than Bill gates, is he? And is the suggestion that this is because his country is a third world sink hole more likely to turn his country men against him, or cause them to rally behind him against the foreigners making that claim?
I don't know. You may be right. Any better ideas? Cos boycotting the World Cup, etc doesn't seem that great. What would you suggest?
Short term? Cool diplomatic relations markedly. Impose Financial restrictions. Impose Trade restrictions. Make it difficult for Russia and Russians to access capital markets and Western banking institutions; make it clear that this is done because the leadership of Russia doesn't obey political norms or respect a rules based order.
Long term? Encourage Europe away from Russian gas, and stop leaving vacuums of power where Russian military/strategic interests can dominate; in the middle east, for example. Oh, and suggest to Europe that paying for their own defence is a better strategy than relying upon the Americans.
All of this should have been done after Ukraine, and especially after the passenger jet was shot down.
These are all valid points. Do ypu think leaving the EU has increased or decreased their likelihood?
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
Dislikes NATO: yep Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep Thinks the government should spend more money: yep Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
Paid for by taxes on the rich?
Nope. Paid for future generations: yep.
Keynes? yep. Sexual libertarian? Yep.
Well then. You and me agree surprisigly often. Trump is the most left-wing President since FDR? Discuss Not "loony left" though (as commonly understood)/
I find I agree with everyone on here from time-to-time, even hunchman and HYUFD.
And, yes I would agree that Trump is the most left wing President since FDR.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Russia has billionaires now true but only if loyal to Putin, otherwise they get jailed or assassinated.
Russia in the last century also executed its royal family, confiscated the land and wealth of its middle class and installed a Communist dictatorship so the hard left can forgive it a lot as long as it is still largely anti West
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
Dislikes NATO: yep Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep Thinks the government should spend more money: yep Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
Paid for by taxes on the rich?
Nope. Paid for future generations: yep.
Keynes? yep. Sexual libertarian? Yep.
Well then. You and me agree surprisigly often. Trump is the most left-wing President since FDR? Discuss Not "loony left" though (as commonly understood)/
I find I agree with everyone on here from time-to-time, even hunchman and HYUFD.
And, yes I would agree that Trump is the most left wing President since FDR.
Short term? Cool diplomatic relations markedly. Impose Financial restrictions. Impose Trade restrictions. Make it difficult for Russia and Russians to access capital markets and Western banking institutions; make it clear that this is done because the leadership of Russia doesn't obey political norms or respect a rules based order.
Long term? Encourage Europe away from Russian gas, and stop leaving vacuums of power where Russian military/strategic interests can dominate; in the middle east, for example. Oh, and suggest to Europe that paying for their own defence is a better strategy than relying upon the Americans.
All of this should have been done after Ukraine, and especially after the passenger jet was shot down.
The Russian government has been very active in funding "anti-fracking" and Green groups in Central and Eastern Europe, and in pushing legislation to limit oil & gas companies. (There is, in Central and Eastern Europe an awful lot of shale gas that could be developed.)
Poland has been particularly corrupted: it has massive shale gas reserves, but somehow the politicians there are opposed to exploitation.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Are they? Mr Trump seems quite fond of it. Is he loony left?
Dislikes NATO: yep Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep Thinks the government should spend more money: yep Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
Paid for by taxes on the rich?
Nope. Paid for future generations: yep.
Keynes? yep. Sexual libertarian? Yep.
Well then. You and me agree surprisigly often. Trump is the most left-wing President since FDR? Discuss Not "loony left" though (as commonly understood)/
I find I agree with everyone on here from time-to-time, even hunchman and HYUFD.
And, yes I would agree that Trump is the most left wing President since FDR.
LBJ or Carter surely? Though Trump is perhaps the most populist President since FDR certainly
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Russia has billionaires now true but only if loyal to Putin, otherwise they get jailed or assassinated.
It's the other way round. Putin is the henchman of the 110 people who own 35% of the Russian economy and serves at their pleasure.
Can someone explain to me why elements of the loony left seem so fond of Russia, which is dominated by a political ideaology based on power and wealth structures that couldn't be further from socialism....?
Russia has billionaires now true but only if loyal to Putin, otherwise they get jailed or assassinated.
It's the other way round. Putin is the henchman of the 110 people who own 35% of the Russian economy and serves at their pleasure.
Tell that to the likes of Khordovsky and Berezovsky. Free market liberals in Russia who stand for office tend to get nowhere.
In any case Putin has a reputed net worth of up to $200 billion himself which would make him easily the richest man in Russia if not the world
He did try to repeal Obamacare which I guess could be seen as right wing depending on what he planned to replace it with.
Although I am not sure about some of the items on the list, in terms of spending more money isn't that true of American presidents going back a while? I guess it could be different in terms of quite how much but I assume there was a pretty big expansion under Bush II. Bush II also had some more isolationist ideas prior to 9/11, maybe not quite as questioning of NATO as Trump but you could see some of his views as a more advanced version of Bush's prior to the twin towers.
I can see some merit in the argument regarding Trump but it becomes tricky when you start associating things with left and right which aren't necessarily right left things.
Although it doesn't mean as much over here pro life, which I understand Trump has been at least in his SC appointments (though I haven't paid much attention) is seen as right wing.
Edit: As a for example with the last article from rcs there are a number of angles, Adam Smith talked negatively about monopoly's, there could be a nationalistic element in there which is more classically associated with the right (but isn't only right wing) but there is also left wing elements to the decision.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
What would you suggest?
Others have pointed out downthread the UK's perhaps unrivalled position as a centre for flows of money. Whilst we may have the reputation as a fairly laissez faire bunch, we can watch that money, it comes through our remit as a country. We therefore can impact on it. Personally, I'd like us to be able to seize some of it but will take a framework that we may not have in place right now.
Some have mentioned clamping down on the oligarchs hanging out in London which selectively done is merely a small time but perhaps high profile measure.
Where the greatest covert capacity lies is offensive cyber warfare and propaganda. The Russians operate by mass & volume as much as precision in these areas. It actually doesn't take long for Western, often UK agencies, to call something as being led out of Russia because we are, generally, very good at analysing it.
The UK on the other hand is remarkably good at developing and maintaining precision efforts in the cyber sphere that go undetected for a very very long time. We tend to use it passively, intelligence gathering as much as an offensive disruptive tool. There have been policy moves to improve offensive capacity, we should put it to use on Russian prestige and Russian economic interests.
As regards propaganda. Speaks for itself that but you take that far and wide as you can. Where they are, we are.
Whether some like it or not, we also need to look at who elsewhere as proxies can help us damage the current Russian regime. This can be tricky and the blow back significant when some of it can and will go wrong. Thats operational risk but strategically its about an objective and that is ensuring the current Russian government winds its neck in. If you take the view that Russia has designs on de-stabilising and weakening the liberal democratic concepts that the West runs by then its worth taking it to them in response.
Finally, ramp up some good old fashioned spying again because we don't do it half as much as we used to.
He did try to repeal Obamacare which I guess could be seen as right wing depending on what he planned to replace it with.
Although I am not sure about some of the items on the list, in terms of spending more money isn't that true of American presidents going back a while? I guess it could be different in terms of quite how much but I assume there was a pretty big expansion under Bush II. Bush II also had some more isolationist ideas prior to 9/11, maybe not quite as questioning of NATO as Trump but you could see some of his views as a more advanced version of Bush's prior to the twin towers.
I can see some merit in the argument regarding Trump but it becomes tricky when you start associating things with left and right which aren't necessarily right left things.
Although it doesn't mean as much over here pro life, which I understand Trump has been at least in his SC appointments (though I haven't paid much attention) is seen as right wing.
No doubt some people will make excuses to do nothing regarding Russia but any halfwit who knows any geopolitical history understands passivity only brings worse on your head down the line.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
I didn't know who Luke Harding was either, until I googled him five minutes ago. I now know that he is absolutely central to any study of relations between this country and Russia in the 21st century. How odd that you don't know that.
He isn't central to anything. He doesn't influence political stances of governments. Thats central, what we do is central. He may be a very well informed guy who produces interesting tomes but I am not aware that he impacts UK or Russian government thinking or actions.
The point stands. The impacts of this situation are many, the BBC getting a hard tine in Russia as one of them isn't worth a jot in the big scheme of things.
He did try to repeal Obamacare which I guess could be seen as right wing depending on what he planned to replace it with.
Although I am not sure about some of the items on the list, in terms of spending more money isn't that true of American presidents going back a while? I guess it could be different in terms of quite how much but I assume there was a pretty big expansion under Bush II. Bush II also had some more isolationist ideas prior to 9/11, maybe not quite as questioning of NATO as Trump but you could see some of his views as a more advanced version of Bush's prior to the twin towers.
I can see some merit in the argument regarding Trump but it becomes tricky when you start associating things with left and right which aren't necessarily right left things.
Although it doesn't mean as much over here pro life, which I understand Trump has been at least in his SC appointments (though I haven't paid much attention) is seen as right wing.
Embrace your inner Trump. He's one of you.
Not a big fan of nationalism, the general xenophobic attitude doesn't do much for me either. I fit quite well into the Labour party in this aspect and Trumpian ideals do not.
There is probably at least a partial overlap of people who would vote Trump and Corbyn, probably seen (partially) in UKIP voters who went Labour or Sanders fans who voted Trump. Somebody like that Ojeda guy running in the upcoming American elections as an example. It's a pretty small group though, if to make it fairer we use British examples then Brexit and Farage are probably our closest examples Labour MPs, Labour members and Labour voters generally dislike those things.
Thinking on it anti globalisation is probably what could be called his most left wing stance, although parts of that do seem to have been taken by the right and with nationalism/anti-immigration added to it, this could be where the Brexit comparison really comes into play.
Comments
They had no need to after so many labour mps asked for it
After all, all political careers end in failure.
As for wars, well Iraq, Libya and Syria (the latter mainly via revolting jihadi proxies) for starters. Countries that couldn't really fight back, unlike Russia. Hence the endless reds under the bed style hysteria about the place. Its inconvenient relative invincibility has our feral overlords hot under the collar.
O’Corbyn mania hits Oireland
For the first time in weeks I watched RT news at eight. They led with accusations that the Russian government was behind the poisoning, and film of May speaking in the Commons. Not very different to the other channels IMO.
A historic debate unifying the Country , apart from Comrade Corbyn, against Putin
The next few days will be interesting but it is now time to say goodnight
We all have different views over many things but to see such political unity for our Country when we come under attack from a foreign power is very reassuring.
Hope everyone has a good restful night.
Good night
There are plenty of people on here to disagree with who don't use such terms.
So I will disagree with them thank you.
Corbyn and his ilk just can't support their own people over a dictatorship - at the end of the day that is what everyone should take from this.
The England team should go. Might be worth advising fans against travel though.
Putin is a right wing nationalist, which is why he has covertly and overtly promoted other right wing nationalist movements across the West, from Brexit, to Trump, to Le Pen to Orban. His goal is to destabilise Liberal democracy. I must admit that I find his promotion of German neo Nazis a bit beyond the pale, but they seem to have plenty of cheerleaders in the UK too. How soon we forget the lessons of history.
Now tell me, is she popular?
Interesting - but then you appear to be saying that tax isn't "fair"
Other people might think other taxes are unfair, should they seek to minimise their tax payments then?
See USA.
"But none of this went far enough for some Labour MPs. Chris Leslie all but rubbished Corbyn to his face, while John Woodcock went so far as to observe that Britain’s national security would be at risk if the Labour leader was ever to become prime minister."
ho ho
We are more than 4 years from a GE...anything can happen.
For evidence think back to the polls 4 years ago.
Then look at them a year ago.
All to play for imho.
So, it's OK for the Russian government to order the assassination of British citizens, because we clashed with them over "wars of resource domination in the middle east and central asia"?
I'm glad we've sorted that out. It means I won't have to waste time reading your posts any more.
The Russians understand the deployment of chemical and biological warfare for small and large scale actions perfectly well. It was a part of Soviet doctrine, its part of current Russian doctrine to utilise these weapons. They would have known about collateral damage and took it into account.
They went ahead.
Putin isn't some genius and Russia not some almighty global power. He is a two bit schemer and it is a kleptocracy. Putin does understand an overwhelming response well and he will not push back anywhere near hard enough if we respond most forcefully below radar. The guy is holding a pair of twos and the West acts like he is sitting on a royal flush. It's bollocks.
Make the current regime pay. Damage their prestige by taking actions that result in them looking like a third World sink hole of a country, damage their economy and damage their leaders and kleptocrats.
Britain may well be alone in this, probably with some assistance with a few other nations. We cannot expect any help from Germany, France etc so we just need to get on with ourselves. We have capacity. Use it.
By the way, I have no idea who Luke Harding is but 'the BBC likely to be in firing line' is worth no more importance than a bottle full of my pee.
Yeah, that’s not what I said. BTW, how are those Ecuador and Venezuela defaults you predicted going?
The problem is that even the most outraged on here can only come up with a few lame actions on dirty money, and those probly hit our financiers as much as any Russian.
Which was why I suggested some forensic accountancy, with results published.
Some took that to be flippant, but I am serious. We are the World leader in finance, and by extension financial shenanigans. So why not utilise our competitive advantage?
We also need to be prepared too take other measures of course, but weaponising the systematic theft of Russian natural resources? Why not?
Putin would.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5491007/Drunken-man-jailed-abusing-police-ex-Russian-double-agent-ill.html
Does noone think it a bit odd that neither target died, when supposedly some super communist soviet nerve agent a million times stronger than VX was used?
More seriously, there seems to have been a general relief at the end of the Cold War, followed by a long period of hoping for the best, and taking the money, without wanting to look too deeply into what was going on.
Which has encompassed both of our Parties.
1. The government was briefed not that long ago on Russian attempts to run interference around the EU referendum. There isn't a 100% agreement by any stretch about the significance of its impact. There are voices who believe it was possibly enough to affect the integrity of the vote. I've made some references, including in the last week, to some of flows from Russia. There is no massive secret to them, they just aren't much publicised. I voted to leave the EU, but I have little doubt that some figures on the Leave side were notably and surreptitiously funded from interests linked to the Russian state.
2. UK security impacts of leaving the EU are limited. The UK is by far the most significant provider of intelligence & security information to other countries within the EU not the other way around. Comparatively little of that is framed within some EU based context, its usually bilateral and those associations will carry on. Policing authorities sharing may be more impacted but again this kind if stuff doesn't ultimately need an over-riding EU framework or membership to work well. Indeed if the UK actually properly gets a fuller control over its borders, then security may well benefit but thats largely down to the UK.
Believes in government intervention in the free market: yep
Thinks the government should spend more money: yep
Not a fan of checks and balances in the political system: yep
Paid for by taxes on the rich?
Nope. Paid for future generations: yep.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/12/man-allowed-fgm-to-be-performed-on-his-daughter-as-punishment
Fair to say that many on the opposition benches weren’t that impressed, either. There’s a time and place to take on the Tories over their links to Russian money – and this probably wasn’t it....
Most Labour MPs tried to make the statesmanlike response they had been expecting from their leader. Yvette Cooper was the most measured.....
But none of this went far enough for some Labour MPs. Chris Leslie all but rubbished Corbyn to his face.....
There will be blood. And not all of it will be Russian.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/12/the-cold-war-heats-up-and-not-just-in-the-labour-party
Long term? Encourage Europe away from Russian gas, and stop leaving vacuums of power where Russian military/strategic interests can dominate; in the middle east, for example. Oh, and suggest to Europe that paying for their own defence is a better strategy than relying upon the Americans.
All of this should have been done after Ukraine, and especially after the passenger jet was shot down.
The mentality that permits such acts is just revolting
Sexual libertarian? Yep.
Well then.
You and me agree surprisigly often. Trump is the most left-wing President since FDR? Discuss
Not "loony left" though (as commonly understood)/
Do ypu think leaving the EU has increased or decreased their likelihood?
And, yes I would agree that Trump is the most left wing President since FDR.
Russia in the last century also executed its royal family, confiscated the land and wealth of its middle class and installed a Communist dictatorship so the hard left can forgive it a lot as long as it is still largely anti West
Poland has been particularly corrupted: it has massive shale gas reserves, but somehow the politicians there are opposed to exploitation.
In any case Putin has a reputed net worth of up to $200 billion himself which would make him easily the richest man in Russia if not the world
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4242718/Vladimir-Putin-200-billion-fortune.html
Although I am not sure about some of the items on the list, in terms of spending more money isn't that true of American presidents going back a while? I guess it could be different in terms of quite how much but I assume there was a pretty big expansion under Bush II. Bush II also had some more isolationist ideas prior to 9/11, maybe not quite as questioning of NATO as Trump but you could see some of his views as a more advanced version of Bush's prior to the twin towers.
I can see some merit in the argument regarding Trump but it becomes tricky when you start associating things with left and right which aren't necessarily right left things.
Although it doesn't mean as much over here pro life, which I understand Trump has been at least in his SC appointments (though I haven't paid much attention) is seen as right wing.
Edit: As a for example with the last article from rcs there are a number of angles, Adam Smith talked negatively about monopoly's, there could be a nationalistic element in there which is more classically associated with the right (but isn't only right wing) but there is also left wing elements to the decision.
Some have mentioned clamping down on the oligarchs hanging out in London which selectively done is merely a small time but perhaps high profile measure.
Where the greatest covert capacity lies is offensive cyber warfare and propaganda. The Russians operate by mass & volume as much as precision in these areas. It actually doesn't take long for Western, often UK agencies, to call something as being led out of Russia because we are, generally, very good at analysing it.
The UK on the other hand is remarkably good at developing and maintaining precision efforts in the cyber sphere that go undetected for a very very long time. We tend to use it passively, intelligence gathering as much as an offensive disruptive tool. There have been policy moves to improve offensive capacity, we should put it to use on Russian prestige and Russian economic interests.
As regards propaganda. Speaks for itself that but you take that far and wide as you can. Where they are, we are.
Whether some like it or not, we also need to look at who elsewhere as proxies can help us damage the current Russian regime. This can be tricky and the blow back significant when some of it can and will go wrong. Thats operational risk but strategically its about an objective and that is ensuring the current Russian government winds its neck in. If you take the view that Russia has designs on de-stabilising and weakening the liberal democratic concepts that the West runs by then its worth taking it to them in response.
Finally, ramp up some good old fashioned spying again because we don't do it half as much as we used to.
The point stands. The impacts of this situation are many, the BBC getting a hard tine in Russia as one of them isn't worth a jot in the big scheme of things.
There is probably at least a partial overlap of people who would vote Trump and Corbyn, probably seen (partially) in UKIP voters who went Labour or Sanders fans who voted Trump. Somebody like that Ojeda guy running in the upcoming American elections as an example. It's a pretty small group though, if to make it fairer we use British examples then Brexit and Farage are probably our closest examples Labour MPs, Labour members and Labour voters generally dislike those things.