Damned decent of you not to immediately question the motives of a debutant poster.
A sign of the times.
Edit: Seriously though, I do try to welcome posters on their first post.
Yeah, but that one was so clearly insidious you might have made an exception to the rule.
Hi Peter
Not insidious, if aimed at me. The knowledge and intellect on here makes that claim a little flimsy. The point was that people on all levels really need to be careful how they respond in one circumstance in case that response is then justifiably thrown back at them at a later date. Ask Colin Parry. I don't know where you are based but I can assure you that in the North West it is a very subdued day and lots of people are very upset.
I might add I look forward to your posts, very insightful, most of the time :-)
Of course it was aimed at you.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
I don't know where you're based. No offence intended but apart from the Scots (and then it's just Scotland in general) and a certain individual from Bedford I don't know where many people are from. You're definitely part of the family here though and not knowing your identity is implausible.
Thank you Philip. I am however moderately surprised that my East End roots are not more widely known, not least because of my occasional use of the local vernacular, my old china.
Still, I suppose it depends how your antennae are fixed. I must admit I couldn't locate most posters, either geographically or politically.
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I never thought that I'd find another Girls Aloud fan on PB.
I'd be surprised if there weren't quite a lot. PB's combined musical tastes are broad and unpredicable.
I think I've only been the the MEN once, to see My Chemical Romance, which was amusing as the signs on the A road leading into the city had 'MCR' painted on the road.
I was never a great fan of My Chemical Romance.
I liked Green Day and Paramore.
Green Day have their moments: usually when contained within 4 minutes.
I never thought in my entire life I would visit this site and witness a love-in between Girls Aloud fans. I don't think even Sean T with his maniacal frothing can top that.
Don't mention trains
AV, Trains, Girls Aloud. The (new) Holy Trinity of PB.
Morrisons are running a collection for the families of victims at supermarket checkouts.
Talk about cashing in. And what mean bastards - couldn't the company itself donate anything?
How is running a collection for someone else hit by a traumatic event "cashing in"? They aren't taking a percentage. And, even if they aren't making a donation themselves (which we don't know), how does this make them mean bastards? What about all those companies and individuals doing nothing at all?
I never thought in my entire life I would visit this site and witness a love-in between Girls Aloud fans. I don't think even Sean T with his maniacal frothing can top that.
Don't mention trains
AV, Trains, Girls Aloud. The (new) Holy Trinity of PB.
(I also saw NIN back in 2014 at the arena too, on the night of the European Election results, so I've actually written PB threads from inside that arena)
Have I been rickrolled?
My favourite mashup is enya vs prodigy.. smack my bitch up/orinoco flow.
Kosheen vs Placebo - Hide the Bitter Pill
www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7XwhRhRSvo
Nice! Hmm, now am I going to spend the next hour listening to mashups?
We Found Somebody That I Used to Know
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4coj9bHEOZg
Ohh, that one is good!
Here's Prodigy vs. Enya I mentioned earlier:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CTJqwX-AwM
That's a good one. Watching musical mashups is somewhat preferable to discussing terrorism.
Music sounds better on holiday: youtube.com/watch?v=JrCv9vbLqWY
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I'm seeing Depeche Mode at the Olympic ("London") Stadium in less than two weeks - needless to say, I am a little apprehensive after last night's events.
I never thought in my entire life I would visit this site and witness a love-in between Girls Aloud fans. I don't think even Sean T with his maniacal frothing can top that.
Don't mention trains
AV, Trains, Girls Aloud. The (new) Holy Trinity of PB.
Did Stapleton Road (Bristol) to Severn Beach yesterday
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I'm seeing Depeche Mode at the Olympic ("London") Stadium in less than two weeks - needless to say, I am a little apprehensive after last night's events.
Ah thank God someone with decent musical taste, I was seriously beginning to worry. 'Enjoy the Silence' - yes.
Damned decent of you not to immediately question the motives of a debutant poster.
A sign of the times.
Edit: Seriously though, I do try to welcome posters on their first post.
Yeah, but that one was so clearly insidious you might have made an exception to the rule.
Hi Peter
Not insidious, if aimed at me. The knowledge and intellect on here makes that claim a little flimsy. The point was that people on all levels really need to be careful how they respond in one circumstance in case that response is then justifiably thrown back at them at a later date. Ask Colin Parry. I don't know where you are based but I can assure you that in the North West it is a very subdued day and lots of people are very upset.
I might add I look forward to your posts, very insightful, most of the time :-)
Of course it was aimed at you.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
I don't know where you're based. No offence intended but apart from the Scots (and then it's just Scotland in general) and a certain individual from Bedford I don't know where many people are from. You're definitely part of the family here though and not knowing your identity is implausible.
Thank you Philip. I am however moderately surprised that my East End roots are not more widely known, not least because of my occasional use of the local vernacular, my old china.
Still, I suppose it depends how your antennae are fixed. I must admit I couldn't locate most posters, either geographically or politically.
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
I doubt her saying she suspended the campaign is going to move a single vote.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
I never thought in my entire life I would visit this site and witness a love-in between Girls Aloud fans. I don't think even Sean T with his maniacal frothing can top that.
Don't mention trains
You were clearly absent during the great Showaddywaddy debate.
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I never thought that I'd find another Girls Aloud fan on PB.
I'd be surprised if there weren't quite a lot. PB's combined musical tastes are broad and unpredicable.
I think I've only been the the MEN once, to see My Chemical Romance, which was amusing as the signs on the A road leading into the city had 'MCR' painted on the road.
Was that the March 2007 gig? I was there!
Having met both of you that's rather surprising. Pulpstar I could see as an emo.
I went under duress, I spent most of the gig looking at my phone wanting to see what was happening in the England v Israel qualifier
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Labour put up a man as potential Prime Minister who has sided with terrorists in the past. With the enemies of this country. A man who would not use shoot to kill. A man who has serious qualms about using drones on those outside our country plotting to set up terror strikes within our country. A man who would have the farce of building submarines (because the unions still want the jobs) but who wouldn't arm them - or if he did, wouldn't fire them under any circumstances.
You, as an apologist for that man, have a much bigger fucking problem than Theresa May claiming she closed down the election.
There is something slightly odd about complaining that the members of a political forum are discussing the political implications of what is almost certainly a political act. I can't for the life of me think why it is predominately supporters of one party that are disquieted about the discussion taking place.
Apparently some exruciatingly pious formalisms have to be observed on these occasions before normal service can be resumed.
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move.
What a load of nasty-minded rubbish. As Corbyn's statement said, they agreed to suspend national campaigns, and both announced at roughly the same time (as did the LibDems, FWIW).
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Labour put up a man as potential Prime Minister who has sided with terrorists in the past. With the enemies of this country. A man who would not use shoot to kill. A man who has serious qualms about using drones on those outside our country plotting to set up terror strikes within our country. A man who would have the farce of building submarines (because the unions still want the jobs) but who wouldn't arm them - or if he did, wouldn't fire them under any circumstances.
You, as an apologist for that man, have a much bigger fucking problem than Theresa May claiming she closed down the election.
I expect that they'll be rescheduled for later in the campaign. Or they might just bump Nuttall out if campaigning's back on tomorrow (which'd feel a bit early, to my mind). UKIP clearly now below the other four in significance.
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move.
What a load of nasty-minded rubbish. As Corbyn's statement said, they agreed to suspend national campaigns, and both announced at roughly the same time (as did the LibDems, FWIW).
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
She expressed some very Katie Hopkins-esque opinions re Islam in the West. I was properly shocked.
If a Corbynite Millennial is thinking that kind of thing, even in the context of a horrible attack., and a few glasses of wine...
Just so fucking sad. All those screaming kids. Jesus.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: The self-styled Islamic State group has said on one of its social media channels that it was behind the #Manchester attack.
One would hope that, even allowing for how depraved anyone who's remotely attracted to jihadism in the first place must be, an act specifically targeting young kids might now give people out there second thoughts about getting involved in this evil ideology.
Young people tend to be Corbynite. It's just a thing..
She and I had the loveliest evening, then this horror. Bleh.
Another friend of mine - with an 18 year old daughter - says he was quaking with rage when he saw the photos and videos. The youth of the victims is really going to hit home: more than some other, similar-sized atrocities.
You have a friend with an 18 year old daughter? For how much longer, I wonder.
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I never thought that I'd find another Girls Aloud fan on PB.
I'd be surprised if there weren't quite a lot. PB's combined musical tastes are broad and unpredicable.
I think I've only been the the MEN once, to see My Chemical Romance, which was amusing as the signs on the A road leading into the city had 'MCR' painted on the road.
Was that the March 2007 gig? I was there!
Yes, it must have been: the most recent album at the time had been Black Parade.
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
Suggest the (perceived) security risk is much more substantial these days.
UKIP if they get a hearing in the media will start to get some traction for their views once the initial reaction has finished.As for many they are looking for more than condemnation and thanking the emergency services.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
Suggest the (perceived) security risk is much more substantial these days.
Hardly from a single Anti-Fox Hunting demonstrator!
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
Young people tend to be Corbynite. It's just a thing..
She and I had the loveliest evening, then this horror. Bleh.
Another friend of mine - with an 18 year old daughter - says he was quaking with rage when he saw the photos and videos. The youth of the victims is really going to hit home: more than some other, similar-sized atrocities.
You have a friend with an 18 year old daughter? For how much longer, I wonder.
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
Suggest the (perceived) security risk is much more substantial these days.
Hardly from a single Anti-Fox Hunting demonstrator!
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
There was one incident at the 1964 election when a protester threw an egg at Alec Douglas-Home and the PM - a former first-class cricketer - caught it without breaking the shell.
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
You are sounding particularly bitter today, almost like you were a supporter of the hard left seeing the last electoral straw you were clutching at sinking beneath the waves.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
Didn't realise I needed credentials to post here. Why the hell should I bother where you are or who you are? Does your opinion count more than mine? do you have a second preferential opinion or is it FPTP? As others have alluded to, Manchester and the North West is very subdued today. The relevance of Warrington is because that is where I am now, born and bred. I had kids in that town centre, that morning. Do you have any concept of what that is like? No mobiles, no social media, just silence until they walked through the door. Forgive me if I am upsetting your sensibilities on pointing out the well documented attitude of Jeremy Corbyn on the subject of terrorism. Please let me know when you feel it would be suitable to express my opinion on this subject and I will duly ignore you. Thanks
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
There was one incident at the 1964 election when a protester threw an egg at Alec Douglas-Home and the PM - a former first-class cricketer - caught it without breaking the shell.
And at the 1966 election Harold Wilson was hit in the eye by a stink bomb thrown by a schoolboy.
Jez's interview will now be delayed I suspect thus moving it from the less watched friday evening slot. The Tories are fortuitous the care clarification/u-turn was brought in seeing as the clock is now stopped. Anyway hopefully this won't change any voting intentions, I can't see it doing any harm to the incumbent mind.
I doubt it about Jez interview: only Tuesday today, and life goes on - and every disruption resulting from last night is victory of sorts for the bomber. 1 day suspension, then on we go.
I agree with that. It will be dominated by this of course but if he tried to postpone it (a) it would suggest terrorism is disrupting our democratic process and (b) it would give his many critics far too good an opportunity to say he's frightened of being quizzed about his record on terrorism.
The first is a compelling reason why the interview should go ahead. The second is sadly unavoidable in light of his past.
I have heard it suggested that the Police might advise against Corbyn continuing with his big rallies - at which he has been quite effective. That is unlikely I would have thought. Moreover until the 1990s most electioneering by party leaders during the campaign period consisted of addressing mass audiences at various City and Town Halls across the land. Back in the 1960s it was common to find hecklers at those meetings some of whom were effective at interrupting the speakers. This came to mind yesterday with the footage of an Anti – Fox Hunting demonstrator being carried off and arrested during May’s Wrexham visit on the grounds of a ‘breach of the peace’. Nobody tried to arrest those people hecking Harold Wilson , Alec Douglas Home, George Brown or Ted Heath at the 1964 /1966 elections.It seems unnecessary that the police authorities collude in the silencing of dissenters in this way. At the end of the day it is not their job to support the control freakery of today’s party leaders.
Suggest the (perceived) security risk is much more substantial these days.
I've already had an email from the Met Police with details of extra Police being drafted in to cover public places today, and I would expect there'll now be a review of security for the election. In their position I'd be looking at events such as election counts, which normally have barely any security at all, and certainly making sure fuller ID checks are carried out on people attending - they'll have the names by 1st June.
That's surely wrong. Never a better time for Corbyn to explain himself And it would be nice to hear what Tim Farron has to say also.
Appropriate IMO that the interviews are suspended, hopefully they’ll be on again next week.
I think politics is off for the rest of the week now, probably until Sunday. Everyone needs to echo the PMs comments then say nothing for a few days. There has to be a non-negligible chance that someone will open their mouth only to insert their foot.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
I suspect a lot of people who were prepared to hold their nose and vote Labour for their local candidates will now sit on their arses on polling day. They'll realise they just have to get rid of the guy. Start afresh, new leader.
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
She expressed some very Katie Hopkins-esque opinions re Islam in the West. I was properly shocked.
If a Corbynite Millennial is thinking that kind of thing, even in the context of a horrible attack., and a few glasses of wine...
Just so fucking sad. All those screaming kids. Jesus.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
What Corbynite millenials chose to exhibit to their friends on Twitter might be slightly different to what they hold in their own hearts. After all, expressing even qualified support for even the most generous of Ms Hopkin's views on social media is probably enough to get you drummed out of the Tufty club (* shows age).
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
Also in 2013 I saw Girls Aloud live at the MEN Arena.
They were fab, nearly as awesome as Depeche Mode in 2009 and Duran Duran in 2011.
I'm seeing Depeche Mode at the Olympic ("London") Stadium in less than two weeks - needless to say, I am a little apprehensive after last night's events.
Ah thank God someone with decent musical taste, I was seriously beginning to worry. 'Enjoy the Silence' - yes.
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Never mind, I'm sure that voters will see through that vile Tory move. If anything, it will remind them that what they really need at at a time like this is Diane Abbott in charge of national security.
Tearing up at the Sky News report of the pictures of the young people that are missing that the families are appealing for help. So young. I hope some of them are reunited with their families.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
They are when Corbyn is defending his 'record'.....
So are we now always to trust anything former IRA members say, or only when what they say favours the Conservatives?
I put it to you that members of the public will have a similar view. They will read the story with interest, and then weight in their minds if they give more credibility to the former terrorist, or the current apologist for terrorism... do you feel lucky ?
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
She expressed some very Katie Hopkins-esque opinions re Islam in the West. I was properly shocked.
If a Corbynite Millennial is thinking that kind of thing, even in the context of a horrible attack., and a few glasses of wine...
Just so fucking sad. All those screaming kids. Jesus.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
What Corbynite millenials chose to exhibit to their friends on Twitter might be slightly different to what they hold in their own hearts. After all, expressing even qualified support for even the most generous of Ms Hopkin's views on social media is probably enough to get you drummed out of the Tufty club (* shows age).
The political outlook of Corbyn supporters means that them entertaining Hopkins world view is incredibly unlikely. This is borne out on Twitter, and many other documented observations of their views. In previous incidents, most have taken a view that is more along the lines of being critical of Western foreign policy - that is part of a larger, 'anti-Imperialist/anti-Western' outlook.
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Never mind, I'm sure that voters will see through that vile Tory move. If anything, it will remind them that what they really need at at a time like this is Diane Abbott in charge of national security.
The same Diane Abbott who wanted to abolish the security services.
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
I suspect a lot of people who were prepared to hold their nose and vote Labour for their local candidates will now sit on their arses on polling day. They'll realise they just have to get rid of the guy. Start afresh, new leader.
Labour to poll in the twenties now.
It's all going to come undone for Labour. They haven't really started on McDonnell and Abbott yet, two more terrorist sympathisers who hope to form our next government.
I would say that Sun front page will be as at least as damaging as the dementia tax was for the Tories. The Sun has an estimated 10 million readership, and plenty of those will be the very people who wavered and considered voting Labour.
This atrocity today will magnify further still the stark choice on June 8th.
Labour put up a man as potential Prime Minister who has sided with terrorists in the past. With the enemies of this country. A man who would not use shoot to kill. A man who has serious qualms about using drones on those outside our country plotting to set up terror strikes within our country. A man who would have the farce of building submarines (because the unions still want the jobs) but who wouldn't arm them - or if he did, wouldn't fire them under any circumstances.
You, as an apologist for that man, have a much bigger fucking problem than Theresa May claiming she closed down the election.
Who are you calling an "apologist"? Can I be a "fellow traveller"?
It's you who have the problem. You're trying to say a terror attack on a pop concert in Manchester strengthens the case for Britain having strategic nuclear weapons, which are designed for use against cities, namely to massacre civilians.
I've now found Jeremy Corbyn's speech and watched it. It was even more crap than Theresa May's. Two lines stood out:
"This is an appalling act of violence against people." (Really?) "We have to make sure we live in a safe environment in the future." (What an embarrassing thing to say.)
BTW had you read Labour's manifesto you would know that they are promising to replace Trident. That is not because of trade unions wanting to protect jobs but because the Labour party hasn't got the guts to oppose the warfare state in a more profound way. The last thing they would want to do is upset the US government or call NATO membership into question or upset the British (or US) military-industrial complex too much - and in that respect they look just like the Tories. Where Jeremy Corbyn does deserve praise is at least he has said that he would not let loose these obscene weapons. As soon as Theresa May became PM she said hell yeah, she'd be blood-dripping-from-fangs willing to let them loose (i.e. nuke whole cities out of existence), so it can't be denied that there's a difference in attitudes between the parties here.
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
Britain has lived with terrorism for 50 years, but the deliberate targeting of teenage girls is the worst of the worst.
They were targeted because they were girls. Girls who go to school. Girls who will grow up not to be subservient to men. Girls who will now not grow up at all because they were murdered by losers who are scared of them.
Britain is a tolerant country. Manchester, the city of my birth, is a tolerant place. But the Muslim community must stand up and be counted now.
The person who committed this act, and those who stand behind him, secure in their anonymity and cloaked in the righteousness of their beliefs, must be condemned.
They believe in death. They glorify death. They believe their reward will be in death.
The only way to reach these people is through the religion they call their own.
They will not listen to Christians, or any other religion of peace.
They might just listen to the elders of Islam.
So, this is their chance. Issue a fatwa against the perpetrators of this act and stand up to be counted with your fellow citizens of Britain.
Imam Qari Asim MBE, Imam of Leeds Makkah Mosque and independent member of the government's Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group, said the victims "are very much in our thoughts and prayers".
"This was an attack on all of us," he added.
"We absolutely condemn the barbaric acts of an individual determined to spread hate and prejudice across the world.
"The senseless murder of innocents is utterly deplorable.
"We must not let them win by creating the divisions they so desperately seek to sow."
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
It was a forgone conclusion anyway.I do not believe anyone rally thought he would be PM.What are you really saying that he encourages terrorism ? He always comes across as a pacifist to me .
Maybe they'll move Tue/Wed/Thu to Mon/Tue/Wed next week? The GE should be back on in a few days.
I sincerely hope Neil doesn't row back on Corbyn's IRA sympathies. I don't think he will, but it might be framed a little differently.
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
The Sun have certainly helped on that front with their front page.
Article from former IRA member and leader...I posted links to them earlier, but that 'disgusted' some posters....
Anyone who bombs a pop concert aiming to kill innocent people is a terrorist. It's really weird that there is even any discourse about whether such an attack is "terrorist" or not. Not all terrorists are jihadists, but that's not the issue.
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Never mind, I'm sure that voters will see through that vile Tory move. If anything, it will remind them that what they really need at at a time like this is Diane Abbott in charge of national security.
The same Diane Abbott who wanted to abolish the security services.
Even if she didn't, her chancellor wouldn't give her any money for them.
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move.
What a load of nasty-minded rubbish. As Corbyn's statement said, they agreed to suspend national campaigns, and both announced at roughly the same time (as did the LibDems, FWIW).
And that contradicts what I said about May's statement outside Number Ten how, exactly?
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
It's likely to encourage moderates to abstain rather than support him, and it's likely to encourage don't knows back to the government.
JackW was absolutely right earlier today. There is no escape for Labour from the back catalogue of their main faces.
Isn't it the case that most voters aren't aware of Corbyn's links to the IRA/Hamas?
I'm sure there was some recent polling on this.
The public are aware of the stories, but they don't believe them. In the door-knocking I've been doing, even people who think Corbyn as PM would be farcically incompent, also think the media makes stuff up about him (the tale of him "dancing a jig" at Remembrance Day has been cited as an example a few times).
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
She expressed some very Katie Hopkins-esque opinions re Islam in the West. I was properly shocked.
If a Corbynite Millennial is thinking that kind of thing, even in the context of a horrible attack., and a few glasses of wine...
Just so fucking sad. All those screaming kids. Jesus.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
What Corbynite millenials chose to exhibit to their friends on Twitter might be slightly different to what they hold in their own hearts. After all, expressing even qualified support for even the most generous of Ms Hopkin's views on social media is probably enough to get you drummed out of the Tufty club (* shows age).
The political outlook of Corbyn supporters means that them entertaining Hopkins world view is incredibly unlikely. This is borne out on Twitter, and many other documented observations of their views. In previous incidents, most have taken a view that is more along the lines of being critical of Western foreign policy - that is part of a larger, 'anti-Imperialist/anti-Western' outlook.
In my experience, there is a subset of young lefties which is beginning to dislike and mistrust Islam or Islamism. They're still hugely critical of western foreign policy, but they abhor (in private, for now) the misogyny and violence of radical Islam.
It was inevitable, in the end. The cognitive dissonance required to be feminist and leftwing and yet supportive and protective of conservative Islam is too painful to last forever.
Hmmm. I'm someone who
(a. Hates the misogyny and violence of radical Islam (b. Dislikes Conservative aspects of any religion
I'd wager most young people think this way. Yet I'm not on board with a general negative view of all Muslims, and in my own experience most of the Muslims I know also hate the misogyny and violence of radical Islam. I wouldn't equate hating radical Islamism with a Katie Hopkins view of the world.
Damned decent of you not to immediately question the motives of a debutant poster.
A sign of the times.
Edit: Seriously though, I do try to welcome posters on their first post.
Yeah, but that one was so clearly insidious you might have made an exception to the rule.
Hi Peter
Not insidious, if aimed at me. The knowledge and intellect on here makes that claim a little flimsy. The point was that people on all levels really need to be careful how they respond in one circumstance in case that response is then justifiably thrown back at them at a later date. Ask Colin Parry. I don't know where you are based but I can assure you that in the North West it is a very subdued day and lots of people are very upset.
I might add I look forward to your posts, very insightful, most of the time :-)
Of course it was aimed at you.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
I don't know where you're based. No offence intended but apart from the Scots (and then it's just Scotland in general) and a certain individual from Bedford I don't know where many people are from. You're definitely part of the family here though and not knowing your identity is implausible.
Hi Philip
Sorry, but I really don't know who Peter is or where he is from, and why should I? I come on here for political comment not personality and geography. I just made my comment on a subject that is very sensitive to me. Wish I hadn't bothered quite frankly but feel I now must defend myself
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
She expressed some very Katie Hopkins-esque opinions re Islam in the West. I was properly shocked.
If a Corbynite Millennial is thinking that kind of thing, even in the context of a horrible attack., and a few glasses of wine...
Just so fucking sad. All those screaming kids. Jesus.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
What Corbynite millenials chose to exhibit to their friends on Twitter might be slightly different to what they hold in their own hearts. After all, expressing even qualified support for even the most generous of Ms Hopkin's views on social media is probably enough to get you drummed out of the Tufty club (* shows age).
The political outlook of Corbyn supporters means that them entertaining Hopkins world view is incredibly unlikely. This is borne out on Twitter, and many other documented observations of their views. In previous incidents, most have taken a view that is more along the lines of being critical of Western foreign policy - that is part of a larger, 'anti-Imperialist/anti-Western' outlook.
In my experience, there is a subset of young lefties which is beginning to dislike and mistrust Islam or Islamism. They're still hugely critical of western foreign policy, but they abhor (in private, for now) the misogyny and violence of radical Islam.
It was inevitable, in the end. The cognitive dissonance required to be feminist and leftwing and yet supportive and protective of conservative Islam is too painful to last forever.
Harmanism and an equalities agenda are totally incompatible with ultra conservative religion.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
Didn't realise I needed credentials to post here. Why the hell should I bother where you are or who you are? Does your opinion count more than mine? do you have a second preferential opinion or is it FPTP? As others have alluded to, Manchester and the North West is very subdued today. The relevance of Warrington is because that is where I am now, born and bred. I had kids in that town centre, that morning. Do you have any concept of what that is like? No mobiles, no social media, just silence until they walked through the door. Forgive me if I am upsetting your sensibilities on pointing out the well documented attitude of Jeremy Corbyn on the subject of terrorism. Please let me know when you feel it would be suitable to express my opinion on this subject and I will duly ignore you. Thanks
Lots of questions, Wire! I'll try to answer the more relevant ones.
No, of course everybody is free to post, subject to the Will Of Mike.
No reason why you should bother with me, but you did say you'd been a lurker for many years.
Strangely, I don't think all opinions are equal.
As you may know from your years of lurking, it would be very surprising if I were not familiar with the kind of anxieties about loved ones to which you fere. I was working in the City, ffs, when the July bombs went off.
I have no special sensibilities as regards Corbyn, which again you might know already from all your lurking.
Were the remarks in your first post 'opinions'? I called them insidious. Nothing you have posted since causes me to change my mind.
Where Jeremy Corbyn does deserve praise is at least he has said that he would not let loose these obscene weapons. As soon as Theresa May became PM she said hell yeah, she'd be blood-dripping-from-fangs willing to let them loose (i.e. nuke whole cities out of existence), so it can't be denied that there's a difference in attitudes between the parties here.
This argument was comprehensively lost in the 1980s. Nothing bespeaks the backwardness of Corbyn's views better than the fact that he's prepared to pay billions for something while rehashing 1980s Soviet-infiltrated guff about how it would be immoral to use it, so he never will.
The whole utility of nukes, such as it is, is that an attacker must be forced to consider that you might actually use them. If you tell him in advance you won't, why do you have them?
Considering Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, or Cameron, if any of them looked you in the eye and said I would press the button on you would anyone dare disbelieve them?
Even if Corbyn said he would, nobody would believe him. Has there ever been a conflict in which he did not side with our enemies?
If Corbyn had been around in 1940, he would unquestionably have looked up at the sky and cheered every time a Spitfire was shot down. In 1940 Nazi Germany was allied with the USSR, so to him they were the good guys, Britain was as always the enemy while the Spitfire pilot was a public-school educated class enemy to boot.
Orwell's schtick about 'Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia' was based on the mental gymnastics required of English communists between 1933 and 1945.
"an act specifically targeting young kids might now give people out there second thoughts about getting involved in this evil ideology."
Possibly. What will definitely discourage the thrill-seekers is to see their dreams of conquest being rolled back and their hopes of unlimited sex with captive women ended. It won't deter the really committed who long for death, but nothing will. We're already seeing some of the less-committed deciding that coming home to the decadent West or even the decadent Muslim states is preferable to being incinerated by a drone.
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
It was a forgone conclusion anyway.I do not believe anyone rally thought he would be PM.What are you really saying that he encourages terrorism ? He always comes across as a pacifist to me .
No, he expects us all to believe he expedited the NI peace process, when in reality he gave succour to one side, and one side only. That is not a peace broker, nor is it the actions of a pacifist.
This goes to the heart of what Corbyn is - a two headed snake. One head preaches domestic pacifism, the other anti British sentiment - including Irish Republican terrorism. There is no hiding place for Mr Corbyn any more on this matter - he cannot unsay what he said, and he cannot undo what he did.
He was an IRA sympathiser, and therefore a terrorist sympathiser, and therefore he was relaxed about their campaign of murder - including women and children. It's why his words were so hard to stomach this morning. The very people he unashamedly - and unequivocally supported - killed women and children.
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
I would imagine that the Tories have game-planned the optimum damaging time to go big on Corbyn's terrorist sympathies for ages. I'd guess they were planning the final two weeks or so of the campaign. Last night's horror story merely brings that time to now. Corbyn, McMao and Abbot all have horrific previous on the issue of terrorist apologia. This needs to be broadcast loud and clear for all to hear.
OK, serious thoughts as to how this will affect the election. I say it will crystalise the public's view that Corbyn would be a massive risk and a completely irrational choice as a PM, not that he was going to ever achieve that anyway.
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
It was a forgone conclusion anyway.I do not believe anyone rally thought he would be PM.What are you really saying that he encourages terrorism ? He always comes across as a pacifist to me .
No, he expects us all to believe he expedited the NI peace process, when in reality he gave succour to one side, and one side only. That is not a peace broker, nor is it the actions of a pacifist.
This goes to the heart of what Corbyn is - a two headed snake. One head preaches domestic pacifism, the other anti British sentiment - including Irish Republican terrorism. There is no hiding place for Mr Corbyn any more on this matter - he cannot unsay what he said, and he cannot undo what he did.
He was an IRA sympathiser, and therefore a terrorist sympathiser, and therefore he was relaxed about their campaign of murder - including women and children. It's why his words were so hard to stomach this morning. The very people he unashamedly - and unequivocally supported - killed women and children.
The public don't know, and if the political truce lasts until the weekend there's precious little time to make them aware.
I was with my leftwing, eco-conscious and very lovely girlfriend last night. She's 21 years old, smart and politically aware.
.
Looking at Twitter I'm not necessarily sure that masses of Corbynite millenials are thinking along the lines of Hopkins, especially after her recent comments.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
What Corbynite millenials chose to exhibit to their friends on Twitter might be slightly different to what they hold in their own hearts. After all, expressing even qualified support for even the most generous of Ms Hopkin's views on social media is probably enough to get you drummed out of the Tufty club (* shows age).
The political outlook of Corbyn supporters means that them entertaining Hopkins world view is incredibly unlikely. This is borne out on Twitter, and many other documented observations of their views. In previous incidents, most have taken a view that is more along the lines of being critical of Western foreign policy - that is part of a larger, 'anti-Imperialist/anti-Western' outlook.
In my experience, there is a subset of young lefties which is beginning to dislike and mistrust Islam or Islamism. They're still hugely critical of western foreign policy, but they abhor (in private, for now) the misogyny and violence of radical Islam.
It was inevitable, in the end. The cognitive dissonance required to be feminist and leftwing and yet supportive and protective of conservative Islam is too painful to last forever.
Hmmm. I'm someone who
(a. Hates the misogyny and violence of radical Islam (b. Dislikes Conservative aspects of any religion
I'd wager most young people think this way. Yet I'm not on board with a general negative view of all Muslims, and in my own experience most of the Muslims I know also hate the misogyny and violence of radical Islam. I wouldn't equate hating radical Islamism with a Katie Hopkins view of the world.
There is a difference between being more vigorous about the positive aspects of our society - including freedom of speech, defending our equality laws, promoting democracy and opposing violence - and measures that "clamp down" (as a previous post put it) on Islam, but will achieve nothing in terms of security and simply create new grievances - such as banning face veils.
I also share the concerns being expressed about faith schools, but most of those are Christian; there is currently only a handful of muslim schools.
Damned decent of you not to immediately question the motives of a debutant poster.
A sign of the times.
Edit: Seriously though, I do try to welcome posters on their first post.
Yeah, but that one was so clearly insidious you might have made an exception to the rule.
Hi Peter
Not insidious, if aimed at me. The knowledge and intellect on here makes that claim a little flimsy. The point was that people on all levels really need to be careful how they respond in one circumstance in case that response is then justifiably thrown back at them at a later date. Ask Colin Parry. I don't know where you are based but I can assure you that in the North West it is a very subdued day and lots of people are very upset.
I might add I look forward to your posts, very insightful, most of the time :-)
Of course it was aimed at you.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
I don't know where you're based. No offence intended but apart from the Scots (and then it's just Scotland in general) and a certain individual from Bedford I don't know where many people are from. You're definitely part of the family here though and not knowing your identity is implausible.
Hi Philip
Sorry, but I really don't know who Peter is or where he is from, and why should I? I come on here for political comment not personality and geography. I just made my comment on a subject that is very sensitive to me. Wish I hadn't bothered quite frankly but feel I now must defend myself
Thank you for bothering to post. People do tend to jump to conclusions. I've written short posts on PB, to make a brief point, then found someone completely misinterpreting them.
Just put in a brief clarification (if you want to) and carry on.
Comments
Why can't Jeremy Corbyn speak for himself?
He must be annoyed by the fast one that May has pulled on him to help the Tories, of course. The way she has said that the election campaign has been suspended as if it were within her authority to suspend anything other than the Tory campaign. And if he calls her on it, the Tories will denounce him as disloyal to the country. A truly vile Tory move. But how about Corbyn rises above it? He could make a speech denouncing the terrorist attack, praising the efforts of the police and security forces, and saying that like Mrs May he has felt it right to suspend his party's campaign, and in times of such WEAKNESS and INSTABILITY what is needed is UNITY and PROTECTION.
(The usage of "strong and stable" in the Tory campaign will probably subside a bit now.)
Anyway, my theory regarding Corbyn's rap sheet will be tested to destruction now. If the general public didn't know before, everyone will know by June 8th. Good. He cannot be allowed to airbrush this stuff away.
You, as an apologist for that man, have a much bigger fucking problem than Theresa May claiming she closed down the election.
Anecdotal experiences aren't necessarily reflective of the public mood. If I trusted my own circle, I'd be thinking that Corbyn was heading towards 50+ majority.
That's probably too optimistic though.
So here they are again:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3623934/ex-ira-killer-says-jeremy-corbyns-solidarity-encouraged-vicious-campaign-of-violence-and-without-his-support-terrorist-murders-and-torture-would-have-ended-much-earlier/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3623936/jeremy-corbyn-might-not-have-planted-a-bomb-but-he-made-it-easier-for-those-who-did-says-former-ira-man/
But even less so now.
Thoughts, anyone?
Of course it was aimed at you.
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
Didn't realise I needed credentials to post here. Why the hell should I bother where you are or who you are? Does your opinion count more than mine? do you have a second preferential opinion or is it FPTP? As others have alluded to, Manchester and the North West is very subdued today. The relevance of Warrington is because that is where I am now, born and bred. I had kids in that town centre, that morning. Do you have any concept of what that is like? No mobiles, no social media, just silence until they walked through the door. Forgive me if I am upsetting your sensibilities on pointing out the well documented attitude of Jeremy Corbyn on the subject of terrorism. Please let me know when you feel it would be suitable to express my opinion on this subject and I will duly ignore you. Thanks
Labour to poll in the twenties now.
I'm sure there was some recent polling on this.
I would say that Sun front page will be as at least as damaging as the dementia tax was for the Tories. The Sun has an estimated 10 million readership, and plenty of those will be the very people who wavered and considered voting Labour.
This atrocity today will magnify further still the stark choice on June 8th.
As Sean T said, I feel it in me waters.
It's you who have the problem. You're trying to say a terror attack on a pop concert in Manchester strengthens the case for Britain having strategic nuclear weapons, which are designed for use against cities, namely to massacre civilians.
I've now found Jeremy Corbyn's speech and watched it. It was even more crap than Theresa May's. Two lines stood out:
"This is an appalling act of violence against people." (Really?)
"We have to make sure we live in a safe environment in the future." (What an embarrassing thing to say.)
BTW had you read Labour's manifesto you would know that they are promising to replace Trident. That is not because of trade unions wanting to protect jobs but because the Labour party hasn't got the guts to oppose the warfare state in a more profound way. The last thing they would want to do is upset the US government or call NATO membership into question or upset the British (or US) military-industrial complex too much - and in that respect they look just like the Tories. Where Jeremy Corbyn does deserve praise is at least he has said that he would not let loose these obscene weapons. As soon as Theresa May became PM she said hell yeah, she'd be blood-dripping-from-fangs willing to let them loose (i.e. nuke whole cities out of existence), so it can't be denied that there's a difference in attitudes between the parties here.
It's the front page of the Sun, a major article and Sun Leader.....
They were targeted because they were girls. Girls who go to school. Girls who will grow up not to be subservient to men. Girls who will now not grow up at all because they were murdered by losers who are scared of them.
Britain is a tolerant country. Manchester, the city of my birth, is a tolerant place. But the Muslim community must stand up and be counted now.
The person who committed this act, and those who stand behind him, secure in their anonymity and cloaked in the righteousness of their beliefs, must be condemned.
They believe in death. They glorify death. They believe their reward will be in death.
The only way to reach these people is through the religion they call their own.
They will not listen to Christians, or any other religion of peace.
They might just listen to the elders of Islam.
So, this is their chance. Issue a fatwa against the perpetrators of this act and stand up to be counted with your fellow citizens of Britain.
I hope you’re with us.
http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/issue-the-fatwa
At least the Imam of Leeds is with us...
Imam Qari Asim MBE, Imam of Leeds Makkah Mosque and independent member of the government's Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group, said the victims "are very much in our thoughts and prayers".
"This was an attack on all of us," he added.
"We absolutely condemn the barbaric acts of an individual determined to spread hate and prejudice across the world.
"The senseless murder of innocents is utterly deplorable.
"We must not let them win by creating the divisions they so desperately seek to sow."
See Airey Neave or the Brighton bombing if you're not sure.
We can infer that they found him helpful. As others have observed, he wanted them to win.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/19/john-mcdonnell-mi5-letter-signature-denied-_n_8601684.html
8-year-old confirmed dead after Manchester attack at Ariana Grande concert
https://t.co/1x0W7HstMZ
JackW was absolutely right earlier today. There is no escape for Labour from the back catalogue of their main faces.
(a. Hates the misogyny and violence of radical Islam
(b. Dislikes Conservative aspects of any religion
I'd wager most young people think this way. Yet I'm not on board with a general negative view of all Muslims, and in my own experience most of the Muslims I know also hate the misogyny and violence of radical Islam. I wouldn't equate hating radical Islamism with a Katie Hopkins view of the world.
Sorry, but I really don't know who Peter is or where he is from, and why should I? I come on here for political comment not personality and geography. I just made my comment on a subject that is very sensitive to me. Wish I hadn't bothered quite frankly but feel I now must defend myself
You stated you had been a lurker for many years and yet you do not know where I am based. You can't have been lurking very often if you are unaware of my location, or my identity generally. I've been posting since March 2005 (the first 10,000 or so posts were under a very slightly different username, before Mike switched to Vanilla) so to regulars I should think I'm almost family.
Excuse me if I find your credentials a bit thin.
Didn't realise I needed credentials to post here. Why the hell should I bother where you are or who you are? Does your opinion count more than mine? do you have a second preferential opinion or is it FPTP? As others have alluded to, Manchester and the North West is very subdued today. The relevance of Warrington is because that is where I am now, born and bred. I had kids in that town centre, that morning. Do you have any concept of what that is like? No mobiles, no social media, just silence until they walked through the door. Forgive me if I am upsetting your sensibilities on pointing out the well documented attitude of Jeremy Corbyn on the subject of terrorism. Please let me know when you feel it would be suitable to express my opinion on this subject and I will duly ignore you. Thanks
Lots of questions, Wire! I'll try to answer the more relevant ones.
No, of course everybody is free to post, subject to the Will Of Mike.
No reason why you should bother with me, but you did say you'd been a lurker for many years.
Strangely, I don't think all opinions are equal.
As you may know from your years of lurking, it would be very surprising if I were not familiar with the kind of anxieties about loved ones to which you fere. I was working in the City, ffs, when the July bombs went off.
I have no special sensibilities as regards Corbyn, which again you might know already from all your lurking.
Were the remarks in your first post 'opinions'? I called them insidious. Nothing you have posted since causes me to change my mind.
Sadly the monster raving looney party wasn't an option - it would have been my second choice...
The whole utility of nukes, such as it is, is that an attacker must be forced to consider that you might actually use them. If you tell him in advance you won't, why do you have them?
Considering Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, or Cameron, if any of them looked you in the eye and said I would press the button on you would anyone dare disbelieve them?
Even if Corbyn said he would, nobody would believe him. Has there ever been a conflict in which he did not side with our enemies?
If Corbyn had been around in 1940, he would unquestionably have looked up at the sky and cheered every time a Spitfire was shot down. In 1940 Nazi Germany was allied with the USSR, so to him they were the good guys, Britain was as always the enemy while the Spitfire pilot was a public-school educated class enemy to boot.
Orwell's schtick about 'Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia' was based on the mental gymnastics required of English communists between 1933 and 1945.
"an act specifically targeting young kids might now give people out there second thoughts about getting involved in this evil ideology."
Possibly. What will definitely discourage the thrill-seekers is to see their dreams of conquest being rolled back and their hopes of unlimited sex with captive women ended. It won't deter the really committed who long for death, but nothing will. We're already seeing some of the less-committed deciding that coming home to the decadent West or even the decadent Muslim states is preferable to being incinerated by a drone.
This goes to the heart of what Corbyn is - a two headed snake. One head preaches domestic pacifism, the other anti British sentiment - including Irish Republican terrorism. There is no hiding place for Mr Corbyn any more on this matter - he cannot unsay what he said, and he cannot undo what he did.
He was an IRA sympathiser, and therefore a terrorist sympathiser, and therefore he was relaxed about their campaign of murder - including women and children. It's why his words were so hard to stomach this morning. The very people he unashamedly - and unequivocally supported - killed women and children.
I also share the concerns being expressed about faith schools, but most of those are Christian; there is currently only a handful of muslim schools.
Thank you for bothering to post. People do tend to jump to conclusions. I've written short posts on PB, to make a brief point, then found someone completely misinterpreting them.
Just put in a brief clarification (if you want to) and carry on.