Forum menu
the OP picked the most inflammatory phrase
[i]Really?[/i] Seems to me you might already have been primed to look for something to react to.
Seems to me the OP simply saw what most people who aren't Squaddies would see, and described it accordingly.
I think we're in furious agreement. I know they're not cops, hence the initial question. I just wondered, beyond looking tough, what they could actually do.
Shoot people if required
Armed police don't deploy solo so some of it is about pairing up to free up numbers
Look like something is being done
Attract the nutters
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/politics/news/86201/watch-jeremy-corbyn-supporter-yells-police-and-soldiers-downing-street
what she has said [u][i]in the past[/i][/u]
Bit of a recurring theme in your posts, Nin...
Seems to me the OP simply saw what most people who aren't Squaddies would see, and described it accordingly.
After not reading his own link justifying his description......
Exactly, I remembered a tracked armoured vehicle that I knew wasn't a tank.
You'd have equally gone off on one if I'd had described it as a tank.
And reading the link, you credit me with too much.
After not reading his own link justifying his description......
It didn't exactly go into great detail about the niceties of armoured vehicle identification though, did it?
And as it's not really the main thrust of the article, a reader might be forgiven for not giving the point his main attention, not expecting it to be followed up with an exam...
A daily reminder that Corbyn is right about the roots of the problem
What has Sweden done to deserve the same problem?
You don't think that what she has said in the past might be revealing of what they really think, and would do if they were put in a position of power?
What, like Boris Johnson?
What has Sweden done to deserve the same problem?
You're [i]very[/i] literal, aren't you?
Nobody has suggested that western foreign policy is the [i]only[/i] cause of jihadism, and clearly the (global) jihad threat pre-dates decisions to march into the Middle East to counter it.
I just wondered, beyond looking tough, what they could actually do.
Just like the [b]TANKS & MISSILE BATTERIES [/b] at Heathrow, exactly that, it's a pr exercise
You don't think that what she has said in the past might be revealing of what they really think, and would do if they were put in a position of power?
I have [i]no[/i] idea whether her past pronouncements predict the future - and neither do you.
I do know however, that people - even politicians - change their minds in light of experience.
I do know however, that people - even politicians - change their minds in light of experience.
People who knew me 10 years ago would think you were mad if you told them I'd joined The Green Party...
Priceless stupidity from Fallon - even exceeding his own standards !
Oh, FFS..!
Fallon used to be considered a big hitter by the tories. Now he's as much of a liability as BoJo and May.
and would do if they were put in a position of power?
There's an (inadvertently) good point here.
I don't expect Labour to manage to change all that much if they get into power, faced with the brakes inherent in Parliament and the civil service. One argument for the election I've heard is that if May increased her majority then she wouldn't have to pander to more rabid extremes of her party to get things through Parliament. Even if Labour miracle a win then it's hardly going to be a landslide or stop the labour right wing trying to meddle. I would, however, like them to try to make worthwhile changes, and perhaps convince a few more people that "might is right" isn't necessarily the best route to peace. Maybe that will encourage politicians generally that a way to get elected is to appeal to people's good nature rather than their insecurities and fears.
Pie in the sky, I know.
I like that, Spud-Face...
Cheers!
I don't see how any sane, rational person can argue that our recent adventures in the middle east have been anything other than an unmitigated disaster, which has massively contributed to the region descending into chaos, and made the whole world a far more dangerous place.
Corbyn is one of the very few MPs who have constantly called this right, and therefore has any credibility on this issue
Yep - no other conclusion bears any critical analysis.
Theresa May seems to be trying to argue that creating vast ungovernable spaces has *not* caused a problem.
I don't see how she can fix this until she realizes where the causes lie.
EDIT: and thinking about it, I wonder what else she's confused about.
intervening in the Middle East MIGHT have been a good idea if there had been a plan for the peace. Quite clearly there never was hence why we are here now. I still here no plans for how to clear up the mess, if it is actually possible now!
I would suggest that once ISIS is defeated another group will appear and repeat what we are seeing now.
I must admit I'm warming to him. Shame he's left it so long to start being the opposition.
It's worse than that though, isn't it? There were plenty of people, far better informed than our warmongering politicians, who were predicting, and warning, exactly what would happen if we went ahead. But even they underestimated the bloody chaos we're in now.
But they were shouted down, demonised, and branded cowards and traitors! It now seems Brexit wasn't the first time our glorious leaders 'did a Gove' ... we've had enough of 'experts'
I hope May keeps banging on about this issue, because she's been on the wrong side of this argument from the off. All she's doing now is reminding everyone of that fact
Strong and stable Binbins strong and stable
I would suggest that once ISIS is defeated
That's the whole nub of the matter - you can't kill an [i]idea[/i] by bombing it.
I must admit I'm warming to him. Shame he's left it so long to start being the opposition.
He's been being the opposition for the past two years, only most people chose not to listen, quite a few of the present company included.
I think the perception in some quarters is that he hasn't been an [i]effective[/i] opposition.
I don't agree.
He's actually had two battles to fight (within Parliament and against the Right-wing press) but he's just kept at it, and the scales are finally falling from the electorate's eyes.
Well, I hope they're enjoying the benefits of hindsight. Thanks to their collective miopia we're about to sleepwalk into the most inept and undeserving government in my lifetime. If Corbyn had been given a fair crack of the whip by his own side, May would have been toast long ago.
If I was Corbyns team I'd be saying '20,000 less police officers' every time the Maybot says 'strong and stable'
If Corbyn had been given a fair crack of the whip by his own side
Good point, and my mistake - he's been fighting [i]three[/i] battles.
Jeez, he's as heroic as [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Prime#Animated_character_biography ]Optimus Prime[/url]!
😉
If I was Corbyns team I'd be saying '20,000 less police officers' every time the Maybot says 'strong and stable'
Wouldn't you be saying "20,000 [b]fewer[/b] police officers" ?
If I was Corbyns team I'd be saying '20,000 less police officers' every time the Maybot says 'strong and stable'
Well, I'd hope he'd be saying 20,000 fewer police officers 😉
But, that's probably the most positive I've ever seen you be about the man binners, so I suppose I should be grateful for small mercies...
Oh look, Binners has come a full 360, the wind must have changed...
As for rules of engagement, I'll ask. They're currently supplementing CNC whilst officers are deployed elsewhere so shouldn't be hard to find one.
He's labour. We don't have cars, and we don't speak proper, like 😉
And yes... it does look like I'm back where I started. I think an awful lot has has changed in the last week. The view from Manchester most certainly has!
He's labour. We don't have cars, and we don't speak proper, like
This is what we've been trying to tell you for the past couple of years
You don't think that what she has said in the past might be revealing of what they really think, and would do if they were put in a position of power?
No because all politicians are guilty of saying daft/incorrect/inappropriate things, just the left get echoed in the media way more (re Theresa May on tourism / terrorism slip up hardly being reported). And secondly people are what they do not what they say.
Well this is a pretty damning indictment of both Theresa May as Home Secretary, and a certainDr Liam Fox when he was defence secretary
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/27/libya-fallout-theresa-may-failed-terror ]The Libya fallout shows how May has failed on terror[/url]
The idea that a government led by these clowns would lead to us all being safer is as laughable as it is insulting!
It seems pages ago that I mentioned that Corbyn could win. What's that line from whoever "events dear boy, events". It seems to me that Labour are pretty close now to a fantastic win or May being down to even less of a majority than she gave up.
It seems pages ago that I mentioned that Corbyn could win. What's that line from whoever "events dear boy, events". It seems to me that Labour are pretty close now to a fantastic win or May being down to even less of a majority than she gave up.
I heard much the same in 1992
And 2015
I heard much the same in 1992And 2015
Naah, you didn't.
So ninfan still can't explain why a fully armed police can't stop a bomber what a surprise. I thought had solutions there... So. Sad. #disappointment
She accused the Police Federation of scaremongering and repeatedly “crying wolf” over the impact of the previous round of cuts in police funding as part of the government’s austerity programme – and rejected their claims that further cuts would force them to adopt “paramilitary styles of policing” in Britain.
[s]Strong and stable[/s]Complacent and not up to the job.
It's a two year old article, but it seems extremely prescient.
fully armed police can't stop a bomber
Way to go, you just shot your own argument on police cuts in the foot, didn't you, If even a fully armed police can't stop them, let's get rid of them.
Like McDonnell wanted
ninfan - memberWay to go, you just shot your own argument on police cuts in the foot, didn't you, If even a fully armed police can't stop them, let's get rid of them.
Same conference from 2 years ago when TM was home sec, she was warned that her destruction of community policing would lead to intelligence collection drying up. Which seems to be what's happened here.
against the Right-wing press
If people bought left wing newspapers the press would be left wing and the right wing press would go to the wall. Wonder why it doesn't happen......
Way to go, you just shot your own argument on police cuts in the foot, didn't you, If even a fully armed police can't stop them, let's get rid of them.
No, but if you had 20000 more police investigating leads from the community telling them that a man was a threat would that man have been in the position to be a suicide bomber?
75-100 seat majority is my call.
The Diane has been doing her bit, she seems to think that being on the same panel/speaking event doesn't count as meeting an IRA terrorist
The shadow Home Secretary was also asked about her own comments in a 1988 interview in an Irish Republican journal, in which she reportedly said: [b]“Every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.[/b]”
I see Diane has been out to reinforce Corbyns "I didn't meet the IRA message"
https://order-order.com/2017/05/27/iain-dale-reads-guidos-corbyn-ira-list-diane-abbott/
And as for honouring all the dead of the troubles
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/night-jeremy-corbyn-stood-in-honour-of-dead-ira-terrorists-1-7008757
Corbyn is effective at deflecting direct criticism of his personal politics by careful selection of what he says and the platitudes he uses. What he says isn't the issue it's what he doesn't, that's why the failures to answer direct questions are so important and telling. It allows him to operate two narratives simultaneously, one for the fellow travellers and one for the public. Whilst all the time trolling his opponents with what he does
Corbyns line of "I didn't meet the IRA" is different to " I didn't meet members of the IRA" which he didn't say
" I worked for peace in NI" is different to " I worked for a united Ireland and removal of all British presence" which he campaigned for continuously
fully armed police can't stop a bomber
French have had 5,000 soldiers on the streets since Charlie Ebdo/Hyper Kacher and the French police are armed but they have still had Bataclan and Nice attacks
rench have had 5,000 soldiers on the streets since Charlie Ebdo/Hyper Kacher and the French police are armed but they have still had Bataclan and Nice attacks
Which coms back to more police following up leads, Police that May made redundant, the same May who is cosying up to Saudi Arabia, who just happen to bank role the Wahhabi school of Islamic thought, that just happens to underlie much of the current issues.
big_n_daft - Member
against the Right-wing pressIf people bought left wing newspapers the press would be left wing and the right wing press would go to the wall. Wonder why it doesn't happen......
Well that's a suitably daft question from big n daft.
Owning a national newspaper requires having vast amounts at your disposal. Rupert Murdoch, for example, is a multi-billionaire who can easily cope with the fact that last year his British newspaper operation experienced several £millions in loses.
People with vast amounts of money at their disposal tend to be staunchly right-wing. This is especially true of newspaper barons who are often motivated by the irresistible prospect of manipulating public opinion. In fact manipulating public opinion often comes before making a profit.
I hope that helps or do you need further help with explaining why people with vast amounts of money at their disposal tend to be right-wing?
Yay! Ernie's back! I've joined Momentum comrade 😀
Not really. I just *ing hate the Tory's! And in particular the hoof****ing thunder* who is presently my elected representative
Does your Socialist Worker come with a free tin foil hat?
If there was a market for it then even the Socialist Worker could be main stream media, if people bought it they would print more and so on. Or would they restrict the print run to keep pure?
No, but if you had 20000 more police investigating leads from the community telling them that a man was a threat would that man have been in the position to be a suicide bomber?
Well, since in this case they already had the leads, as with other attacks they already knew him, he had been repeatedly flagged as an extremist,
What they couldn't do was lock him up based just on being a threat
And if they [b]had[/b] locked him up, or even been monitoring him, regularly searching his house et. Then you would have been one of the first hopping up and down calling the police racist for doing so.
Yeah good point big n daft, owning a national newspaper doesn't require having vast amounts of money at your disposal - it's just a coincidence that Rupert Murdoch owns over 150 newspapers and also happens to be a multi-billionaire.
I must have been talking bollocks.
Does Socialist Worker own a broadcasting and film making concern?
Does Socialist worker sponsor major sporting events?
The reach of the billionaire press barons is insidious, all enveloping.
If SW had that kind of reach, i'm sure their publication figures would also be significant
.
You mean like the 900 million pound Scott Trust limited? (Guardian and observer)
ulysse - Member
I'd imagine lethal force from the Army is a given..
Absolutely, we're all mindless trigger-happy nutters 🙄
To answer zokes' question on the legality of soldiers shooting somebody, peacetime rules of engagement only give service personnel the same inherent legal right of self defence as any member of the public, i.e. You may use lethal force if you reasonably believe that your life (or somebody else's) is in danger and there is no other way to prevent the danger. There are also rules about issuance of warnings. The difference is that we're allowed to carry firearms on duty, so the lethal force is considerably more so. The entitlement to use it is exactly the same as a member of the public. Regarding the "shoot to kill" element, this gets misunderstood. AIUI armed police are taught how to shoot to incapacitate if appropriate, this is quite a subtle and complex thing. Servicemen are, in general, just taught to aim for the middle! "Shoot to kill" becomes confused with extra-judicial killing; it isn't.
Making the judgement in the case of a suspected suicide bomber is difficult; there are signs and there is training, but there's a big potential for a mistake as with Menezes. If a squaddie were to shoot somebody and they turned out to be innocent, if it was found to be a reasonable and honest belief, the law protects them, as it should.
Ouch:
And yet ninfan, May is managing to lose ground to him...
I wouldn't trust you with a weapon, airtragic, but dont take that personally, I wouldn't trust anyone, full stop, farmers for dispatching distressed animals included.
They're designed with one purpose, why would anybody choose to own or work with one.
Would you trust your sweet innocent "unarmed" drug dealing mate with one?
ninfan - Member
You mean like the 900 million pound Scott Trust limited? (Guardian and observer
Your point, caller?
Big money publishing house with big circulating tickets on the books, shock?
Isn't t that what Ernie was getting at?
We can add an inability to read and understand to your unique charms, Ninfan?
No one means no one.
And where was it mentioned he was innocent?
So Summary executions are fine in your world, instead of trial, incarceration and possible rehabilitation
I was right earlier then, you really are John McDonnell's press secretary
"disband MI5 and special police squads, disarm the police."
Summary executions
😆
Answer the question instead of the usual right wing tactics of evasion, is Judge Dread style policing fine in your mind and world view?
Go back and read the duggan inquest verdict (or, equally, the Azele Rodney case, or any of the others)
You're spouting codswallop
The stuff of utter moon-howlingly deluded idiots
You should probably step away from the canary and anotherangryvoice for a while
Indeed @ninfan, it surely must have been obvious to those voting for Corbyn as oeader that those wprds would haunt him
@AD May is not losing ground to him, its going to be a 75-100 Tory majority. You are guilty of getting suckered in by the newspapers commissioning "polls" to generate clicks. We saw the same thing in the Scortish Referendum and in the GE 2015 where polling was simply miles out from electoral reality.
I'm staggered that people are as naive as to think Corbyn's 'Stating the obvious' speech was original and different - British PMs have been saying this stuff for years, it's a completely mainstream view:
May spelling it out:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38776377
Cameron:
[img] 
[/img](Nicked from above.)
Regarding newspapers. I reckon newspapers reflect opinion far more than forming it. People buy the news that conforms to their own bias. The only journos I know are local journos and there is zero effort from them to form opinion. Their entire objective is the desperate need to write stuff people want to buy. I see no reason why the national press which is in terminal decline would have the luxury of trying to form opinion at the expense of readership.
Anyway, there *is* a left/centre left press, IMHO:
The Guardian
The Independent
The Observer
The Morning Star ( https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/)
Mirror
Socialist Worker ( https://socialistworker.co.uk/)
it surely must have been obvious to those voting for Corbyn as oeader that those wprds would haunt him
Doesn't seem to be working though does it and as I said before yes it is obvious that the right wing media will be making up all sort so BS, skewing facts, taking things out of context to help May as much as possible. Do you think any of us are surprised by that?
May is not losing ground to him, its going to be a 75-100 Tory majority
Which poll, compared to any poll from 4 weeks ago, shows that May has not lost ground?
Do you actually even believe what you write yourself because nobody else does?
right wing media
https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/support
https://socialistworker.co.uk/donation/init
Anyway, there *is* a left/centre left press, IMHO:
The Guardian
The Independent
The Observer
The Morning Star ( https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/)
Mirror
Socialist Worker ( https://socialistworker.co.uk/)
Socialist Worker and Morning Star definitely aren't "mainstream", and the rest don't have anything like the political reach and clout of the Right-wing press in a currently Right-wing centric political system.
Newspaper editors (and their media mogul masters - think Murdoch) [i]unquestionably and significantly[/i] influence the political landscape, to an extent which utterly subverts democracy.
May is not losing ground to him, its going to be a 75-100 Tory majority
You made that up.
Socialist Worker and Morning Star definitely aren't "mainstream",
They would be if there was demand for them, that's what mainstream means.
You made that up.
To be fair, predictions of the future that aren't made up are pretty rare. No disrespect to Jamba but I think prophecy is probably not in his skillset.
I know what mainstream means - and there [i]isn't[/i] the demand for them what would make them mainstream.
SW for example, describes itself as:
a revolutionary socialist newspaper
and with the best will in the world, not even life-long socialists like me are caught by a description like that.
And MS is further left again.
I sympathise with what they stand for, but I don't read them. And I'm confident I'm not alone here.
No disrespect to Jamba but I think prophecy is probably not in his skillset.
Which is why it would have been better if he'd cited a source, or couched his comment in more... [i]aspirational[/i], rather than factual, terms.