BS: uk politics

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 10:45 AM

But David Carter it is all part of the great game and nothing is as simple as it seems


http://www.blacklistednews.com/Pepe_Escobar%3A_Why_Jihadism_Won%27t_Be_Allowed_To_Die/60699/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 10:21 AM

MISSED A BIT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 10:20 AM

"In the real world it is called progress-for good or ill."
Laser weaponry
I would say it was a sign of modern savagery
One of the aspects of this filth being examined it the possibility of blinding the enemy
Are you advocating this as a moral way fr human beings to remain?
Give me bows and arrows any day
I brought it up because, should it be fully developed there is no reason for it not to be part of the arms trade
That would be a thing for the Saudis to pass on to their terrorist friends to use in their struggle

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:38 AM

"THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME ???"

In the real world it is called progress-for good or ill.

Are you recommending we revert to bows and arrows?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:38 AM

Here is an example Teribus. That is to Syrian rebels in that instance.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:21 AM

THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME ???
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:14 AM

CLUSTER BOMBS OUTLAWED IN 2010!!!
Saudi Arabia has finally admitted that it used UK-manufactured cluster bombs against Houthi rebels in Yemen, increasing pressure on the British government which has repeatedly refused to curb arms sales to Riyadh." 2016
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:13 AM

Cluster munitions are only "outlawed" by countries who have signed the 2010 convention. A few choice non-signatories are Saudi Arabia (who have used them in Yemen), tbe US, Israel and Turkey. Plenty more.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 09:03 AM

Blackmail!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 08:57 AM

Saudi also supplies 10% of our oil and as Norway depletes this figure may well increase.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: bobad
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 08:48 AM

BRITISH SUPPLIED ("DEFENSIVE") CLUSTER BOMBS !!!

BRITISH SUPPLIED CLUSTER BOMBS IN 1980'S - CLUSTER BOMBS OUTLAWED IN 2010!!!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 08:02 AM

Ad infinitum.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 07:41 AM

BRITISH SUPPLIED ("DEFENSIVE") CLUSTER BOMBS !!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 07:16 AM

"Of all nations, UK is the most restrictive on who it sells arms to."
"Vince Cable, the business secretary, has admitted as much. "We do trade with governments that are not democratic and have bad human rights records", he told a crossparty group of senior MPs. "We do business with repressive governments and there's no denying that"."
These weapons are not specifically for defence and are widely being used to suppress legitimate protest - as in the case of the armoured cars tear gas, and riot control
THis is a sick defence of a sick trade
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 07:11 AM

Oi, Al, what's with this "we?" You'll be telling me next you believe in original sin! 😉

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 07:06 AM

we beheaded Sir Thomas More on a point of religious doctrine.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 06:24 AM

I didn't mention religion at all in relation to the beheadings count. You brought it up first at 10.38 am yesterday, quite gratuitously. I think you'd better look to your own not-so-latent Islamophobia in order to explain why you were so anxious to throw that into the ring. There was something else, too, utterly irrelevant, some mention of trade union activism, as I recall. You're losing it, pal. Why not go and sing a song instead? 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 06:24 AM

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 05:54 AM

The first time #Croydon has ever failed a social services inspection - only with @CroydonLabour in charge: croydonconservatives.com/news_search_re…

Disgraceful failure by Croydon Labour Council!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 05:45 AM

Nice try Shaw but no coconut.

Religion came into the thread due to YOU wittering on about beheadings in Saudi Arabia introduced by YOU. I merely cited an offence for which YOU could be beheaded in Saudi Arabia.

No need to ask Joe or Pete anything Shaw - I just go to the horse's mouth - i.e. your own posting history - that you cannot quibble about.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 05:28 AM

Nah then, Bill, why didn't YOU toddle off and ask Joe, Pete, etc., about my views on religion? While you're at it, explain to your mate Keith why you tried to derail his thread by gratuitously bringing religion into it. Utterly inexplicable. Silly bugger.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 05:15 AM

Sandman, see the arms trade thread.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 05:02 AM

Of all nations, UK is the most restrictive on who it sells arms to." please provide stats to back this up

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 04:20 AM

There is no current political debate in UK on the issue of arms sales.
When there is it would be appropriate to discuss it here.
Until then it belongs in a different thread.
It is just an attempt to derail this thread.

Jim,
"We do trade with governments that are not democratic and have bad human rights records",

Of course we do. Countries that do not choose democracy are still entitled to defend themselves.
Of all nations, UK is the most restrictive on who it sells arms to.

You choose to live in Ireland. Ireland requires armaments and goes to arms dealers for them. It is a legitimate trade.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 04:08 AM

I think a dose of reality is required, all major nations are involved in the "arms trade"......we don't like it, but the fact is that war is "profitable" and most nations are run on a "for profit" principle.
To change that will take generations, political unity and evolution of the human mind.

At present we must work with what we have if we wish to finance our public services.....sometimes people just can't afford perfect principles.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:48 AM

"British companies have sold arms to Syria"

Now that statement is quite clear and definite David Carter(UK) - So please provide details of what British Companies have sold what arms to Syria.

Now this may, or may not, sound rather old fashioned to you, but if you cannot do that, then you have no right to broadcast something you know to be a lie, you have no right to deliberately misrepresent things.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:42 AM

"quite likely to have been used" does not mean WERE USED - the latter is YOUR completely unsubstantiated interpretation of what William Hague said.

Subsequent BIS investigation matched the quantities of "dual purpose" chemicals exported to Syria to the products produced by the declared "End User" Companies and found that the quantities sent corresponded to the volume of product produced. That being the case what was, what could have been, DIVERTED?

So Jom who was it that posted this:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

Someone else?

A mistake? Then where is your admission and your apology for posting such a lie? Or did you fall back on the "socialists" excuse - "It's always somebody else's fault?

The UK - "last year reckoned to be the second largest arms dealer in the world" - What comic did you get that out of Jom - another lie another gross misrepresentation. Here is the actual 2016 "League Table" when it comes to the Arms Trade by Nation according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute:

1 - United States - $47,169,000,000

2 - Russia - $33,186,000,000 [Note to Jom: NOT the UK]

3 - China - $9,132,000,000

4 - France - $8,564,000,000

5 - Germany - $7,946,000,000

6 - United Kingdom - $6,586,000,000

7 - Spain - $3,958,000,000

8 - Italy - $3,823,000,000

9 - Ukraine - $3,677,000,000

10 - Israel - $3,233,000,000

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:34 AM

Teribus, British companies have sold arms to Syria and, much more reprehensibly in my view, to Saudi Arabia. Now you seem to somehow absolve Britain of blame with your phrase "...Britain, as in the British Government..." Its not the British Government which is Britain in this context. This is the whole military-industrial complex. One branch does not act with the complicity of the other, particularly in the case of Saudi Arabia where government ministers and officials have been busy glad handing despots so that British companies can make arms sales. Just because the government doesn't make the weapons with its own bare hands, doesn't absolve it of responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:27 AM

I know nothing of the situation involving the "sniper rifles" Jim, I have never commented on it and I don't think it even pertains to this thread.

I wish you would stop digging up the subject whenever you get out of your depth.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:15 AM

By the way
"he British Government has sold neither weapons OR ammunition to Syria - FACT."
Britain sold the materials for Assad to create his aresnal of chemical weapons, which he used on his own people - FACT
William Hague, described once as "the best Prime Minister Britian never had" stated publicly that the chemicals sold to Syria were quite likely to have been used in the manufacture of Weapons - FACT
The Government implicated the British people in the gassing of the Syrian people FACT
No amount of manipulation and quibbling about small arms sales (which rate small next to the sale of chemicals, riot control equipment, armoured cars and tear gas that was also sold and used against the Syrian people) changes one iota of Britain's blood trade on arms - FACT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:03 AM

Enough here Teribus
Keith stated the confusion about whether the order was for whether the shipment was for rifles or ammunition - I orignally put up the information that Britain had shipped military equipment to Syria - you pair denied that fact like headless chickens
This is what I put up
Syria 2,676,460 30,000        1 Small arms ammunition
Which I linked to this
who do we sell to, how much is military and how much just 'controlled'?
My point was then and remains that Britain sold weapons and equipment to repressive states, including Syria
Now we have the full team mob-handed - including Ake, defending the fact that Britain sells arms to repressive states - not did - "DOES"
AND AGAIN
ONE MORE TIME
And more still
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/yemen-multibillion-dollar-arms-sales-by-usa-and-uk-reveal-shameful-contradiction-with-aid-efforts/
You can nit-pick over whether I got the details of a sale of sniper ammunition as long as you like - my point was and remains that our politicians have steeped the British people in the blood of poorer nations for the profit of the few and was last year reckoned to be the second largest arms dealer in the world
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-is-now-the-second-biggest-arms-dealer-in-the-world-a7225351.html
That is how much my arguments are "in the sixties and seventies"
If I needed any more confirmation - this full gathering of the extreme right wolf-pack is sufficient
That is the face of UK politics today - profiting from death of the poorest people on the planet
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:22 AM

Steve Shaw - 04 Sep 17 - 06:58 PM

"That's just very shallow and superficial. Gibberish, frankly."

Only thing wrong with that of course Shaw is that you cannot challenge or refute in detail anything I have stated. For confirmation of what I have said about you and your attitude to religion and the religious beliefs of others we could ask Joe Offer, mg, or peteofthesevenstars.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:07 AM

All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."

No Jom that is what you wrote to dredge up this subject on this thread, and what you wrote is a gross misrepresentation based on an assumption on your part that you have never been able to verify as being true. NO evidence has ever existed, or been presented by anyone that any actual sale, or delivery of ammunition has ever taken place. If it had THAT is what your newspaper article would have reported, NOT simply that an export licence had been issued.

This is YOUR claim as posted on the "Homs Horror" Thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

The above is a downright lie Here is another Jim Carroll lie:

"Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done"

I do not think that I have EVER defended anything of the sort - the above is typical Carroll "Made-Up-Shit" - as can be seen above the only comments I have made have been to challenge YOUR lies and misrepresentations - So I will say it again just to make it perfectly clear to YOU - No evidence exists that there was EVER any sale of ammunition from from the private individual who was granted an export licence to Syria, and secondly Britain, as in the British Government has sold neither weapons OR ammunition to Syria - FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:07 AM

All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."

No Jom that is what you wrote to dredge up this subject on this thread, and what you wrote is a gross misrepresentation based on an assumption on your part that you have never been able to verify as being true. NO evidence has ever existed, or been presented by anyone that any actual sale, or delivery of ammunition has ever taken place. If it had THAT is what your newspaper article would have reported, NOT simply that an export licence had been issued.

This is YOUR claim as posted on the "Homs Horror" Thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

The above is a downright lie Here is another Jim Carroll lie:

"Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done"

I do not think that I have EVER defended anything of the sort - the above is typical Carroll "Made-Up-Shit" - as can be seen above the only comments I have made have been to challenge YOUR lies and misrepresentations - So I will say it again just to make it perfectly clear to YOU - No evidence exists that there was EVER any sale of ammunition from from the private individual who was granted an export licence to Syria, and secondly Britain, as in the British Government has sold neither weapons OR ammunition to Syria - FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:58 PM

That's just very shallow and superficial. Gibberish, frankly.

As was your last post directed at me, Teribus. Take a deep breath and try again.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: bobad
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:11 PM

What are the root causes of Islamic terrorism? Is it misguided to focus exclusively on religion or politics? Is it wrong to describe the current conflict as a "clash of civilizations"?

The latter part of your question is yes. The truth is that it's not a clash of civilizations. It never was. [Samuel] Huntington's theory has been critiqued to death on that. Rather, what we're seeing is a clash between those who believe in democratic values, like human rights and secularism, and those who believe in totalitarianism. But of those who believe in totalitarianism and have dictatorships, some will use jihadist tactics to further their ends, and others will use other forms of undemocratic phenomena.

But essentially, it's a struggle between democrats and non-democrats, secularists and non-secularists. In those dividing lines there are Muslims and non-Muslims on both sides. For example, there are non-Muslim voices out there that excuse and obfuscate the phenomenon of jihadist terrorism, focusing primarily on the U.S. being the enemy while making every excuse under the sun for theocrats. Likewise there are Muslims on the other side who will struggle against theocracy — Islamist theocracy in particular — while defending democratic values.

So it's not really a struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims. That's a complete and total misdiagnosis of the problem. Assuming it's a struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims is as shallow and lacking in nuance as assuming that all Christians in the world subscribe to the same political beliefs. They simply don't. … Political beliefs, though associated to or perhaps influenced by one's religious beliefs, aren't in fact determined by one's religious beliefs, and this applies to Judaism, Christianity, Islam or any other religion in the world.

Former Islamist radical Maajid Nawaz: Salon

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:24 PM

Jim still inhabits the sixties and seventies when politics were more simple.
The working class were an organised political faction, the good guys wore bunnets and scarfs...the baddies ties and Trilbies.

The Tories were the enemy and striking was the MO......We would show the bastards how to shoot ourselves in the foot! Everybody Out!!

Jim is a hopeless ranter, to paraphrase a famous US commentator
"If Jim were prevented from ever again calling other Members dumb, he would be robbed of half his arguments. To be sure, he would still have "racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple him."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:30 PM

Jim if you want to state that terrorism is increasing in the world that is a statement that can be accepted, denied, or discussed.
To make the statement" we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms" is obviously a gross simplification, an exaggeration and simply not true. There are many 2nd and 3rd generation Moslems in the UK-when were they persecuted?
To state "those who went out to fight your friend Assad and came back radicalised" is a bit cart before the horse. It would be easier to accept they were radicalised and then went to Syria otherwise why travel? It is hardlt a tourist destination any more.
Don't know about Assad being a friend- the only time he came visiting I was out in the field so never met the guy.
You are just throwing out unsubstantiated facts to support a feeble argument.

You would be taken far more seriously if you used facts instead of bluster to support your stance on various subjects.

When it comes to insults do you regard yourself as the pot or kettle?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:03 PM

"The world according to Jimmy. Irrational, ludicrous and just plain wrong.2
you and your4 mates are totally incapable pf posting without hrling personal insults aren't you?   
It might worry me if it didn't come from a supporter of a mass murderer
Make a note to yourself - never try to talk down to people when you're standing in a hole
"Are you simply exaggerating or just spouting nonsense
Then how about substantiating it with a few facts
Terrorism is in the INCREASE throughout the world - I'n not interested in the few nutters at the top, they could be from any religion.
I'm talking about those who went out to fight your friend Assad and came back radicalised
I could have added the younger generation, no longer prepared the Paki-Bashing culture that their parents withstood with such stoicism
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 02:24 PM

"WE are up to our arses in fighting off terrorist attacks because we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms"

The world according to Jimmy. Irrational, ludicrous and just plain wrong.
Is that every Moslem between the ages of say 12 and 25 Jimmy. Are you simply exaggerating or just spouting nonsense as usual. In the western world the casualty rate from car wrecks is far higher than that from terrorism and their numbers are in thousands, not millions.

   Are not the vast majority of these terrorist organizations an artificial construct engendered by western political affiliations.
(All denied of course-but who equips, trains, and transports them?)

Perhaps you should have a pop at Toyota for providing all the machine gun mounted "technicals"

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:46 PM

"(don't really see the need for borders but that's another story"
I'll drink to that one too Peter
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: peteglasgow
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:33 PM

i don't see the need for any country to sell arms to another (don't really see the need for borders but that's another story) i don't see why countries are allowed to take arms abroad or why the americans (and others to a much lesser extent) are allowed to have military bases in dozens of countries around the world (and particularly russia) the anti-nuclear debate gets the occasional airing but the fact that we sell arms to any dodgy regime that wants them has never been seriously considered since robin cook died.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:13 PM

So Keith, you are saying that because newspapers are ignoring something it isn't an issue? Sorry, I am not going to let what I think is an issue and what I will be expressing opinions on be dictated by the sewer press. And parties are not split on it? I don't think thats true, I think that Labour are very much split on whether the UK should be involved in arms sales. Tories, probably only on the subsidiary issue of who those arms sales should be to. And who should rake in the profits.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:52 PM

Who says the question of arms sale is not a current issue
YEMEN
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:47 PM

"Until Jim dredged up the old dispute no-one thought of mentioning it."
Will you stop attemting to control what people discuss on this forum - you have no authority to do so, yet you do it persistently when it becomes embarrassing your particular brand of politics
All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."
Britain's involvement in the arms trade is extremely relevant to this discussion which you chose as "uk politics"
WE are up to our arses in fighting off terrorist attacks because we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms
Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done
It was you, not me, who extended this subject into a loing argument - I was quite happy to leave it with my original statement - we've covered this over and over again
Britain sells arms to repressive states - former business secretary admitted as much
"Vince Cable, the business secretary, has admitted as much. "We do trade with governments that are not democratic and have bad human rights records", he told a crossparty group of senior MPs. "We do business with repressive governments and there's no denying that"."
VINCE CABLE
The Arms trade is inghuman, immoral and it is part of the cause of the rise in terrorism
How dare you attempt to prevent people expressing an opinion
This has become a regular to the point of predictability part of the way you operate on this forum - if a subject slips out of your comfort zone - cry "thread drift"
If you wish to curtail argument - open a thread and stipulate that yours is the only opinion acceptable for discussion
Have you ever thought about setting up a dictatorship of your own?
It really is about time you pair cleaned up your act
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:24 PM

Those things most certainly are an issue.

The papers and news reports are full of political stories at the moment, but not those ones.
Until Jim dredged up the old dispute no-one thought of mentioning it.

Which party has recently issued a statement about it?
Is any party split over it?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:16 PM

Ah so in short Shaw you subscribe to 2: "If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country"

With you however it is not merely a case of you proclaiming your atheism is it? It is of you decrying, mocking and belittling the beliefs of others - Whaddya think, Shaw?

"You wouldn't for one second say that it would be fine to do that here" - Yet there are people in the UK who are pressing for Sharia Law to be recognised and practiced in the UK. My feelings on that are that our forefathers fought and campaigned for the legal system and rights we currently enjoy - they are not up for negotiation.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:09 PM

Those things most certainly are an issue. When did they cease, in your view, to be an issue? Unless you have evidence, not yet seen by the rest of us, that they have stopped doing those things.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:06 PM

Jim,
"This thread is about current UK politics."
You mean the British Government has stopped selling arms to despots and no longer allows the import of goods from firms employing slave labour?

Jim there is currently much turmoil in UK politics, but those things are not an issue at present.

Can we be allowed to discuss things that are?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:38 AM

"Jom. "
Whoops - missed another piece of insecurity
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:29 AM

Both Teribus and Nigel have demonstrated that they don't know the difference between laws and punishments. I don't agree that I shouldn't be able to declare my atheism anywhere on earth, but I wouldn't be stupid enough, believe it or not, to shout it from a Saudi rooftop. A further point there is that wild horses wouldn't get me to a rooftop or to anywhere else in that country. Yes if I knowingly break even a stupid law I can expect to be punished. When Isis beheaded its captives on camera we were all justifiably outraged and horrified. But Saudi Arabia does that in public around 300 times a year, not to speak of its public floggings, and you hardly hear a whisper raised against it. You wouldn't for one second say that it would be fine to do that here, but, instead of condemning the regime, you are putting the blame on the victims for the predicaments they find themselves in. Well I don't think you're blaming the right people. And I don't see what trade union activism has to do with it. That's just a small-minded, gratuitous insult, frankly, totally uncalled for.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:18 AM

"but for murder would be both a punishment and a deterrent"

It's not a deterrent though, is it? Also, in the case of the death penalty it's the innocents who really suffer. Better to keep the buggers alive and let them stew over their mistakes for the rest of their days.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:06 AM

"I am in error here but wasn't he the first person to sign the book of condolence at the Nazi Embassy in Dublin?"
Is anybody defending Dev or his politics here?
Missed that one!
It seems if political leaders do things it is the people who are responsible for it
Paerhaps the anarchists are right - we don't need them
If we trade with people who behave like Assad and the Saudis - particularly if we prop up their regimes with weapons, we are no better than they are
Blair was accused of war criminality for his behaviour over WMD - perhaps he should have been offered a knighthood - after all, it was all for the sake of keeping our cars on the road.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:49 AM

I think that it is the responsibility of British politicians, particularly those in government of looking to the national interest of the country and its citizens. Concerns relating to employment and foreign trade and earnings take precedence over futile and empty gestures. On the subject oof funerals Jom. Tell us all again how good ol' Dev addressed Hitler's death in 1945, tell us all how he registered his objections to the dictator and despot who had been the root cause of roughly 72 million deaths - Correct me if I am in error here but wasn't he the first person to sign the book of condolence at the Nazi Embassy in Dublin?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:42 AM

What do I think?
It would depend on the circumstances.
Beheading for theft would not seem a suitable response, but for murder would be both a punishment and a deterrent.

But their social mores and religious background are different from ours. I would not wish to see Sharia Law imposed in the UK, what right have I to insist that they follow our ways?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:38 AM

"Oil will get you anywhere, it seems"
Finally comprehension dawns.
Welcome to the real world

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:38 AM

Better still Shaw why don't you go to Saudi Arabia and tell them all in your "Union Activist - Whaddya think" manner in Mecca exactly what you thing of religion and belief in religion. Then we can all sit back and watch from the comfort of our armchairs your subsequent trial and punishment. It will no doubt commence with the instruction "Wheel the guilty bastard in" (In Arabic of course) as with your views on religion there will be absolutely no question of your "Innocence". Penalty for "Blasphemy" uttered by an infidel under various Sharia Codes of Law is Death, which you may dodge Shaw by adopting the Muslim faith and becoming a devout follower of the religion - A win-win situation for all interested spectators I'd say.

As Nigel Parsons has clearly stated:

1: "The journalist (as with any traveller) should be aware of the laws & restrictions in any country they visit. If they are not prepared to live within those laws (no matter how harsh)then they can choose not to visit.
We expect visitors to our country to abide by our laws, can we do less when we are the visitors?

2: "If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country, or abide by their laws if I travel."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:32 AM

"But it is not my place to try to impose "Western" Laws and values on other states."
Nor is it the place of out politicians to support such behavior, particularly when it comes to selling arms to them
It seems to me that the refusal to attend a funeral at a time when a regime was showing itss savegry would have been an ideal gesture for a responsible head of state to make
Since the funeral, Saudi Arabia has sentenced a man to 10 years in prison and 2,000 lashes for expressing his atheism on Twitter - Saudi is still one of our main customers for weapons
A great deal of posturing was done by Trump in castigating Muslim Countries with supposed links to terrorism _ Saudi Arabia was not one of them
Oil will get you anywhere, it seems

"as Keith A said to the fuckwit:"
"Very surprised to see the "fuckwit" come out with this:"
Will continue to put these up until you stop or are stopped - it's as permanent as it ever was
You can never find a moderator when you need one - what happened to the condition of membership that said we need to show respect for other members
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:12 AM

So you think it would be OK, for example, for Saudi Arabia to behead a UK citizen in a public square, then, Nigel? Just shrug and say, well, he shouldn't have been such a naughty boy then? This is not a question of imposing western laws on anybody. It's a question of opposing barbaric and brutal punishments that go way beyond fitting the crime. Whaddya think, Nigel?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: MikeL2
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:05 AM

Hi B W M

I wonder why you don't all meet up in a quiet pub car park somewhere and slug it out. "

I agree to this give us a rest for ***** sake. Some people need to grow up.

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:01 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:49 AM

Are you justifying the use of the lash?

No.
But it is not my place to try to impose "Western" Laws and values on other states. If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country, or abide by their laws if I travel.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:56 AM

Backwoodsman as Keith A said to the fuckwit:

"Please stop dredging up these old disputes when they have no relevance to the subject under discussion."

If that request was observed then these "trialogues" on off topic subjects would not occur

Very surprised to see the "fuckwit" come out with this:

"Everything here has been dealt with dozens of times - the persistent demands that we cover old ground over and over again is a sure sign of dementia, I've been told"

When it is he himself who is most guilty of doing precisely what he is complaining of.

Read Jim Carroll - 01 Sep 17 - 09:05 AM - this was the "fuckwit's" 12th or 13th post to the thread, at this stage I had posted 2 times, Keith A 5 times, Iains 6 times, just go back through his posts to discover the number of people he has had a pop at. When it comes to throwing out baseless accusations and allegation the "fuckwit" is a high-level "ranter" par excellence.

The threads that are normally dug up are ones that the "usual suspects" got absolutely slaughtered on prior to them driving those threads to closure and in some cases total deletion.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:51 AM

"Why Wait?" Because the world has gone barking mad!

Simple example The Sure Start center in Oxfordshire insists the nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black sheep is sung Baa Baa Rainbow sheep.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/499/Political-correctness-gone-mad

http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/10/political-correctness-islam-made-britain-vulnerable-chemical-terrorism/

http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11391314/Rotherham-child-sex-abuse-scandal-council-not-fit-for-purpose.html

This thesis could be developed ad nauseum, but I am sure most will get the point, although I can predict those that will make it an issue not to!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:49 AM

Are you justifying the use of the lash?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:25 AM

Jim:
Our last Prime Minister paid respects his to the head of the Saudi Dynasty while his family's regime was administering 10000 lashes to a journalist who had spoken out-of-turn
What should he have done? Refused to deal with Saudi Arabia, possibly refused to deal with any of the Oil states, after all, who needs oil?
The journalist (as with any traveller) should be aware of the laws & restrictions in any country they visit. If they are not prepared to live within those laws (no matter how harsh)then they can choose not to visit.
We expect visitors to our country to abide by our laws, can we do less when we are the visitors?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:41 AM

No, not you specifically Jim, just counting down to the point at which the usual fuckwit suspects get yet another thread closed.

I wonder why you don't all meet up in a quiet pub car park somewhere and slug it out.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:33 AM

Five-Four-Three...
Don't know if you are referring to me Baccy
I have no intention of turning this into a triolgue with this pair
Everything here has been dealt with dozens of times - the persistent demands that we cover old ground over and over again is a sure sign of dementia, I've been told
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:19 AM

Five
Four
Three...

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:18 AM

Don't know what happened to my earlier post - it seems to have been truncated:

"arms sales to a mass murderer"

What arms sale to which mass murderer?

"the pair who defended this sale"

What sale? I believe that "the pair" you are referring to have "defended" NOTHING, they have (Shock and utmost horror) merely had the temerity to tell you that you have provided no proof at all that any sale ever occurred in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:16 AM

"Nothing has changed in right wing politics - we still support despots"

Are they the same despots that Labour supported Jom?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:14 AM

Proof that a single penny has been "bunged" to anyone please Jom.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 07:51 AM

Before one of you clowns decides a typo is a convenient way out of a hole - that should read 1,000 lashes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 07:48 AM

"This thread is about current UK politics."
You mean the British Government has stopped selling arms to despots and no longer allows the import of goods from firms employing slave labour?
Damn missed that particular U-turn in British policy
"unfortunately he will not take the least notice."
Do I detect desperation creeping in to all this?
Britain not only sells arms and the wherewithal to manufacture them (such as chemical weapons) to mass murderers and torturers, but one of our Prime Ministers personally befriended one and was part of his never being brought to trail, but she describes as attempts to bring him to justice as "running a police state" and described his mass murder as "democracy"
Our last Prime Minister paid respects his to the head of the Saudi Dynasty while his family's regime was administering 10000 lashes to a journalist who had spoken out-of-turn
Our current Prime Minister has just bunged £billion of taxpayers money to a Party with terrorist connections
Nothing has changed in right wing politics - we still support despots, we involve ourselves in wars of self interest and we kiss the arses of warmongerers like Trump
Nothing has changed - if anything, things are getting worse
Will you pair of bullies and manipulators please lay off
What with blustering, cowardly arrogance and attempts to manipulate discussions to deal only with what you both wish to be discussed, this forum is beginning to feel like part of the Murdoch Empire   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:52 AM

"arms sales to a mass murderer"

What arms sale to which mass murderer?

"the pair who defended this sale"

What sale? I believe that "the pair" you are referring to have "defended" NOTHING, they have (Shock and utmost horror

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:40 AM

Keith A of Hertford - 04 Sep 17 - 04:46 AM

"Jim, what have you gained by resurrecting a thread from five years ago?
Nothing except to be ridiculed, yet you keep doing it.

This thread is about current UK politics.
Please stop dredging up these old disputes when they have no relevance to the subject under discussion."

HEAR, HEAR, Keith A very well said - unfortunately he will not take the least notice.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:22 AM

"I'll keep taking the red pills, you continue with the blue!"
Do that - perhaps you need to up your dose!
My pills are white, by the way - for high blood pressure
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:12 AM

I'll keep taking the red pills, you continue with the blue!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:58 AM

"Now what was that about the Rooney clan of travellers and slaves in Lincolnshire recently?"
Now there's a good point for examining the state of Britain's politics today
Around a month ago the police made a massive sweep on suspected 'slavers' and found a huge network of gangs and individuals involved in sex trafficking, domestic servant slavery, pimping and prostitution.......
What did the press focus on - the criminal behaviour of eight individuals who happened to be Travellers
Nothing was taken up about the hundreds of other non- Travellers who were uncovered in these raids.
Who does our right winger here hone in on, totally ignoring the fact that our economy is becoming reliant on goods produced under slave conditions, the pimps and traffickers, the domestic slave holders.....?
Eight individuals who were Travellers.
A survey a few years ago indicated that around a quarter of Britain's population held and have expressed racist views.
This little sect of Mudcat members appear to be a microcosm of what his happening in Britain today
What's's your point Iains - that only Travellers are involved in modern slavery?
If not - that is what your question indicates
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:21 AM

I'll try again.

"Surely the backyard should be cleaned up first or is PC the dominant factor?"

Why wait?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:04 AM

Surely the backyard should be cleaned up first or is PC the dominant factor?"

Why wait?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:55 AM

"Jim, what have you gained by resurrecting a thread from five years ago?"
Because nothing has changed Keith - if anything, things have got worse
I suggest that any ridicule is deserved by the suggestion that arms sales to a mass murderer who, it has been announced, will not be brought to book for his crimes, is "out of date"
Perhaps you can point me to any "ridicule" expressed by anybody other than the pair who defended this sale for my bringing this up - no? Thought not!
The subjed-ct you started is UK politics - UK politics today involves selling arms to dictators and buying goods produced under slave conditions
Are you really going to play your "thread drift" card so early in the game?
Desperate measure for a desperate situation, I suppose
Please stop attempting to censor a discussion because it has slipped from your grasp
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:55 AM

" but you do nothing about "goods that are produced in virtual slave conditions" elsewhere."
Now what was that about the Rooney clan of travellers and slaves in Lincolnshire recently?
Surely the backyard should be cleaned up first or is PC the dominant factor?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:46 AM

Jim, what have you gained by resurrecting a thread from five years ago?
Nothing except to be ridiculed, yet you keep doing it.

This thread is about current UK politics.
Please stop dredging up these old disputes when they have no relevance to the subject under discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:28 AM

While we're at it, I think it's about time you got a grip on your behaviour on this forum
Your arrogant talking down to people is now back in full flow – "spittle-flecked ranting" as I seem to remember your having accused others of producing
This is supposed to be a debating forum in which we express views without being bullied and spoken down to by the likes of people like you
About time you got a grip, doncha think
I suggest that, if you are incapable of controlling your own behaviour towards other people, the adjudicators who are quick enough to close threads when they get out of hand (often quite justifiably) nip the ongoing contempt you appear to have for others in the bud and request you to desist
If you continue to behave in the manner which yo permanently do, I really think there is no place for you on a serious debating forum
These are examples of how you permanently talk down to and insult people who have the temerity to disagree with you – from a thread that was opened four days ago
Jim Carroll

Any reason they should "TIE UP" Jom?
All pretty academic anyway Jom
simply put Jom
Really Jom?? What "evidence" has emerged?
So tell us Jom
vast majority of people in Syria Jom
complete and utter "Bollocks":
Really Jom?
So tell us Jom what is this new evidence - absolutely dying to hear a verifiable version of it.
Jom
Ah Jom. So no new "evidence" has "emerged" - simply your own wild imaginings.
Unfortunately Nigel, Jom very rarely reads the links he posts,
Love Mr. Red's take on the EU - to him it would appear to be idyllic –
You keep dragging this crap up and I will continue to knock it flat - takes absolutely no effort on my part.
Simply because Jom
Your problem Jom would appear to be that you lack knowledge, you are blinded by your own views, you have no idea whatsoever of perspective, logic or reasoning. YOUR view is the ONLY view - well Jom, thankfully IT AIN'T - not by a long shot.

Might as well add you most recent offerings
The only thing wrong with your argument Jom
Simple solution to that one Jom
One thing I do love about your rants Jom
Strange that you can witter on
Well actually Jom
Not bad for one posting, doncha think?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:20 AM

The only thing wrong with your argument Jom is that I can back up and substantiate everything I have "claimed" - YOU on the other hand CANNOT.

You opened this with your false and ridiculous claim that British weapons were being used to kill civilians in Homs in the Spring of 2012.

Tell us all in what way is Britain (World's fifth or sixth largest exporter of arms) poncing off the poorest people in the world while those nations in First, Second, Third, Fourth and possibly Fifth place ARE NOT.

"British shops are full of goods that are produced in virtual slave conditions making modern Britain part of the modern slave economy"

Simple solution to that one Jom - STOP PURCHASING THEM. The countries that produce those goods are all now independent, probably inspired and prompted by the heroic men of the gun in 1916 like you claimed. Independent means that those people are now governed by politicians they elected and that Britain does not have any influence over them any more, neither do the companies that place the orders. They can insist all they want with regard to wages, conditions, etc, but they can enforce NOTHING - only the consumer can do that.

One thing I do love about your rants Jom - It is always somebody else's fault

Strange that you can witter on at enormous length about the BDS campaign but you do nothing about "goods that are produced in virtual slave conditions" elsewhere.

"THERE IS NO EARTHY REASON WHY IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SENT" - Well actually Jom, both pdq and myself gave you an excellent EARTHLY reason why that ammunition WOULD not have been sent. An excellent EARTHLY reason as to why the deal DID NOT GO THROUGH - the bullets could not have been fired from the rifles used by the Syrian Army - Or ONCE AGAIN have you missed that rather vital point?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:13 AM

It isn't hard to see how a disaffected Labour voter .............

What was that quote about never underestimating the taste of the public ?

Fakebook is the digital equivalent of the pub, without the alcohol. Or maybe with.

I was re-watching the BBC programme on The Brain. It re-iterates the well understood (scientifically) concept that we don't decide rationally. We (not me of course, not sure about you!) decide with a measure of emotion, then rationalise in retrospect.

Decision making has to have a measure of emotion, we can't function without it. And the kind of religion we call politics is a belief system. Ya can't take the emotion out of that! See any Mudcat thread for proof.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:47 AM

You really don't get this, do you?
Personally, I don't give a toss whether this ammo was delivered or used - it's not the point and it wasn't why I put it up in the first place.
The point of all this is that Britain sells arms to some of the most vicious regimes in the world - not because it necessarily because it supports them but for profit.
Under consecutive Governments, Britain has reverted back to the old Empire days of poncing off the poorest people in the world to the extent of providing equipment to the regimes that persecute them and keep them poor.
British shops are full of goods that are produced in virtual slave conditions making modern Britain part of the modern slave economy
Whether this order was sent or not is totally immaterial - what is important is THAT THERE IS NO EARTHY REASON WHY IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SENT - THAT IS THE TYPE OF BUSINESS OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES ARE INVOLVED IN IN OUR NAME AND THAT IS THE TYPE OF POLITICS YOU AND YOUR LIKE ARE HAPPY TO BREAK YOUR NECK TO SUPPORT
You have lied, distorted and contradicted yourself on this single issue - it wasn't sent, it was licenced or not licenced, the licence was withdrawn, the goods were sent but they were for freedom fighters, not for Assad, they were the wrong size, they went too early to be used - every feeble little excuse to defend one order.......
Utterly pathetic
You refuse to comment on the fact that a leading politician has admitted publicly that chemicals sent to Assad were probably used to a help create a stockpile chemical weapons for a regime that has used them on its own people - a point to be avoided, as far as you are concerned.
The relevance of all this to this thread that our politicians have implicated the British people in state terrorism and mass murder - that us UK politics today.
I don't give a shit who else deals in these predatory trades - especially as Russia is now one of the 'good guys' - part of the capitalist bloc - these trades are the domain of the wealthy who sell weapons and buy slave-produce goods to increae their wealth and to stay powerful, and their behaviour sucks the life out of the poor, and in doing so, destabilizes the world, making the dangerous place it has become.
The only value that you and Keith and Ake and the tiny handful of extreme extremists who share your sick views bring to this thread is as examples of the mindset that is not so gradually destroying this planet
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:43 AM

Meanwhile, back at the ranch Labour are practising their backflips, somersaults and usual contortions, Reported courtesy of that discriminating pundit Guido:
"Sir Keir Starmer amusingly told Marr "what's really important this summer is that Labour has got to a united and a clear position". Here are those three "united and clear" Labour positions in full:

    Keir Starmer: Stay in single market and "a" customs union during transition period, then leave single market. Transition has to be as short as possible, "could" last just two years. Or it "could" go beyond 2022 election.

    Tom Watson: Could stay in single market and customs union permanently after the transition period is over.

    Caroline Flint: "Totally disagree" with Watson, cannot stay in single market and customs union permanently.

Note that Starmer didn't rule out the transition period lasting beyond the 2022 election. This is Labour Remainers' plan for a permanent transition…

UNITES AND CLEAR................................?????????????

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:13 AM

Any reason they should "TIE UP" Jom?

They cover two completely different aspects of your idiotic and false claim that British weapons were being used to kill civilians in Homs.

The first statement:
IF the ammunition was delivered in 2009, or before all export licences were revoked in 2010, then YOU have no idea whether or not those who would have been trained using that ammunition would be fighting on the side of the regime, or on the side of the rebels. One thing we do know for certain is that those conscripted to serve in the Syrian Army in 2009/2010 - would no longer be serving in 2012.

The second statement:
The newspaper articles that you latched onto to falsely claim that Britain sold weapons to Assad states ONLY that an export licence was issued - NOTHING ELSE. Had ammunition actually been sent I am totally convinced that the newspapers involved would have reported that - can you furnish any reasonably sane explanation as to why they would not do that?

All pretty academic anyway Jom - Standard NATO 7.62x51mm rounds would be of no use to the Syrian Army armed, as they were at that time, with Russian weapons that fire 7.62x39mm ammunition. Probably the most likely reason that no sale took place. I can see that, pdq certainly saw that, and I suppose it registered with any other sentient human being who bothered reading the thread - somehow it hasn't registered with YOU - simply put Jom you cannot fire a cartridge that measures 51mm from a gun that was built and designed to fire a cartridge that measures 39mm - WHY?? Because the former will not fit it is 12 mm too long.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 06:03 PM

The largest supplier/only supplier (?) of weapons to the Assad regime is Russia (Two freighter loads every month). The AI weapon is described as being an "Arctic" Version of the rifle. These were not supplied to Assad by Accuracy International, a Portsmouth based UK Company, these weapons, or more correctly the particular weapon shown is most probably one of a consignment of these rifles that were sold to Russia:

"British-made Accuracy International Arctic Warfare Magnum (AWM) sniper rifles with elements of Syria's secretive special forces in Harasta, Damascus, new information indicates these British sniper rifles were most likely delivered to Syria from Russia.

While acquiring several AWM sniper rifles, albeit via the black market, would already prove a challenge for the Syrian military, acquiring these with the rare and very new pistol-grip skin would undoubtedly be beyond the capacities of the Army Supply Bureau of the High Command of the Syrian Arab Republic, which has so far limited its orders to Russian and Iranian sniper and anti-materiel rifles."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 04:31 PM

You can all relax. I have found a british sniper rifle allegedly in Syria.
One rifle could have been liberated in any number of possible scenarios
(captured?)
N.B. as the old saying goes;"One swallow does not a summer make.


http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=4055

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 04:26 PM

At the time Hague and Cameron were desperate for an excuse to attack and overthrow the Syrian government.
If they had been successful Syrian would now be another failed state like Libya........you people are a real danger, the "FSA" was simply a grouping of religious Jihadists who wanted the secular government of Assad removed.....something similar to the brave freedom fighters of Libya who have reduced a reasonably successful country to a wasteland.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 03:01 PM

"COULD HAVE BEEN does not mean WERE USED"
"William Hague, confirmed to parliament that the UK had exported chemicals that 'WERE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN DIVERTED FOR USE IN THE SYRIAN PROGRAMME"
Dyslexia still rules OK.
Any word how "these "sniper" bullets are now being used by the brave fighters of the free Syrian army in their tireless efforts to defend those Syrian civilians" ties up with No proof that the ammunition was actually delivered and the permission to sell was revoked in a reasonable time.?
REPRESSIVE REGIMES
Just curious!!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 02:30 PM

Been over this one as well Jom:

"The UK supplied potentially deadly chemicals THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED [note: COULD HAVE BEEN does not mean WERE USED] in the chemical attack that killed more than 80 people, human rights groups have claimed.

In the 1980s the UK exported chemicals necessary to make sarin to the Syrian regime, reports The Guardian."

1980s Jom!!! When was this chemical attack Jom? 2012 wasn't it? I take it that you do know biological and chemical agents do have a "shelf life" - Don't quite think it extends to 32 years.

The chemicals sold to Syria between 2004 and 2009 were investigated by the BIS and all were accounted for. The amount supplied matched the items produced by the companies supplied - so none of it was diverted to make sarin used in any attack.

The Russians were supposed to have overseen the collection of chemical and biological weapons in Syria weren't they Jom? How did that pan out?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 02:30 PM

we probably sold them instant coffee that they drunk before going out killing each other.
at some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 01:30 PM

Ten
Nine
Eight
Seven
Six......

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 01:26 PM

" it is really a stretch to blame the Brits for the atrocities committed by Assad."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415081/Britain-sent-poison-chemicals-Assad-Proof-UK-delivered-Sarin-agent-Syrian-regime.html


The UK supplied potentially deadly chemicals that could have been used in the chemical attack that killed more than 80 people, human rights groups have claimed.
In the 1980s the UK exported chemicals necessary to make sarin to the Syrian regime, reports The Guardian.
Sarin is an odorless liquid that is developed into a nerve gas that can cause excruciating pain to its victims.
In 2004, the then foreign secretary, William Hague, confirmed to parliament that the UK had exported chemicals that 'were likely to have been diverted for use in the Syrian programme'.
From 1983 to 1986 chemicals like dimethyl phosphite, trimethyl phosphite and hydrogen fluoride were supplied to Syria.
Did the UK sell sarin chemicals to Assad's regime?
William Hague found that certain chemicals used to make sarin were exported from the UK
The chemicals are ordinarily used to manufacture plastic and pharmaceuticals, but they can also be used to produce sarin.
Hague told parliament: 'From the information we hold, we judge it likely that these chemical exports by UK companies were subsequently used by Syria in their programmes to produce nerve agents, including sarin.'

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 11:47 AM

Thanks for the laugh Al!   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 10:11 AM

The name's Jim Carroll Teribus
You want to carry on a discussion, use it
Otherwise go stuff yourself
I'm not in the habit of handling mindless adolescents
There is no longer a place for prattish behaviour like yours on this forum - it gets too many threads closed
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 09:53 AM

On that Homs Thread Carroll that was your trouble -

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: GUEST,Teribus - PM
Date: 20 Feb 12 - 11:26 AM

"You have objected when it is pointed out that some of the sniper bullets now cutting down civilian men women and children on the streets of Homs (or went into the training of the snipers) came from Britain." – (Jim Carroll)

"There is not one shred of evidence to back up that contention of yours "Christmas" - still sticking to that "small arms arms" thing I see.

To pursue this fable of yours, into a thread about what is going on in Homs, Syria you have introduced by way of diversion and deflection - Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Bahrain - Where are you headed next Jim-Lad?? It won't matter because one thing is certain - Britain sold no weapons to Syria.

Your usual spittle-flecked rants get so incoherent that you completely lose track of what the discussion is about. If you wish me to - just to demonstrate that it was not solely myself who found your posts complete and utter nonsense - I can easily dig up what pdq commented on your posts, or what about GUEST 999 and others on that Homs Terror Thread?

Example

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: pdq - PM
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 03:31 PM

The Russian 7.62 round is older in design that the 7.62 NATO that a private arms seller in England was authorized to sell to Syria.

No proof that the ammunition was actually delivered and the permission to sell was revoked in a reasonable time.

Since the rifles used in Syria are Russian design and use ammunition that is not compatible with the 7.62 NATO rounds authorized, it is really a stretch to blame the Brits for the atrocities committed by Assad.

Loads more Carroll.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 09:45 AM

"The BBC film showed warehouses full of shells sold by Britain."
Libya - not Syria - read the note
"Britain has sold NO WEAPONS to Assad."
Water cannon, armoured trucks and tear gas supplied by Britain were used by Assad to disperse rioters
You may try semantics to show they were not weapons - feel free

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 08:01 AM

In haste.

A Pollwatch report said that around one in 15 Labour voters may have switched to UKIP in 2015. That's what I mean when I say that left and right aren't exactly poles apart in some respects. It isn't hard to see how a disaffected Labour voter, having been lambasted with fake information that foreigners are swamping the country, etc., would switch to UKIP. I didn't mean that genuine left-wing principles are close to the right, no matter how some people like to paint them that way. It seemed that UKIP gained a lot more from the Tories, in fact.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 07:36 AM

Pssst Jom - these are all yours:

1: Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 11 Feb 12 - 05:43 AM
"The BBC film showed warehouses full of shells sold by Britain."

Only trouble is there is no record of any such sale ever taking place, and I doubt very much if the BBC film you referred to had anything whatsoever to do with Syria, or about people getting killed in Homs.

2: Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 12 Feb 12 - 02:49 PM

The fact that Britain should sell ANY WEAPONS whatever to Gadaffi and Assad is a crime against humanity

Britain has sold NO WEAPONS to Assad.

3: Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

Still say that you never claimed that Britain had sold weapons to Assad Jom? The above clearly shows that you did.

By the way, McCluskey as the leader of a Trades Union is looking after the interests of his members.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 06:41 AM

"As usual Jim you post absolute rubbish."
I assume you mean "posts" - "posr" is absolute rubbish.
Wouldn't bother to mention it, but typos appear to be important to you.
The sniper bullets for the "free Syrian Army" was posted by Teribus, hence the incverted commas.
I suggest if you think THAT was absolute rubbish, you direct your comments to him
Another rough night on the sauce? - I suggest a strong coffee and maybe an Underberg might do the trick!!
Doesn't make a hap'orth of difference to the fact that Assad is still a murderous twat
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 06:17 AM

you guys are never any nicer to each other.

i just wondered - are labouring under the impression that at some point Nigel Farage and Jeremy Corbyn will step up, present you all with medals, 'Thankyou for being extremely nasty on my behalf!'

A special one for Ake from Trump - 'The Irrational Medal of Honour'.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Mr Red
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 06:16 AM

Like two prongs at the top of a tight horseshoe. nice metaphor.

but for a better overall picture I was shown at college that a two dimensional graph was instructive.

left and right on the horizontal and tough upwards, tender downwards.

Not so easy then to see leftists crossing the tough bridge to the right (& vice versa), but maybe they can see each other over the horizon from the elevated position. If not actually shake hands.

from the Chinese insult (& I don't remember angering the Gods personally) - we live in interesting times and historical norms don't apply.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 04:07 AM

"these "sniper" bullets are now being used by the brave fighters of the free Syrian army in their tireless efforts to defend those Syrian civilians"
These are the same fanatics trying to impose Sharia lwa on swathes of what was a secular country.In fact, of the approximately 23 million citizens in Syria, around eight million are minorities such as Christians, Druze, Alawites and Kurds, who are represented solely by the government. At least a third of the Syrian people support President Assad by default. Many others support him by virtue of alliances with his support base.
As usual Jim you posr absolute rubbish.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 03:34 AM

Bullshit Teribus
Your half-dozen contradictory arguments have remained exactly as they were - a load of desperately made up crap to excuse a licence that should never have been issued in the first place - you carefully shuffle around the chemicals that were sold
It has been a wonderful opportunity to put up your blue-arsed-fly excuses for this sale - I'd totally forgotten the one that they'd been sent but they were for someone else - classic   
"these "sniper" bullets are now being used by the brave fighters of the free Syrian army in their tireless efforts to defend those Syrian civilians"
You are a bumbling clown, your friend is litle more than your straight-man - you make a wonderful team
Have you ever thought of putting together a sketch like THIS ?
Would push up your entertainment value no end
Finished here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 03:26 AM

Jim,
Keith one the one who claimed "sniper rifles"

In error, which I acknowledged but you refuse to accept.
There were no sniper rifles.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 03:22 AM

"The far right and far left are, in many ways, "
I really am not sure of any of this
Corbyn is faced with rebuilding the Labour Party after the New Labour fiasco, he has to seek allies and his supporters are largely made up of enthusiastic amateurs and the far right (most of whom were Brexiteers), still look on Parliament as a meal-ticket
Who is he going to turn to for support?
The old mob broke the ties with the Trades Unions, who were the founders of The Labour Party and who remain its natural ally.
It seems to me that there is a great degree of maneuvering going on here.
I'm a little out of touch over what's happening in Britain - ifs McCluskey really of 'the far right'?
He supported 'The People's Assembly', his stance on 'free movement' appears to be that anybody working in Britain should be paid the negotiated minimum wage and not be allowed to undermine negotiated rates.
His criticism of immigration appears to be that it has been allowed to be used to drive down wage levels, not that it should be stopped or reduced - seems fair enough to me.
Historically employers have used immigrants to undercut rates of pay, why should that be allowed to happen here?
As I say, I'm out of touch - would appreciate being filled in.
As far as Corbyn is concerned, I'll support him until he ceases to live up to my expectations
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Sep 17 - 03:06 AM

So you admit that no "evidence has emerged" - Nothing has emerged.

"How the **** do you know that the order had not been dispatched
Stop making things up"

Simply because Jom if the ammunition HAD BEEN SENT then that is what your sole source of information on this - a newspaper article - WOULD HAVE STATED. It didn't it only stated that in 2009 an export licence had been issued. I have also given you very valid reasons why the sale would not have gone through. Issued to the Syrian Army those Standard NATO 7.62x51mm rounds would have killed NOBODY as they would not have been able to load them into their weapons.

By the way Jom, can you tell us all who formed the bulk of what became known as the Free Syrian Army? IIRC it comprised of former Syrian Army conscripts and deserters from the Syrian Army - Or do you have better information? The shootings in Homs occurred in 2012, the period of conscripted service in Syria is I believe 18 months to two years. So if you had been a conscript in the Syrian Army in 2009 when YOU claim these bullets were delivered then by 2012 you will have:

1: Completed your military service and would not be shooting any in Homs

2: Completed your military service and may now have joined the rebel Free Syrian Army and as such would not be shooting civilians in Homs

3: Been trained and during that training you and your 219,999 colleagues would have fired those bullets down a firing range during weapons training long before March 2012.

Your problem Jom would appear to be that you lack knowledge, you are blinded by your own views, you have no idea whatsoever of perspective, logic or reasoning. YOUR view is the ONLY view - well Jom, thankfully IT AIN'T - not by a long shot.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 09:12 PM

Dunno, David. The far right and far left are, in many ways, not that far apart. Like two prongs at the top of a tight horseshoe. It's a little gap that real lefties can't cross, but it's one that xenophobes such as Farage find it easy to exploit. Gotta get to bed. Have you seen the time??

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 02:21 PM

Yes Keith, and the xenophobe Corbyn is trying to please has a name, and its name is Len McCluskey. How that man can present himself as a figure of the left I have no idea, he is a creature of the far right, with more in common with Farage than Labour. Ian Allinson was the left wing candidate for the leadership of Unite.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 01:52 PM

By the way
The only reference I ever made to selling sniper rifles was
"The UK was still selling arms to Libya just four months before Colonel Gaddafi turned them on his own people, with government ministers approving a deal for sniper rifles, bullets and tear gas."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 01:31 PM

"Perfectly true"
There is no record whatever of this order being withdrawn
The order was dated 2009, a year before licences were revoked
How the **** do you know that the order had not been dispatched
Stop making things up
The human rights record of the Syrian military long before this order was licenced - no self respecting government should sell military equipment to such a regime
You denied any order had been sent - you still deny any ammunition was sent yet you accept that some was in one of your many excuses
"Not at all Jim - these "sniper" bullets are now being used by the brave fighters of the free Syrian army in their tireless efforts to defend those Syrian civilians currently being shot by the Alawite bastards loyal to that murderous, Hezbollah sheltering, cretin Assad. As to them being shot randomly, I would venture to guess there is nothing random about being shot by a sniper - quite a deliberate process I would fancy.
Your arguments were a shamble then and they remain a shambles
Keith one the one who claimed "sniper rifles"
You have clearly been searching vigorously, but all you have come up with is some sniper rifles.
You had no idea owhat had been ordered - the report never specified, yet you went to great lengths to tell us that what had been ordered could not be used by the Syrian army
Your defence of the licensing of this disgusting sale was, as I said, a contradictory, made up shambles from start to finish
Now - unless you can start using my chosen name (unlike you, I choose not to hide behind a pseudonym,but then again, I don't make permanently insulting posts that I wouldn't dare to make to their faces from the safety of distance and anonymity - I would consider that cyber-stalking) - I think we're finished here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 12:28 PM

1:"I invented the order"

Never said - YOU on the other hand DID claim that Britain, as in The British Government, had exported weapons to Syria, and that those weapons were being used to kill people in Homs in 2012 - All of that was a lie invented by YOU, corrected by me and others.

2: "the order was never licenced"

Never said - It stated clearly in the newspaper article that in 2009 an export licence was granted to a registered arms dealer. The British Government per se sold nothing.

3: "It was licenced then the licence was withdrawn"

Perfectly true - The licence we are referring to was issued in 2009 - In 2010 ALL export licences concerning goods for export to Syria were revoked - Simple matter of record - look it up.

4: "It was too early for the ammunition to be used in Homs"

The amount of ammunition that could be purchased for £30,000 would amount to roughly 110,000 rounds. The Army and Police Force of Syria numbers over 300,000 men. IF, and it is a big IF, any ammunition had been delivered in 2009 and there are NO RECORDS to verify that it ever was despatched, by 2012 chances are that it would have already been used long before anyone was shot in Homs.

Jom, if you have other substantive evidence that proves otherwise then please post it - over the last five years you have had ample opportunity to do so and so far you have come up with absolutely nothing.

5: "It was a private order for sporting equipment"

110,000 rounds is a minute order for an Army the size of Syria's. Ammunition manufactured in the UK would be for weapons used by NATO. Such ammunition is of no use in Soviet/Russian made weapons.

6: "The ammunition ordered was the wrong size to be used by Syrian snipers"

True - The Standard NATO 7.62x51mm round is 12mm too long to fit into the chamber of Russian weapons used by the Syrian Army which uses 7.62x39mm rounds. I know that this means nothing to Jom who would never let fact or truth get in the way of a good rant.

You keep dragging this crap up and I will continue to knock it flat - takes absolutely no effort on my part.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 11:23 AM

"Sarah Champion "
Comment on Sara Champion's statement from an Asian
"This language has parallels with the terminology the Nazis used to discuss "the Jewish question" and its "solutions". It shows how the horrific abuse and exploitation of young girls at the hands of criminals is being used to fuel and mainstream Islamophobia and bigotry."
The Sun wants to make child abuse all about race – that doesn't help the victims
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 11:12 AM

Sorry, that should read "fat "liberal" arses"

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 11:07 AM

By "indigenous", I mean people who were born, brought up and educated in the United Kingdom, or otherwise citizens of this country; regardless of creed, colour or religion.

That definition suits me fine, so you can take your "liberal" charges of racism and stick them right up your fat arses :0)

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 11:03 AM

Labour MP Sarah Champion has just given her first interview since "resigning" from her front bench job as shadow women and equalities secretary.

She told The Times, "I genuinely don't know how I first knew that to be racist was the worst thing I could possibly be, but I somehow knew that it was, and that attitude stayed with me for most of my working life. Today, I'd rather be called a racist than turn a blind eye to child abuse."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sarah-champion-mp-i-d-rather-be-called-a-racist-than-turn-a-blind-eye-to-child-abuse-96s0fbm22

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 11:00 AM

Ask me later.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 10:52 AM

Steve,
By his fruits, Keith, by his fruits

By the fruits of his Right wing you mean.
It was Watson who announced the new policy.
Corbyn said that UK can be better off outside the EU, and he had no principled objection to ending the free movement of European workers in the UK.

Stu says that makes him an idiot. Disagree Steve?

Stu says, "His decision to support reduced immigration is nothing more than a hamfisted populist attempt to please the xenophobes"
Disagree Steve?

Stu says, "As for being a little Englander, in his own way him (and many others in the left) are,"
Disagree Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 09:47 AM

"The British Empire was founded on TRADE NOT CONQUEST"

The conquest and subjugation just followed on then?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 09:04 AM

By his fruits, Keith, by his fruits. Check that with the vicar tomorrow.

So nothing in the world has changed since the sun set on the Empire, eh, Col. Blimp? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 08:59 AM

"simply your own wild imaginings."
Has any evidence emerged of your
I invented the order
then
the order was never licenced
then
It was licenced then the licence was withdrawn
then
It was too early for the ammunition to be used in Homs
then
It was a private order for sporting equipment
then
The ammunition ordered was the wrong size to be used by Syrian snipers
All of these excuses and more wee put forward by you are to be found on the Homs Horror thread
Now we seem to be back to square one and I have little doubt that, should I be interested in continuing this "round and round the mulberry bush" game, you will be happy to go through it all again
Kieth's immediate response was "all you could come up with was a fewe sniper rifles" and later, "if only sales to Assad could be confined to riot control equipment - even democratic nations need to keep order"
The pair of you broke your necks defending sales to this monster and you both did the same when Britain was found to have sold chemicals capable of being used in the manufacture of weapons at a time when he was found to be using such weapons on his own people
You were given the press reports reports of the sale and you still claim I made it up
If you can prove the link I provided is a fake, please do so
I MADE NOTHING UP - YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO SHOW I HAVE EVER MADE ANYTHING UP, WHEN I AM ACCUSED OF DOING SO - BY YOU PAIR - I PRESENT LINKS TO THE CLAIMS I MAKE - YOU NEVER LINK TO ANY OF YOUR CLAIMS
You make all your claims based on nothing - that is why you never link and that is why you try to bully and bluff your way though everything
I suggest that unless you have anything new to say on this matter we leave this here before this thread gets closed down
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 08:24 AM

Like every other sentient being in the country, he can see that leaving the EU is going to be an unmitigated catastrophe

No, he said that UK can be better off outside the EU, and he had no principled objection to ending the free movement of European workers in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 07:44 AM

Ah Jom. So no new "evidence" has "emerged" - simply your own wild imaginings.

Nigel Parsons - 01 Sep 17 - 07:56 AM

"Jim,
Maybe you should read the link you posted."

Unfortunately Nigel, Jom very rarely reads the links he posts, or if he does, he clearly does not understand what they state.

Love Mr. Red's take on the EU - to him it would appear to be idyllic - which or course it is not - far from it. In his view the UK is beset with insurmountable problems because we are leaving (And WE ARE LEAVING Mr Red). Funny then that for centuries prior to there being an EU we seemed to get on just fine trading with Europe and the rest of the world (The British Empire was founded on TRADE NOT CONQUEST). The points put by Stanron and Iains are valid and sensible. Of the BRIC countries you refer to Red, the truth is that they are no further down the track now than when the term was coined in 2001, the EU believes them to be totally incapable of any collective action, while there has been talk of trade agreements none exist to date.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 07:38 AM

Though actually, Stu, Labour now supports a transitional period during which we stay in the single market and customs union. That isn't even a transitional period. It's virtually the status quo. I have a hunch that it's a tactic to ensure that brexit doesn't happen. Like every other sentient being in the country, he can see that leaving the EU is going to be an unmitigated catastrophe. Let's see. By his fruits shall we know him.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 06:34 AM

"I ain't got a clue what you are babbling about jimmy. "
Sorry about the typos - did it in a hurry
I'll explain as simply as I can - when Teribus found himself in a loss in the past he reverted to talking down and insulting
As he finds himself permanently in that position, he does that permamnently
I'm sure an intellingent person who had any intention of responding to it would have been able to work that out
That is what you have mindlessly picked up on
Isis rose from being a tiny sect to the threat it became from the support it organieed by disaffected Muslims who watched as the West stood by and allowed Assad to slaughter his people - Homs was the breaking point.
Many of those who volunteered to fight in Syria became radicalised and Isis grew to the size it has become
You link to the opinions of Alasdaire Crooke (who has links to British intelligence and the British diplomatic service), which presents the musderous Syrain regime as heroes, totally ignores the fact that they are proven mass murderers, torturers and human rights abusers - a total whitewash of one of the world's leading war criminals performed by a supporter of the British establishment who sells arms to such people
What else is such an individual going to say?
THE HEROIC SYRIAN REGIME
Now - if you might try to address these documented facts (not opinions) without the insults and somewhat pathetic attempts to talk down, perhaps you might at least convince people you believed what you are claiming yourself rather than trying to save face in your support for this scummy bunch of war criminals
JIm Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 06:30 AM

"Is "indigenous" a racist word?"

Groan. We're not taking about uncontacted Amazon tribes, we're discussing a population that has as very varied and wide gene pool. For tens of thousands of years. In this context, "indigenous" is meaningless. Perhaps the alt-reich should use the term "white aryan fuckwits" instead to distinguish themselves from the rest of the human race.


"If not, please do not say that all leavers can be described by those soubriquets."

I think he is an idiot for abandoning the 48% to the likes of the Brexiteer hierarchy, who are proven liars. His decision to support reduced immigration is nothing more than a hamfisted populist attempt to please the xenophobes he lost to the kippers; we knew full well before the immigration provided a net gain in economic terms. As for being a little Englander, in his own way him (and many others in the left) are, but not because of the hankering for empire of the deluded 52ers, but because he believes in the sovereignty of parliament.

The real issue, and in answer to the OP is that no-one CARES any more about the integrity of our politicians anymore, they can lie (£350 million) and everyone gets on with it as long as the result is the one they want. Gove, Johnson and May are despicable people in a way, the epitome of the sort of people that hold our country back, narrow-minded and lacking in imagination.

That's not to say that Labour is any better, I don't think they are. Brexit has caused a tremendous rent win our society, and as for where this will take us, who knows? I have to say, I don't think the signs are good and I don't think that party politics is capable of providing the answer.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 06:18 AM

Sorry, Stu. I see I just did my parrot impersonation.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 05:15 AM

"Indigenous" was racist in the context in which it was used, set as it was against "immigrants." Don't be so disingenuous, unless you want to be branded racist yourself. And using the word to characterise a section of the population of this country betrays an abject ignorance of our history.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 04:52 AM

"it is a direct lift of tor apparent menror's (Teribus's) insecure bullying."
I ain't got a clue what you are babbling about jimmy. Your view of the world is totally divorced from reality and your proposed solutions would look good in a fantasy novel. And why this fixation on insecurity? Is it some mantra you trot out just to pad out your scribblings in the deluded belief that phsycho-babble adds credibility.

"Recently, the most urgent threat has been the rise of Isis, which is directly attributable to Western support for the despotic regimes we sell arms to."
I do not know what you spread on your toast in the morning but it is having a nasty effect on you. I suggest you read your above sentence and ponder as to whether you really meant what you wrote. The reality is that it is a war between factions that arose from a vacuum created by western interference in the area. Also some of their funding is obvious, some is very shady as is their help.
But then you were convinced the white helmets were on the side of the angels, rather than a cheap propaganda outfit with carefully staged "incidents" and cameras ready to roll at a moments notice.
And of course the link below you will disregard, even though it likely impacts on the area under discussion
http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_Reasons_for_Netanyahu%E2%80%99s_Panic/60639/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 04:32 AM

Is "indigenous" a racist word?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 04:31 AM

We've ponced off these people for centuries and left their countries in shreds - pay-back time

We are discussing migration from EU Jim.
Your claim is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 04:29 AM

Stu was right and Corbyn was wrong. As everybody sometimes is. But, in particular, his comment against free movement was wrong, and was not something which anybody with a socialist or social democratic outlook should ever have said

OK, but would any of you describe Corbyn as a little Englander, a racist or an idiot?
If not, please do not say that all leavers can be described by those soubriquets.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 04:20 AM

"Racist shite."
Absolutely
We've ponced off these people for centuries and left their countries in shreds - pay-back time
This is racism at its most extreme
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 03:40 AM

"indigenous population"

Racist shite.

This sort of opinion is held by people who know little or nothing about he history of these islands.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 03:29 AM

The training opportunities are there Ake, its just that people won't take them up.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 17 - 02:42 AM

"In reality the entire post has little to do with Brexit and more to do with Jimmys view of the world"
Then you are free to dismantle everything I have put up with evidence of your own - all I have claimed is fully accesible
Britain - only sixth in the arms sales market - we really are trailing, aren't we !!!!!
You have responded to nothing, neither are your few friends - the implications of selling weapons and riot control equipment to mass murderers then denying their victims sanctuary, tha massive rise in racism in Britain, the increasing gap between haves and have nots - not just in Britain, but throughout the world   
And you all stay silent and allow Ake to continue his racist rant.
Recently, the most urgent threat has been the rise of Isis, which is directly attributable to Western support for the despotic regimes we sell arms to.
"Jimmys view of the world"
Your childish invective is not even original - it is a direct lift of tor apparent menror's (Teribus's) insecure bullying.
If you wish to debate, please do so like an adult
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 08:55 PM

i suppose one side effect was that i have limited sympathy for folksingers who can't be arsed to learn three or four verses of songs that most of the audience know.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:53 PM

Big Al:
but i wasn't the ideal subject for education - never could learn lists of words - latin declensions, french irregular verbs, the periodic table - hydrogen, helium, berilium, boron .carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, neon, sodium, magnesium, aluminium, silicon, phosphorus.... i'm sure i would have preferred learning to flip burgers.

Sorry, I have to say it. You're right about not learning lists. Lithium fits between Helium & Beryllium.
I learnt the mnemonic (in school 40+ years ago) as:
Hydrogen (obviously first & lightest, so no need to include it in the mnemonic)
Here Little Beggar Boys Catch Newts Or Fish. (Helium Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Flourine)
New Nature Magnifies All Sin, P.S. Chlorine. (Neon Sodium Magnesium Aluminium Silicon Phosphorus Sulphur Chlorine)
A(r) King Can Scan, 'Tis Vain Cries Man. (Argon Potassium Calcium Scandium Titanium Vanadium Chromium Manganese)

Cheers
Nigel
(hoping I've made no cock-ups with that list)

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 06:58 PM

my parents had lived through a period of mass unemployment and great poverty.

i think my parents saw education as a way that would ensure i and my sister would never face such deprivations.

And so i was educated. hours of homework every night so i got in the A class , where all the richer kids were in, and i passed the 11 plus.

but i wasn't the ideal subject for education - never could learn lists of words - latin declensions, french irregular verbs, the periodic table - hydrogen, helium, berilium, boron .carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, neon, sodium, magnesium, aluminium, silicon, phosphorus.... i'm sure i would have preferred learning to flip burgers.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 05:51 PM

Anyway you're missing the point about the lack of training opportunities while a pool of immigrant workers is available.

Didn't take you guys long to get off that subject.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 05:46 PM

and why would anybody want to move to Poland or Romania?

The immigrants I talked to are heading for Bulgaria

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:26 PM

Everybody's human rights. With freedom of movement you too can move.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:16 PM

"Free movement is the bedrock of human rights."

Who's human rights? The immigrants or the indigenous population?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:04 PM

"I think he was right about that and you are wrong."

Oh.

Time will tell, and I am wrong much of the time. In this case though, I can't see any progressive policies emerging. In fact, the opposite as the atmosphere in the country has become distinctly unpleasant since the vote, back to some sort of Garnett-like islander mentality and longing for empire.

Sad, really.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 02:40 PM

Stu was right and Corbyn was wrong. As everybody sometimes is. But, in particular, his comment against free movement was wrong, and was not something which anybody with a socialist or social democratic outlook should ever have said. Free movement is the bedrock of human rights.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 01:49 PM

"I suppose offering some sort of evidence to support the above would be asking the impossible."
I suppose it's out of the question that yo might look it up for yourself?
It's common knowledge
I suggest you dig up the disgustingly over-long Homs Horror thread where two of our prime suspects did double somersaults first denying, then defending these sales
All the evidence is there - in spades
One of our suspects offered seven different and at times contradictory excuses for the sniper ammo sales which was licenced for import by the Government
It was admittedly a small amount but it came at a time when Assad's snipers would have been in training.
I might have mentioned the chemicals capable of being included in the manufacture of weapons, for which Britain was internationally condemned.
All this took place after the Amnesty report on Syria's record of torture and mass murder were public knowledge.
I seem to remember you dismissed reports by Amnesty as 'fake news'
"What "evidence" "#You've had it Teribus - you were the one who produced the seven contradictory excuses, so you already know this
"Jom" I've decided that responding to a self-imposed semi-literate is likely to do more harm than good, so until you learn some manners and get my name right, I suggest you don't expect a response from me
I really am not qualified enough to know how to deal with somebody with your psychological hangups - your inferiority complex is now getting way beyond a complex
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 01:45 PM

Stu.
But then he(Corbyn) never was in favour of the EU.

As you said a couple of days ago, "Only an idiot would vote to leave the EU."

I think he was right about that and you are wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 01:28 PM

"Britain was selling riot control equipment to Assad, who had a decade old record of torture and mass murder - while his snipers were offering packets of cigarettes as prizes to those who could kill a woman acd a child she was carrying with one bullet, evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."
I suppose offering some sort of evidence to support the above would be asking the impossible.
No doubt you also have the delusion that the Arab Spring was a totally spontaneous affair in each country-the downtrodden seeking their freedom rather than sheep being led by the nose.
"One of our most stable economies is Arms Sales" not quite sure what that means. Depending on whose figures you regard as reliable(by no means an easy task to assess) Britain ranks behind America, Russia, China, France and Germany so your spurious arguments should perhaps be run by them first to gauge the response.
In reality the entire post has little to do with Brexit and more to do with Jimmys view of the world

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 12:36 PM

Yes Keith, he was wrong to say that.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 12:00 PM

"Do you think he was wrong to say that UK can be better off outside, and that he has no "no principled objection to ending the free movement of European workers in the UK.""

Yes, he was. But then he never was in favour of the EU. 48% of the country has no-one to look after their interests or voice their opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 11:58 AM

"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria"

Really Jom?? What "evidence" has emerged? You were asked to produce "evidence" about four years ago and you singularly failed to do so.

Are you sure it was Britain - as in the British Government - who sold this ammunition? Before all we got was a vague reference in a newspaper article that in 2009 an export licence had been granted to a private individual to export Standard NATO ammunition worth £30,000 to Syria (So The ammunition was not being sold to Syria by the British Government). There was no confirmation in the newspaper that the sale ever went through, or that the ammunition was ever sent to Syria.

So tell us Jom what is this new evidence - absolutely dying to hear a verifiable version of it.

"The Arab Spring protests to improve the conditions of many of these countries were barely a week old when Cameron hosted a massive arms fair to sell weapons to some of the worst offenders."

As international trade fairs take months to organise I think the start of the Arab Spring protests and the timing of the arms fair were purely coincidental. When the old USSR collapsed they left a bit of a vacuum in their old stomping grounds - in any area of trade where vacuums occur they tend to be filled rather quickly. The weapons and munitions used to kill the vast majority of people in Syria Jom come from Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 11:01 AM

Many of our remainers here are also Cobyn supporters.

Do you think he was wrong to say that UK can be better off outside, and that he has no "no principled objection to ending the free movement of European workers in the UK."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/09/jeremy-corbyn-uk-is-better-off-out-of-eu-with-managed-migration

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 09:40 AM

"I WISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Does that mean you wouldn't have to respond to my points Iains - whoops sorry - you aren't anyway
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 09:12 AM

" I may as well be writing in Sanskrit"

I WISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 09:05 AM

"said the poster was "not our campaign" "
They would say that, wouldn't they, especially when there was a possibility of the posters being prosecuted.
"spiking the guns"
Since then, the arguments have been about 'protecting our borders and controlling the inflow"
There has never been such an animal as "uncontrolled immigration" - that is an invention of the bumwipe press
All immigration is controlled - Europe is about a two-way street, allowing member states to share the right to move - not "uncontrolled immigration.
The rise in racist incidents following the result speaks for itself - instead of responding you offer denials of what is obviously true
None of you have bothered to comment on economic consequences - as for the moral obligation of accepting refugees from situations we have helped create - I may as well be writing in Sanskrit - in no longer appears part of the English psyche
We have a moral obligation as human beings to open our borders to people we are helping to impoverish and terrorise
One of our most stable economies is Arms Sales
The Arab Spring protests to improve the conditions of many of these countries were barely a week old when Cameron hosted a massive arms fair to sell weapons to some of the worst offenders.
Britain was selling riot control equipment to Assad, who had a decade old record of torture and mass murder - while his snipers were offering packets of cigarettes as prizes to those who could kill a woman acd a child she was carrying with one bullet, evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria.
Our arms trade has made Britain complicit in war crimes and mass murder and we are turning away the fleeing victims.
Is that your idea of Britain standing on its own two feet?
It's not mine
EXPLOITATION of the POOR
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 08:49 AM

Brexit has poisoned the political atmosphere of this country. There is are a huge number of people whose opinions are sidelined as the major parties flap and bluster over what sort of mess they prefer.

It's turning the island into a horrible place to live, dumbed down and backward.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:57 AM

That's right, Raggytash, and that is fuelling inflation that employers can't hope to match with equivalent pay rises. So the standard of living of the people at the bottom especially keeps on diving. Jim, there'll be plenty of new food bank jobs, so we'll all be OK then won't we. Another part of this epic Tory balls-up.

"Ruled by Europe - " well, Nigel, anyone who was told that was lied to. Over 95% of the laws that apply to EU countries have been AGREED TO WHOLEHEARTEDLY by successive UK governments. As for the other five percent, well what large organisation is ever going to enjoy full agreement about everything? If ever a word was dishonestly over-employed in any campaign, it was "control" in that referendum campaign.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:56 AM

Jim,
Maybe you should read the link you posted.
The poster was not posted with agreement of all those who voted for Brexit. In fact your link states:
Johnson, who leads the official Vote Leave campaign, said the poster was "not our campaign" and "not my politics". Drawing a distinction between his own view and those of Farage, he suggested that leaving the EU would be a way of "spiking the guns" of anti-immigrant feeling. "If you take back control, you do a great deal to neutralise anti-immigrant feeling generally," he said, after reporters showed him a picture of the poster. "I am passionately pro-immigration and pro-immigrants."

Immigration is not the problem. Uncontrolled immigration is. Even Angela Merkel now seems to accept that her 'open door' policy for Germany was a mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:39 AM

"State that as often as you wish, but it will not make it true."
BREAKING POINT
Ake has aleardy given us a glowing testimonial of Usick's acheivements
"Without UKIP, we would be hosting 350,000 EU immigrants per year for ever..."
That was how Brexit was sold - state otherwise if you wish - as often as you like, but that will not make it true
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Mr Red
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:39 AM

The first example that came to my mind was the building of canals.

Many canals didn't get finished (Leominster eg) or lost money when they were completed, dividends were modest. Then when the railways came they lost money to the point they were vulnerable to the railway companies who wanted their cuttings and near zero inclines. Pick yer timescales as to cost/profit - think restoration!
My own Stroudwater currently needs £18 million to connect the restored section to the system. The 6 miles already done cost over £10 million. The benefit is: I can walk to Stroud unparticulated along a pleasant verdant corridor. The payback is ephemeral, but I favour the project, so that is justified. Oh Yes It Is!

Change costs money. Payback period is never instant. And something as complex as a country replete with H&S, Trading Standards, and self-serving politicians etc is not what I would class as simple. Hidden costs are in there. And consequences like a nationalised bank opening a new trading house in Europe to be able to compete are but the tip of the proverbial.

In the long run you are predicting the future from historical experience. It is a hope (aka belief system, aka religion) that 65 million comfortable peeps can compete with 2000 million low paid. Who can buy us out!
In the short run the pound is weaker and your food is costing more, and there is more to come!
Global warming will confuse the general picture to the point that the yessers will have a getout. FWIW Global warming is a change that will cost! Like more rainfall. Any current evidence/consequence/cost there?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:25 AM

On a financial note on the exchange rate in Sept 2015 the pound would get you 1.41 Euro, today it is worth 1.08 Euro.

33 cents per pound less. Around 23% less.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:21 AM

"Anyway, Theresa May says she's staying on. On her past record, that means she'll be gone within weeks...."

Please God, make it so...

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:20 AM

"My expectation is that Brexit will enable the UK to react to, and exploit, world changes,"
In order to do that, Britain needs industries - to be self-sufficient, if not to export
At present we are reliant on cheap imports produced in countries paying starvation wages under appalling conditions
When these conditions produce a flow of economic migrants, we close our doors to them
We export arms to dynastic tyrants like the Saudis our Assad ( it has already been announced that this particular war criminal is "here to stay" and the forthcoming immigration laws will ascertain that there will be no sanctuary for his victims when he bengins to extract his revenge on his opponents
We involve ourselves in oil wars which produce floods of refugees - we would rather watch their children be pulled dead out of the sea rather than give them the sanctuary Britain has always been proud of in the past
Not only have we reverted to the predatory nature of Empire, but we have allowed our 'great and good' to brutalise us as human beings.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:18 AM

"Freedom of Movement" isn't the same thing as an automatic right to remain. The EU legislation I referred to earlier, and which the UK has chosen not to enact gives Member States the right to remove immigrants from other EU Member States who have not, within three months of arrival, obtained employment or have sufficient private means to support themselves and their families.

So much for the BrexShitter's usual bollocks about the EU forcing the U.K. to allow 'Imagrunts (sic) to come here to claim are (sic) benifits (sic).

Seems that the average BrexShitters' lack of English skills mirrors their lack of understanding of EU Immigration rules.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:14 AM

Jim:
Brexit was sold to the British people on the "lets stop immigration" ticket - the banks and commerce all opposed it on economic grounds - there was no other articulate argument put forward other than to stop immigration.
State that as often as you wish, but it will not make it true.
Many people voted to leave because they do not wish to be ruled by Europe (Just as you seem to wish Ireland had self-determination from Britain).
It suited the remain campaign to try to paint those in favour of Brexit as racists who wished to stop all immigration. That was never the case.
I accept that some who voted for Brexit may have done it for xenophobic reasons, but it is totally inaccurate to state that that was the sole reason.

A month or so ago, The Bank of England issued a statement declaring that the basic standard living of people in Britain (real people - not entrepreneurs, bankers and the elite) will continue to be effected adversely for at least a decade
Yes, and we all remember the Bank's scare stories before the Brexit vote. (Since recanted)

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:11 AM

Wouldn't be half so bad if there actually WERE any meaningful negotiations. I've never seen such a shambles in my life. How much longer are we supposed to have to do deals? The best we can hope for (and I have a feeling it may actually happen something like this) is for a fudge lasting about ten years then everyone turning around scratching their heads saying "Didn't we vote to leave? Are we still in or what? Buggered if I know..."

Anyway, Theresa May says she's staying on. On her past record, that means she'll be gone within weeks....

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stanron
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 07:10 AM

Well, Me Red, 'change costs money'? The first example that came to my mind was the building of canals. That was a change, and it cost loads of money, but before too much time it sparked the industrial revolution and lots of people got very rich. The country, as a whole, definitely benefited.

My expectation is that Brexit will enable the UK to react to, and exploit, world changes, and opportunities, more quickly than it could do as part of the EU. In the long run we will all get richer.

The negotiations conference yesterday was a revelation. People against Brexit say the UK has more to loose than the EU. In terms of trade, if we move to World Trade rules, the EU has more to loose than the UK. They sell more to us than we do to them. Then there is the matter of £11 billion a year that the UK contributes to the EU as a member. The EU will lose a lot of UK cash when we leave.

Why do you think the EU wants to take the UK's money contribution out of the negotiations before they discus trade? Because if they don't their weak position is even weaker.

The EU, by it's very nature, is inflexible. 27, soon to be 26, have to say 'yes'. to get anything done. It is one, amongst many, of the reasons I voted to leave. Had the EU been more flexible David Cameron would have gotten some real reforms before the referendum. They weren't, he didn't and we voted leave. Now the EU insists that we give them a load of money before we discuss a trade deal. I hope that David Davies continues to say no. Who in their right mind would agree to buy something without knowing what they were buying?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 06:39 AM

Brexit has made this country a place I no longer want to live as we regress back to the little Englander, racist ignorance and stupidity I grew up with in the 1970s. A country ruled by rich people and the establishment, protecting their own and fuck everyone else. It's ever been thus I suppose, but I don't like the atmosphere of the place, it's got a tinge of nastiness about it; always happens when the tories are in, and this lot are very bad - just see how they are fucking up the Brexit negotiations. Way out of their depth.

I'm stuck here though, got family to think of. Plus I'm potless.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 06:34 AM

"No-one has suggested stopping all immigration."
Within days of Brexit being announced, people of an obviously non-English background were being approached in the street and asked when they were "going home"
The number of racist incidents rocketed
The Uksick poster depicted "hordes" of beturbaned, robed, non-white immigrants queuing up to enter Britain - our resident ultra-right bigot has extended that to include the Slavs.
Brexit was sold to the British people on the "lets stop immigration" ticket - the banks and commerce all opposed it on economic grounds - there was no other articulate argument put forward other than to stop immigration.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-racism-hate-crime-figures-rise-white-british-being-attacked-a7360836.html
You people have been so blinder by your Little Engladism that you haven't even begun to address the practical problems Brexit has brought about
A month or so ago, The Bank of England issued a statement declaring that the basic standard living of people in Britain (real people - not entrepreneurs, bankers and the elite) will continue to be effected adversely for at least a decade
Add to that the possibility of those working in Europe having to return home and join the already considerable dole queues.... economic and social chaos
Mind you - this might be relived a little by the extra employees needed to process those we might have to deport!!
"Oh to be in England now that Brexit's here"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 06:31 AM

The positions taken for or against Brexit have the implicit assumption that the EU will for the remainders:
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us,
God save the EU

Whereas for Brexit:

O lord God arise,
Scatter our enemies,
And make them fall!
Confound their knavish tricks,
Confuse their politics,
On you our hopes we fix,
God save the Queen!

To my mind there is no certainty that the EU will continue in it's present form for any length of time. This could make both positions redundant in the fullness of time.
An attempt was made to reform the institution from within. It failed.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Mr Red
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 06:12 AM

Why don't we calm down and talk about lesser religions.

Politics is a belief system. Proof (dressed up as incontravertable fact but still mere opinion) can be seen above.

Brexit, love it or hate it is a slow car crash. Predicated on the hope it will be more lucrative but founded on a belief (pick yer pecadillo).

Hard truth is that change costs money. Always has, always will. It costs in unintended (read unthought through) consequences. It costs the losers and there are always some who don't deserve it.

The BREXIT argument (not fact, note) is that the equation results in profits, but in reality only results in prophets. The payback takes time - 10 years suit you? - Sir!
By which time the BRIC countries will loom large and squeeze the profits from the UK (et al). It is happening already.
The goal posts will have moved.

The problem with predicting the future is that it is formulated on past events. Which on a rising curve often works. But we are not on the rise, the ride is bumpy for us right now and if anything overall progress is not necessarily to our advantage as an Emperor once said.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 05:07 AM

Do not worry Steve. EU needs a deal too.
If one is not forthcoming, worst case, we will still have WTO trade with them and will not have to pay their ridiculous divorce bill.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 05:01 AM

You can actually read, can you, Teribus? In my last post I criticised Blair for perpetuating Thatcher's ideological meddling in education. So where did I show any loyalty there?! Second point: if you really think that the entity which was Blair's New Labour is the same thing as Corbyn's party then you haven't been keeping up. As for betraying and letting us down, you ain't seen nothing yet. Fifteen months after the disastrous result of Cameron's betrayal of the country, we are in a state of paralysis with the EU snarling around us and no sign of a deal, captained rudderlessly by an illegitimate prime minister whose incompetence and ineptitude knows no bounds. Tell you what, Bill, another couple of years of this tragicomedy and even you will be voting for Corbyn.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 05:00 AM

If we won't accept immigrants

No-one has suggested stopping all immigration.

If we won't accept immigrants, why should anyone else?

Few countries, if any, allow free movement. Not USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,....

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:53 AM

"This door has NOT been closed. Brexit has not yet been achieved."
This is what is quite likely
If we won't accept immigrants, why should anyone else?
"I suppose we import all our plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, carpenters."
Is this a rhetorical question?
We always have - there are plenty of English workers living in Ireland at present
Skilled workers have always emigrated 0- as far as Australia, to find work or get higher pay
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:52 AM

David,
Probably in homes that they would help build.

Only if others are denied homes David.
There was a huge shortage of housing before the current wave of mass immigration began, and it has worsened every year under every government because homes can not be built at that rate.
Likewise provision of services for a whole new city every year.

We used to manage without mass immigration.
Other countries like Japan and Poland manage with almost none.
Who benefits? Employers especially government from a supply of pre-trained undemanding labour, and landlords.
Who suffers? Those poor sods at the sharp end competing for jobs while wages fall, rents are driven upwards, and their schools and hospitals suffer overcrowding.

If they complain, they are racists.
Labour won back many such people from UKIP, but the latest policy could drive them all back again.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:32 AM

Jim:
This is why youngsters flock to Europe to find work and this is the door that Brexit has closed
This door has NOT been closed. Brexit has not yet been achieved.

Higher education has been placed out of the reach of poorer families by the fees demanded - it is now the sole domain of the Middle Classes What, no higher education for the upper classes? Obviously a preposterous statement. Also following the move (by a Labour government) to get 50% of students into higher education the numbers benefitting has risen, not fallen. The 'fees demanded' are, effectively, on the "never never" as the students will only repay the loans needed for them if they end up in very well paid employment.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:21 AM

"His claims of education, apprenticeship schemes and training are utter nonsense - apprenticeship schemes for what?"

I suppose we import all our plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, carpenters........................?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 04:09 AM

"Well Ake's right about one thing."
"Right" being the operative word
This is primitive stuff - not too far from "coming over here to take our jobs and molest our white women" - the racist garbage of my youth.
If immigrants are working for less, so is every indigenous individual involved in the black economy (now referred to as the "underground" or "shadow" economy), reckoned to be worth £150 billion per year.
His claims of education, apprenticeship schemes and training are utter nonsense - apprenticeship schemes for what?
Britain no longer has an industry which requires apprentices - you don't need expensive schemes for stacking shelves in Sainsburys, which is the level of work many school leavers are being forced to take up in Britain's failing economy.
This is why youngsters flock to Europe to find work and this is the door that Brexit has closed - much to the glee of little Englanders like Ake
Higher education has been placed out of the reach of poorer families by the fees demanded - it is now the sole domain of the Middle Classes
It is estimated that at present between 4.5 million and 5.5 million Britons live abroad, that's around 7-8% of the UK population, around 1.2 million of those live in Europe.
Two years ago it was estimated that there were 33,000 Britons drawing dole in Europe
That is not caused by a few Poles being paid to paint our kitchens and hang shelves - it is the fault of a failing economy
It has always been easy to blame immigrants - that's what our establishment has always done to explain their failings, and that's what the rabid right has always fed off, like the maggots they are
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 03:52 AM

Big Al, I can't comment on any of the individual cases which you or your Canadian friend were dealing with, but I do think that you are a bit quick to write kids off. If they come in not being able to spell, that is usually a result of lack of parental encouragement and support, not a lack of innate ability. An attitude of "education is not for the likes of us". Kids need to rise above that and teachers need to help them to do so. Otherwise the "sink estates" which Ake rightly decries, will never get any better.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 03:52 AM

And then Labour came into office and put it all right again Big Al? Apparently not according to Shaw. One thing recent posts by both of you have shown is your loyalty to a political entity that has consistently let you down and betrayed you. Yet you both state clearly that you will, presumably for ideological reasons, carry on supporting them. What was that tale about a man banging his head against a wall and complaining about a headache again?

Thanks for the link Backwoodsman it only got me to a 404 Error - Cannot be found - you are talking about immigration. If anybody from anywhere reaches any EU member state and registers they can then invoke their freedom of movement, that cornerstone rule.

EU Immigration

The above contained the following:

"EU-wide rules that allow citizens of countries outside the EU who are staying legally in an EU country to bring their non-EU family members to live with them and to become long-term residents."

Basically what I have said above

The EU-wide rules are followed by 25 out of the 28 member states the three exceptions? Denmark, the UK and Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Sep 17 - 03:42 AM

The descent is complete. I was over optimistic with my first estimate. I'm out of here.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:40 PM

The National Curriculum was brought in as an ill-conceived blunt instrument of control over teachers by Thatcher. She couldn't stand us, and our exceptionally weak attempts at militancy in the mid-80s gave her the perfect excuse. It came with a lot more than just a content-stuffed bunch of syllabuses that, at a stroke, destroyed the concepts of imagination and flexibility that are the hallmarks of good teaching. It also brought in a system of inspection, run by unqualified people, that was designed to be one hundred percent judgemental and nil percent advisory. It also forced an authoritarian regime on teachers that ruined the concepts of democracy and professional collaboration in staffrooms. Well, we've had all this for thirty years now. We have had no improvement in standards, a whole load of inept fiddling with assessment systems that encourage cheating in order to keep your place in the league table and a situation in which head teachers are leaving in droves who can't be replaced. So well done Maggie for setting it off and well done Blair for conniving in it. And a thousand bloody curses on the teaching unions for being so damned weak and divided. And I'm still a member of one of 'em and will be until they carry me out in a box. Education? Best bloody political football going.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:53 PM

Well Ake's right about one thing.

We need to stop flogging a dead horse with school curriculums.

back in 1970's a Canadian teacher came on exchange to our school in Brum. Lots of kids from very poor backgrounds.

i remember him saying, 'your system is crazy - you keep on banging on with academic subjects with kids, long after its obvious that nothing in their background is going to help them get it. you should teach practical subjects - some life skills that will be of some use to them.'

of course after Keith Joseph and the national curriculum - things got even worse. children who could hardly spell simple words were required to be studying two foreign languages.

of course workshops and kitchens and all the things that would be required would cost money. involved in providing such vocational training would cost money. and you couldn't fiddle the expense with a huge paper trail - like previous investment in education.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 05:52 PM

"came here nine years ago with their families and intend to go back to retire!!"
Pretty much the same as many Brits who work abroad and plan to return when they retire
They made a series about if forty years ago - Auf Weidersein Pet or something like that !!
Jim Caroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 04:44 PM

href="http://ec.europa.eu/immigration/who-does-what/more-information/explaining-the-rules-why-are-there-eu-rules-and-national-ru

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Raggytash
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 04:14 PM

Oh there's fame !!

I appear to have got under Teri-towellings skin. I haven't posted to this thread for almost 8 hours.

Oh Joy !!

Have you looked at those Anger Management Courses yet Terikins?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:43 PM

"Like every other EU Member-State, the U.K. has had the power to control EU immigration at any time. However, successive governments of the Right and the Left have declined to activate the piece of legislation which governs such controls.

'Uncontrolled EU Immigration' is SFA to do with our membership of the EU, and everything to do with our own UK governments who, regardless of which party has been in power, have been happy to accommodate it." - Backwoodsman

Thanks for explaining that Backwoodsman - It directly contradicts the following which must - to use Raggy's favourite expression be complete and utter "Bollocks":

"Freedom of movement and residence for persons in the EU is the cornerstone of Union citizenship, which was established by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. Its practical implementation in EU law, however, has not been straightforward. It first involved the gradual phasing out, of internal borders under the Schengen agreements, initially in just a handful of Member States. Today, the provisions governing the free movement of persons are laid down in Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of EU citizens and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:43 PM

Immigration and Emigration has always existed but until the recent past difficulties in transportation limited numbers and it would seem the wanderlust was more restricted. Irregardless(sp?) of the reasons for the restricted inflows outflows, today those constraints have dramatically diminished and numbers have increased. We have a reservoir of unemployed, a chronic housing shortage, an education system that is allowed to totally neglect those at the bottom and a social system that has allowed the growth of feral sink estates. Somehow these problems need to be both recognised and addressed, while also foreign workers.
But foreign workers are regarded as a force to drive down wages thereby impoverishing both the unskilled and crafstmen. Whether this is merely a perception or the reality I do not know, but the truth needs to be clarified.
Did we really achieve the desired result by encouraging 50% of young people to study for a degree while at the same time destroying apprenticeships? Cynical me would suggest all these young people on degree courses nicely massages the unemployment rate down while concurrently driving them into debt in order to make them docile sheep throughout the bulk of their working lives. Does this vast influx of foreigners merely just highlight some glaring deficiencies in our educational system?

    Time for our lacklustre politicians to start addressing these issues.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:41 PM

Hah! The two Polish men I spoke to today, served their time in Poland, came here nine years ago with their families and intend to go back to retire!!

Pease try to understand that the playing field is not level, these immigrants are depriving local youth from training.....few firms take on apprentices, certainly not in the numbers which pertained when I got my papers. Now they go to an agency and hire labour "off the peg"

I have nothing against "education" providing it is of value and will allow the recipient to contribute to society.
For many years now education has just been an alternative to "work" for many young people.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:20 PM

Stop feeding the troll lads
He's not responding to anything anybody says and you are giving him a platform for his ARM-IN-THE-AIR hate
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:13 PM

Well if they are returning to Poland or Romania taking with them extra skills picked up in the UK, thats good. Everybody wins. Likewise if British people work in Europe, acquire extra skills, then return, thats good too. I get that you don't like academics, thats sad, but what is more concerning is that you don't seem to like education of any kind. So you would condemn the young people in the less well off areas to remain in the very conditions which you decry about four posts up?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 03:12 PM

Not because of any increased 'control', but because of a fear of an unpleasant welcome from racists and xenophobes, and a lack of confidence in the UK's future once the reality of BrexShit starts to bite.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:58 PM

"Likewise, there has been little or no effort on the part of our governments to control non-EU immigration. Where do BrexShitters get the ludicrous idea from that immigration will be any more strictly controlled post-BrexShit than it's been during the past fifty years?"

Immigration rates from within the EU are already falling fast.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:55 PM

Deepest condolences "D"! 650 grand a years for these pussies...give me strength.

The "liberal" bias on BBC is truly sickening.

I'll never forget Jon Snow interviewing Nigel Farage "Well Mr Farage, you seem to be a bit of a black sheep in the European parliament......tho' I hesitate to utter the word "black" when interviewing you!"
Mr Farage of course ignored the remark.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:45 PM

Like every other EU Member-State, the U.K. has had the power to control EU immigration at any time. However, successive governments of the Right and the Left have declined to activate the piece of legislation which governs such controls.

'Uncontrolled EU Immigration' is SFA to do with our membership of the EU, and everything to do with our own UK governments who, regardless of which party has been in power, have been happy to accommodate it.

Likewise, there has been little or no effort on the part of our governments to control non-EU immigration. Where do BrexShitters get the ludicrous idea from that immigration will be any more strictly controlled post-BrexShit than it's been during the past fifty years?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:43 PM

I'm working on a job right now with two Polish joiners.....really nice guys, been here nearly nine years, they work cheap, labour only.

In a couple of years they are going to Romania with their wives and kids......they told me a house costs under 30 grand in Poland or Romania.

We need full scale training and re-training to do vocational work, we have too many bloody academics already....dozens of worthless degrees contributing nothing, a waste of tax revenue.

What's wrong with UK politics? "liberal" and neo liberal ideology.

David, if regulating immigration is such a bad thing, why is it now the policy of every major political party? What about the infrastructures of the countries from which the immigrants come???

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Donuel
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:24 PM

goodbye FOX news http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/29/media/fox-news-uk-fox-sky-rupert-murdoch/

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:20 PM

Slightly hyperbolic Ake. Free movement works both ways. And the way out of the sink estates is through education and training. Both of which EU immigrants help to provide.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:15 PM

"I remember you people, how you smeared and laughed at UKIP, well they achieved something momentous.."
Fair's fair
THEY HAD SOME HELP
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 02:01 PM

Who's gonna build thee homes in Poland or Romania, who's gonna care for their old people? We have millions here in sink estates, run down manufacturing areas, drug infested ghettos.....they need work and their children need work....real work, not short term contracts.

Never forget, unregulated immigration was an economic policy.
Not a fucking gesture of goodwill.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 01:46 PM

Probably in homes that they would help build.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 01:43 PM

Where would they live David?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 01:38 PM

And they would be brilliant. EU immigrants keep our NHS running, teach our students at our universities, care for our old people in care homes and at home care, and fix our plumbing. Would that we had 350,000 more.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 01:14 PM

Without UKIP, we would be hosting 350,000 EU immigrants per year for ever......get down on your knees a thank Mr Farage who dedicated 20 years of his life in getting us out.

I remember you people, how you smeared and laughed at UKIP, well they achieved something momentous......none of the other Parties have achieved anything like it......In fact they ALL have adopted UKIP policy on immigration and still you're whining.
Roll up your sleeves and make Britain ....."Great again"

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 11:06 AM

All are welcome on the 'All welcome' thread :-) I am pretty sure that you will enjoy it a lot more than on here provided you follow the rules in the OP :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 10:52 AM

"This from someone who seems to idolise anything Irish, and hate anything British!"
Neither is the case
I detest what has happened to Britain under consecutive right wing Governments and I feel the same about what has happened to Ireland under similar regimes
As for the British and Irish people, they have my respect and my support when they try to change the world for the better.
You confuse racism with a refusal to stick ones nose up the arse of the establishment
I add you to my list of invitees - I will happily make a generous donation to any named charity if you can show that I am in any way a racist.
As I said - racism and bigotry is the domain of the right, not the left
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 10:32 AM

Dthe G
How right you were!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 10:25 AM

From: Iains -

"...to be deliberately provocative, or to insult the opposition is going to send any thread to the dogs, as is intentionally drifting way off topic. Some take pleasure in pissing people off unfortunately, others like to air their supposed superiority..."

Oh, the irony! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 09:51 AM

Didn't take this one long to get personal did it :-(

I'll give it a couple of days before it gets silly but, as I said before, I am naturally optimistic. Maybe a few hours?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:52 AM

Racism and bigotry is your bag, not ours
Jim Carroll
This from someone who seems to idolise anything Irish, and hate anything British!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:44 AM

If you have a thread about politics it is inevitable it will be divisive. It is the nature of the beast. To phrase a posting in such a way that no other view is allowed, to be deliberately provocative, or to insult the opposition is going to send any thread to the dogs, as is intentionally drifting way off topic. Some take pleasure in pissing people off unfortunately, others like to air their supposed superiority,
some get their kicks from honing in or grammatical errors or spelling mistakes. It takes all sorts to tango.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Raggytash
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:22 AM

Exactly my point Nigel, in my defence the other thread is about pleasantries, this one was thought up to create discord, as always.

Now we will get squealing from certain sources ............

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:13 AM

By the way
It is true that 'New Labour' became the feuge and meal ticket of many right wingers - they were basically Tories who saw The Labour Party as a way up the greasy pole
I was one of the voters who stopped voting when thhey came into being
Corbyn has attempted to change that and will get my support while he continues to do so
When Labour was accused of antisemitism it launched an immediate enquiry
Around the same time the Tories were accused of serious Isl;amophobia - nothing has been done to date
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:12 AM

From: Raggytash - PM
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:47 AM
Seeing as someone sought to derail another thread this morning I thought I would tell you on this one that we are in the middle of a tremendous downpour, complete with thunder and lightening.
Sauce for the goose and all that.

Great!, Tit for tat interruptions.
Whoever you're complaining about Raggytash, you're stooping to their level.

Hardly helpful.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 08:05 AM

"Another amazing rant."
Why "amazing" Nige
Hasn't your party just done a deal with a party with terrorist links and bunged them £Billion of taxpayers money>
Your foreign secretary (nearly wrote sexratary) is a raving racist
It is the right with the track record of racism, not the left
It was the Economic Capitalist right that filled the extermination capps and massacred six million Jews (along with Left wingers and trades Unionists.
The Labour Party has a proud record of anti-racism - it was established with the help of emigre Jews fleeing right-wing European pogroms
It was Labour Party Members and Communists who took to the streets to oppose the Fascist and the police protecting them in the thirties
Despite enormous efforts on the part of the anti-BDS group, not a shred of eidence was proved to substantiate antisemitism in the Lanbour Party
Racism and bigotry is your bag, not ours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Raggytash
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:47 AM

Seeing as someone sought to derail another thread this morning I thought I would tell you on this one that we are in the middle of a tremendous downpour, complete with thunder and lightening.

Sauce for the goose and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:34 AM

Maybe the Tories might invite her to step into accident-prone Two Ton Tessie's shoes when her party finally ditch her
Another amazing rant.
She would be more likely to join Labour, as she has twice attempted to be selected as a Labour candidate (being shortlisted once).
Anti-immigration policies are clearly not just the province of UKIP and the Conservatives.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:14 AM

i suppose it depends on how you've looked on membership of the EU.

i didn't vote to enter the common market in 1974. i saw it then, as now, an American inspired idea to put a power bloc between it and Russia.

times moved on and Russia isn't quite the white hot threat that it appeared in the post war years.America has stopped doling out money - apart from defence installations - and there aren't as many as them.

I remember Alex Campbell playing out our folk club in 1978 - the year of Ally's army going to Argentina. He was telling us all about Upper Clyde Shipbuilders and how all the work would now go to Hamburg, thanks to the fine Italian hand of the Heath government a few years earlier.

Since then we've seen so many other industries go that way.

Now will come the abuse. Jim will call me a little Englander. Keith will call me a troglodyte trade union supporter - never let us forget Red Robbo. Dave will say that that the mprris marina wasn't up to much - forgetting that the the beetle had no legroom at the back, the renault dauphin and the renault 4 and every citroen known to man were rust buckets and the skoda estelle was prone to falling in half.

but at the bottom of my feeling is sadness for what losing our manufacturing base did to English society. THe fractured families and communities; the beggars in the street; the loss of working class culture.

just as Thatcher used the EU as an engine for monetarist reforms, whilst hating the institution for the decencies it extracted. I find the right wing of the tory party very uncongenial bedfellows.

Still I want out of the EU and they do. I'll do anything except vote for them.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 07:01 AM

Not even the labour party would touch her with a bargepole. That speaks volumes. Her past election history shows constant failure. Why on earth would the Tories want a born loser? Total delusion, as usual.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 06:53 AM

"UKIP "
I notice that raving neo-fascist Islamophobe, Anne Marie Waters fresh from 'Shariawatch' is competing for leadership of the party
'Bout time they stepped out of their closet and stopped being so coy about what they really stand for.
Maybe the Tories might invite her to step into accident-prone Two Ton Tessie's shoes when her party finally ditch her - what a dream-team - Anne-Marie and Boris!
That should steer Britain safely through Brexit
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 06:41 AM

I agree with Steve's post above and although I am firmly in the remain camp I am not as convinced that it will be as bad as predicted. Maybe it is just my natural optimism but I think we (the human race in general) are very good at making the best out of a bad job. I believe we are still capable of rescuing the situation. The best way forward for us to do this is the left hand path!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 06:07 AM

The whole brexit thing is an unmitigated disaster brought down on our heads by that contemptible twat David Cameron. He thought he was sidelining his own vicious right wing and UKIP by calling a referendum he was convinced he'd win. Now we have the equally contemptible Theresa May who tried to sideline her vicious right wing by calling an election which, in her hubris, she thought she'd slaughter Labour. During her campaign her media lackeys tried to demonise Corbyn by linking him with Hamas and Hezbollah. When she failed to win a majority, guess what, she threw her hat in the ring with a bunch of sectarian terrorist sympathisers in Northern Ireland. The sheer hypocrisy is staggering. The people of this country need to learn that the Tories are the party of self-interest, and they will always put what they see as their own interest above the interests of the country. Whatever messes you consider Labour has got us into in the past, they were like Sunday picnics compared with what now confronts us.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 05:48 AM

The idea of Brexit does not seem to have been fully embraced by any party. It could have fizzled out over time by pure stagnation. However the obscene amount of money being demanded as our severance payment will likely give added impetus to our departure. Last year we contributed approx. 13.5% of the total contributions.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/european-union-eu-budget-share-of-contributions/

The rest of the EU sells about £70 billion more to us in goods and services than we sell to them, according to UK data

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

How the Irish   border is resolved is crucial to the Irish. There are very few direct links to Europe. They also take considerably longer than trans shipment through the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 05:44 AM

dunno about you...

it just leaves me very confused. but i always vote labour. i thought kinnock was a prat, who sounded absurd every time he gave a speech.

blair lied to me about wmd's.

jeremy surprised me by getting anyone to vote for him - looks too much like the birdseye veggie burgers target customer.

confused. i'll just go on voting labour.

Subject: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Aug 17 - 05:25 AM

These are dramatically interesting times for UK politics.
Lib Dems and UKIP are currently marginalised, but the EU debate could see them break through again any time.

The Tories have a knife edge majority and that only by relying on DUP.
They are split over Brexit, and May's leadership hangs by a thread.

Labour are also split over brexit, and their left/right split has just widened over their Scottish leadership.

So much has happened over the last year! Where will it take us next?