2017 General Election thread

[Ricky Otto]

The fact is Corbyn invited Gerry Adams and his cronies into the House of Commons not long after the Brighton bomb of 1984 which had killed 5 people including an MP. At the time Corbyn and the IRA were calling for troops out of Ireland and were certainly not talking about peace.

What if some back bench rebel invited members of ISIS to do the same next month. Especially if they were not just the voice of the terror but also raised funds for them and ordered the Manchester attack. In 1984 that's exactly what Adams was doing for the IRA......Corbyn thought he would win back then and was never talking peace......Fact.

For those of you who think Terror cannot be defeated, you should remember the Brighton bombing was the beginning of the end for the IRA. Thatcher called in the SAS and said right lads time stop these murdering scum anyway you see fit and the British Government will back you 100%.....That is the only reason the IRA ever reached out for a surrender disguised as peace talks and boy have JC and his chums lied their a.... of ever since.

Are you really suggesting this is feasible with ISIS IS etc? This is a different league to the IRA and the size of the task mammoth. We wouldn't even make a dent and it would just cause more bloodshed.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I vowed never to reply to your posts again but you're just getting on my nerves.
The army being deployed has nothing to do with police numbers. It is operation Temperer which has been put in place due to intel of imminent terrorist attacks. You will notice that the UK security level threat is now at Critical.
The decision to go to this level comes from the highest security staff level and if anyone seriously thinks this is some kind of election stunt by the tory party or due to police cuts then you are seriously deluded. Do you honestly think the head of M15 would agree to raise to the highest threat level just to help May win the election?
You seriously don't know what you're taking about.

Not replying to my posts suits me just fine so feel free to revert to that.

In May 2015 Home Secretary Theresa May told the Police Federation that they were ‘scaremongering’ and ‘crying wolf’ over their warnings over her budget cuts to the police force.

In November 2015 Home Secretary Theresa May was told by senior police officers that her cuts could ‘reduce significantly the UK’s ability to respond to a Paris-style attack’.

Over 7 years she has cut 19,000 officers.

Yesterday the chairman of the Police Federation when discussing the use of the army on our streets said ‘there is no ignoring the fact that we simply do not have the resources to manage an event like this on our own’.

So feel free to work on the assumption that the police force don’t know what they are talking about – Theresa May clearly has that opinion.

 

[dloman]

Not replying to my posts suits me just fine so feel free to revert to that.

In May 2015 Home Secretary Theresa May told the Police Federation that they were ‘scaremongering’ and ‘crying wolf’ over their warnings over her budget cuts to the police force.

In November 2015 Home Secretary Theresa May was told by senior police officers that her cuts could ‘reduce significantly the UK’s ability to respond to a Paris-style attack’.

Over 7 years she has cut 19,000 officers.

Yesterday the chairman of the Police Federation when discussing the use of the army on our streets said ‘there is no ignoring the fact that we simply do not have the resources to manage an event like this on our own’.

So feel free to work on the assumption that the police force don’t know what they are talking about – Theresa May clearly has that opinion.

Actually Police numbers are no different to what they were under Blair, in fact the budget for the Police has significantly risen over the past seven years and will continue to do so.

 

[haveaguiness]

Actually Police numbers are no different to what they were under Blair, in fact the budget for the Police has significantly risen over the past seven years and will continue to do so.

Not sure where you got those figures from but the actual figures show that police numbers were on the rise until 2010 and have been cut (along with spending) every year since: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34899060

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Not sure where you got those figures from but the actual figures show that police numbers were on the rise until 2010 and have been cut (along with spending) every year since: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34899060

Certainly, I saw John Prescott on the Daily Politics yesterday confirming,what I thought was widely known, that police numbers have been cut since the Blair/Brown goverments.

 

[Bielzibubz]

Just to balance up the unending Guardian links

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...remy-Corbyn-voted-against-13-terror-laws.html

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40053427

Here's one from the BBC that actually covers current election news.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Actually Police numbers are no different to what they were under Blair, in fact the budget for the Police has significantly risen over the past seven years and will continue to do so.

have you got a link for that info? Everywhere else is reporting a reduction of 19,000 over the last seven years

 

[Bielzibubz]

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40053427

Here's one from the BBC that actually covers current election news.

So everything in the Telegraph link. Is ******** is it Barna? Either he did or he didn't, one of the two. And it's no good saying that was two years ago. Political expediency isn't an excuse.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Priorities:
Corbyn asked about policing cuts in PMQs in 2015. The answer was "Put on a proper suit, do up your tie & sing the national anthem".

Cameron really thought than your look was more important in politics than your policy. Where is he now?

 

[Bielzibubz]

So I'll ask again seeing as you blatantly ignored/avoided the question. In your opinion all the stuff in The Telegraph link I posted is untrue and or lies is it?

And just to put you right on what's relevant or not regarding this election. The link I posted to a two year old article goes right to the very heart of whether you think JC is fit to lead this country and a persons past whether good, or in this case bad, say's a hell of a lot about a person.

A cursory 30 minutes spent doing some independent non mainstream media research into the man and his past tells me all I need to know thank you.

 

[Bielzibubz]

Priorities:
Corbyn asked about policing cuts in PMQs in 2015. The answer was "Put on a proper suit, do up your tie & sing the national anthem".

Cameron really thought than your look was more important in politics than your policy. Where is he now?

Christ you're clutching at straws now Barna. It wasn't a sign of priorities. It was a childish insult made by a supposed adult and more of an indication of the kind of man Camerscum is rather than anything else.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Christ you're clutching at straws now Barna. It wasn't a sign of priorities. It was a childish insult made by a supposed adult and more of an indication of the kind of man Camerscum is rather than anything else.

agreed, but at PMQ's he prioritised an attempt to belittle the leader of the opposition over explaining his policy. I think that is the kind of attitude that is registering with voters and they are starting to move away from the party who don't want to engage with the public or other politicians in a meaningful way.

I've never been to Barcelona but I would like to!

 

[haveaguiness]

So I'll ask again seeing as you blatantly ignored/avoided the question. In your opinion all the stuff in The Telegraph link I posted is untrue and or lies is it?

And just to put you right on what's relevant or not regarding this election. The link I posted to a two year old article goes right to the very heart of whether you think JC is fit to lead this country and a persons past whether good, or in this case bad, say's a hell of a lot about a person.

A cursory 30 minutes spent doing some independent non mainstream media research into the man and his past tells me all I need to know thank you.

When you actually look at all the votes on terrorism between 2001 - 2010 there are plenty that he actually voted AYE on (conveniently missed out in that article) - https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1053

In the same way, if you look at May's record, there are plenty she voted NO on (many the same as Corbyn) - https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10426/theresa_may/maidenhead/divisions?policy=1053

A lot of these votes were also very close, which suggests that a lot of the terms being proposed were controversial.

 

[londonblue]

agreed, but at PMQ's he prioritised an attempt to belittle the leader of the opposition over explaining his policy. I think that is the kind of attitude that is registering with voters and they are starting to move away from the party who don't want to engage with the public or other politicians in a meaningful way.

I've never been to Barcelona but I would like to!

I'm not quite sure what point you're making here. A person that is no-longer PM insulted a someone who never will be. But more to the point you seem to be making the point that Camerscum's judgement is poor. We all know that, and it's irrelevant to this GE.

What is relevant is that Corduroy's judgement is equally poor, if not worse.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I'm not quite sure what point you're making here. A person that is no-longer PM insulted a someone who never will be. But more to the point you seem to be making the point that Camerscum's judgement is poor. We all know that, and it's irrelevant to this GE.

What is relevant is that Corduroy's judgement is equally poor, if not worse.

the point is that Corbyn pointed out in Parliament that the police cuts Theresa May was putting through was dangerous, Cameron reacted in a puerile manner and didn't want to discuss it. Here in 2017 Theresa May's 19,000 police cuts are still in place and now that she is head of the Conservative Party she does have the guts to debate that or any other policy with Corbyn either.

So you think Corbyn's judgement on police cuts was as poor if not worse than those reducing the force by 19,000 officers? Or do you think he called that one right?

 

[londonblue]

the point is that Corbyn pointed out in Parliament that the police cuts Theresa May was putting through was dangerous, Cameron reacted in a puerile manner and didn't want to discuss it. Here in 2017 Theresa May's 19,000 police cuts are still in place and now that she is head of the Conservative Party she does have the guts to debate that or any other policy with Corbyn either.

So you think Corbyn's judgement on police cuts was as poor if not worse than those reducing the force by 19,000 officers? Or do you think he called that one right?

I didn't say Corduroy's judgement on police cuts was poor. I was talking in general terms.

As it happens I don't believe his reason for wanting more police had anything to do with terrorism. I believe it was more to do with a) general crime, and b) keeping people employed. I just think he got lucky. As I stated on another thread, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I didn't say Corduroy's judgement on police cuts was poor. I was talking in general terms.

As it happens I don't believe his reason for wanting more police had anything to do with terrorism. I believe it was more to do with a) general crime, and b) keeping people employed. I just think he got lucky. As I stated on another thread, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Ok, so you agree that he is right to think that reducing the police numbers by 19,000 is a bad move but you assume that it is because he wants lower general crime.

To be honest it's probably more efficient to just agree that he is right on this and May is wrong. To try to argue that he is right, but for some assumed still right, but less topical reason, just seems a bit unwilling to embrace the facts.


Your assumption is also wrong because in his complaint to Cameron on reduced police budgets in November 2015 he spoke of the growing terror threat - so he actually had the right policy for the 'right' reason and Cameron / May had the wrong policy for whatever reason.

 

[superblue24]

I'm not quite sure what point you're making here. A person that is no-longer PM insulted a someone who never will be. But more to the point you seem to be making the point that Camerscum's judgement is poor. We all know that, and it's irrelevant to this GE.

What is relevant is that Corduroy's judgement is equally poor, if not worse.

Wouldn't be too sure on that one....I think we might be looking at a shock victory for Corbyn... The Tories are running a very poor campaign and people out there seem to genuinely believe that Corduroy and Numbers Abbott will be competent. It's worrying the hell out of me!

 

[maninasuitcase]

Wouldn't be too sure on that one....I think we might be looking at a shock victory for Corbyn... The Tories are running a very poor campaign and people out there seem to genuinely believe that Corduroy and Numbers Abbott will be competent. It's worrying the hell out of me!

Mrs May and her team had a big advantage over the other parties. She chose the time of the election and when it was announced. She had the advantage of being able to plan her strategy months in advance, yet she appears to have mis-judged the mood of the people on policies like fox hunting and the dementia tax.

Perhaps many people are thinking if she is so poor at running a campaign that is focused almost entirely on her and her team, then maybe she isn't the right person to lead the country at this important time.