General Election 2017

[darrenm]

Just now, markavfc40 said:

Just seen on ITV news they have got hold of a speech he is making tomorrow where he does will state that you can't make cuts at A and E and to the Police, cuts which he said he will reverse, and will bring up our foreign policy in relation to these attacks. They said whilst many will agree with him they may question the timing given the dead in Manchester haven't yet been buried. I can imagine he will be ripped to pieces by the right wing rags who will run big with him politicising the Manchester attack.

There's also another potentially more powerful angle. Fully politicise it but make no apologies for doing so because you're so angry about it and are laying the blame directly at the door of the Tories. Bit dog whistley but it's only what most of us are feeling.

[Dodgyknees]

3 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Just seen on ITV news they have got hold of a speech he is making tomorrow where he does will state that you can't make cuts at A and E and to the Police, cuts which he said he will reverse, and will bring up our foreign policy in relation to these attacks. They said whilst many will agree with him they may question the timing given the dead in Manchester haven't yet been buried. I can imagine he will be ripped to pieces by the right wing rags who will run big with him politicising the Manchester attack.

And yet the first thing the Scum did after the attack was politicise it. I'd rather lose a testicle than write for the sun.

 

[markavfc40]

Quote

 

Corbyn to warn UK foreign policy raises terror threat at home after Manchester attack

Jeremy Corbyn will link Britain's involvement in military interventions overseas and terrorism at home as he resumes election campaigning after the Manchester bomb attack.

The Labour leader will make a veiled criticism of Conservative-led administrations in a speech in London on Friday, four days after the deadly suicide blast.

He will say while "no government can prevent every terrorist attack" all administrations had the "responsibility" to minimise the risk of terror by ensuring their foreign policy does not increase the threat to the UK.

Mr Corbyn's speech will come a day after Ukip said Prime Minister Theresa May must share "responsibility" for the attack at Manchester Arena in which 22 people died.

Mr Corbyn, who opposed Britain's military involvement in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as air strikes against terrorist targets in Syria, will pledge to take a new approach towards countries which act as a seedbed for extremist violence.

And he will insist it is time to recognise the West's "war on terror" is not working.

"Many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services, have pointed to the connections between wars our government has supported or fought in other countries and terrorism here at home," Mr Corbyn will say.

"That assessment in no way reduces the guilt of those who attack our children. Those terrorists will forever be reviled and held to account for their actions.

"But an informed understanding of the causes of terrorism is an essential part of an effective response that will protect the security of our people that fights rather than fuels terrorism.

"We must be brave enough to admit the 'war on terror' is simply not working. We need a smarter way to reduce the threat from countries that nurture terrorists and generate terrorism."

Mr Corbyn will also promise a Labour government will provide the funding that security agencies and emergency services need.

He will make direct reference to the Manchester attack, saying the "solidarity, humanity and compassion" shown on the streets of the city in the aftermath of the bombing would be the values which guide his government in office.

All the major parties will resume national campaigning on Friday for the June 8 election on Friday.

Prime Minister Theresa May will not be involved as she is in Italy for a summit of the G7 group of industrialised nations.

 

Corbyn Warns UK Foreign Policy Raises Terror Threat at Home

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by markavfc40

[Dodgyknees]

This is where the media will pick bits out as quotes with no context. The sad thing is seeing idiots fall for it.

[peterms]

2 hours ago, villakram said:

With May being home secretary for the previous 6 yrs prior to being PM, what is the opinion on here as to her culpability for this attack etc.? Is this fair game? I ask as it now appears that all sorts of red flags were raised about this guy, but perhaps certain Libyan escapades may have muddied the waters.

It's a mixed picture.  May cut back police resources, which will certainty have impeded their ability to resource counter-terrrorism measures.  Of course there's no guarantee they would have used the resources wisely, but let's assume so.

The bigger fault is down to Blair.  He was specifically told by the security services before the Iraq invasion that his warmongering would result in domestic terrorism which would cost the lives of British citizens.

So it has proved.

There is a direct line between these wholly avoidable deaths, and the decisions of the British state over several decades to cuddle up to the Wahabbi state of Saudi Arabia, supply and train their murderous armed forces, and destabilise other ME states for some perceived monetary gain for a handful of speculators and arms dealers.

Does this constitute treason?  Beinv complicit in the deaths of our people, for the profit of your chums?  I'd like to think so.

[chrisp65]

You'd like to think that it's a statement of the obvious that a perpetual value engineered dabble in bombing various bits of the middle east and north africa without any depth of understanding of the consequences is not going to end well.

Having said that, you can't deny there's a lot of profit in selling bombs to mentalist murderous regimes.

So yeah, swings and roundabouts.

 

[Dodgyknees]

Torygraph quick offthe mark

Headline:

'Jeremy Corbyn suggests Britain's wars abroad to blame for Manchester suicide bombing'

[chrisp65]

 

Tories taking us back to the 1970's

[darrenm]

3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

 

Tories taking us back to the 1970's

Shocking. You don't need police anyway, they're overrated. 

Edit: misread

Edited May 25, 2017 by darrenm

[HanoiVillan]

The Guardian really have outdone themselves with this picture from the UKIP manifesto launch:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/25/ukip-launches-manifesto-with-pledge-to-act-against-islamic-terrorism-manchester-paul-nuttall#img-1

[peterms]

29 minutes ago, DK82 said:

Torygraph quick offthe mark

Headline:

'Jeremy Corbyn suggests Britain's wars abroad to blame for Manchester suicide bombing'

Well, he can of course quote the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or whatever the spooks call themselves, who advised Blair of exactly this a decade ago.  And it has come to pass.  And several families are now to spend the rest of their lives grieving for their murdered children.  And it was all, all, avoidable.

[villakram]

1 hour ago, peterms said:

It's a mixed picture.  May cut back police resources, which will certainty have impeded their ability to resource counter-terrrorism measures.  Of course there's no guarantee they would have used the resources wisely, but let's assume so.

The bigger fault is down to Blair.  He was specifically told by the security services before the Iraq invasion that his warmongering would result in domestic terrorism which would cost the lives of British citizens.

So it has proved.

There is a direct line between these wholly avoidable deaths, and the decisions of the British state over several decades to cuddle up to the Wahabbi state of Saudi Arabia, supply and train their murderous armed forces, and destabilise other ME states for some perceived monetary gain for a handful of speculators and arms dealers.

Does this constitute treason?  Beinv complicit in the deaths of our people, for the profit of your chums?  I'd like to think so.

I think there's a certain West Ham supporter who's getting off awfully lightly here, given the explicit Libya angle.

[tom_avfc]

1 hour ago, darrenm said:

There's also another potentially more powerful angle. Fully politicise it but make no apologies for doing so because you're so angry about it and are laying the blame directly at the door of the Tories. Bit dog whistley but it's only what most of us are feeling.

Is this what most of us are feeling?  It might just be me but I'm not laying the blame directly at the door of the Tories but rather at the tosser who blew himself and innocent kids up. With all the talk earlier on about the government politicising the attack id have thought that this kind of post is fairly hypocritical. An attack of this nature could happen anywhere and at any time. It's happened in many other countries and I wouldn't want our foreign policy to be decided based on such attacks. 

Corbyn's statement is also nice in that it states "we need a smarter way to reduce the threat" without actuallly giving any kind of smarter way. Provide an alternative and give people something to vote for. I genuinely feel about as out of touch with any politician as I ever have to the extent where I'm not sure I can even be bothered to go and spoil my vote.

[darrenm]

2 minutes ago, tom_avfc said:

Is this what most of us are feeling?  It might just be me but I'm not laying the blame directly at the door of the Tories but rather at the tosser who blew himself and innocent kids up. With all the talk earlier on about the government politicising the attack id have thought that this kind of post is fairly hypocritical. An attack of this nature could happen anywhere and at any time. It's happened in many other countries and I wouldn't want our foreign policy to be decided based on such attacks. 

Corbyn's statement is also nice in that it states "we need a smarter way to reduce the threat" without actuallly giving any kind of smarter way. Provide an alternative and give people something to vote for. I genuinely feel about as out of touch with any politician as I ever have to the extent where I'm not sure I can even be bothered to go and spoil my vote.

Poor wording from me. I meant most of us are feeling very angry about it. Not specifically about blaming the Tories.

[Rodders]

It would be very hard to ignore the events for any politician really. You ignore it, and end up not being sensitive to the reality of events, or you talk about it and get accused of politicisation. Odd really. Don't totally understand the latter - I mean aside from the immediate hours and days after the event. Unfortunately we do have an election in two weeks and the questions and debate we have here, goes on everywhere else - what do we do about it and how do we stop it? I think those are legitimate questions and regardless of whether JC is right or not I would find it bizarre for him to be accused of trying to make capital of it. It's not really about that is it? It's about responding to the situation and going - here's what I'd do. In much the same way the others will. 

I think incumbent leaders always "benefit" if you can call it that, in that they immediately are seen being responsible for dealing with it, but given the political consequences of Austerity in other areas, and the anger it has caused, having these comments from a year or two back, are fair game really. People in the field, saying "help! we don't have enough resources", and being told to get on with it -that is a position that comes with risk if an event such as this week happens .

 There is only one person to blame for the attacks, that cowardly shit who did it, but it should be ok to challenge the appropriateness of pursuing a certain agenda, in the face of ignoring claims from experts in the field, that has made the situation a little bit more challenging. 

Personally, I think lumping it all on foreign policy is a bit of a stretch, though it certainly is a significant element that has contributed to events in the past decade or so. 

Edited May 26, 2017 by Rodders

[jon_c]

It feels like I'm watching the two main party leaders trying their best to make sure they're not winning the election.

Corbyn may not be wrong about the interventions of the army motivating acts of terrorism, but he must know how this will get attacked politically during the election. He's just handing his detractors an easy narrative to turn against him, at a time when the people are particularly prickly about terrorism. 

And as for May, it's like her entire Manifesto has been designed to lose votes. The dementia tax? Targeting you're core vote, with something they'll hate. 

Does anyone actually want to win? Or are they just looking at impending Brexit negotiations and thinking, "No Thanks."

[darrenm]

3 minutes ago, jon_c said:

It feels like I'm watching the two main party leaders trying their best to make sure they're not winning the election.

Corbyn may not be wrong about the interventions of the army motivating acts of terrorism, but he must know how this will get attacked politically during the election. He's just handing his detractors an easy narrative to turn against him, at a time when the people are particularly prickly about terrorism. 

And as for May, it's like her entire Manifesto has been designed to lose votes. The dementia tax? Targeting you're core vote, with something they'll hate. 

Does anyone actually want to win? Or are they just looking at impending Brexit negotiations and thinking, "No Thanks."

Yes they all desperately want to win. As said above, Corbyn has to tell people his plan for responding. How couldn't he do that? If he doesn't say anything he 'has no plan'.

[Davkaus]

Got kids? I probably wouldn't vote Tory.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/school-spending-fall-7-per-cent-conservatives-win-election-institute/

 

Quote

 

School spending to fall by 7 per cent if Conservatives win election, Institute for Fiscal Studies says

26 MAY 2017 • 12:01AM

School spending per pupil looks set to fall by 7 per cent despite a Conservative pledge to increase the education budget if the party wins the general election.

However spending would increase if either Labour or the Liberal Democrats win power, according to the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In a new paper examining each of the main political parties proposals for education spending, the IFS calculated school budgets in England could face a real-terms cut of almost 3 per cent by 2021/22 if the Tories win the election.

This rises to a 7 per cent reduction by 2021/22 once the cuts schools have faced over the past two years are taken into account.

Labour's plans would leave per pupil spending 6 per cent higher in real terms over the same five year period - 2017/18 to 2021/22.

The IFS – which publishes a wide appraisal of all the manifestos today - the Liberal Democrats' plans would see per pupil spending protected in real terms at the 2017/18 level.

It comes amid continued concerns from school leaders, teachers and parents about a growing squeeze on school budgets.

The Conservative manifesto said: “We will increase the overall schools budget by £4 billion by 2022, representing more than a real terms increase for every year of the parliament.”

Labour has pledged to reverse real-terms cuts since 2015, and protect per pupil spending in real terms over the next parliament.

This would mean a 6 per cent increase in per pupil spending over the next five years, and leave per pupil spending 1.6 per cent higher in 2021/22 than in 2015/16.

The Liberal Democrats have set out a five-year package that includes protecting per pupil funding in real terms.

Under this commitment, spending per pupil would be frozen in real terms over the next parliament, the IFS says.

IFS associate director Luke Sibieta said: "The commitments made by each of the main parties would imply quite different paths for school spending in the next parliament.

"Labour would increase spending per pupil by around 6 per cent after inflation over the course of the parliament, taking it to just above its previous historic high in 2015.

"Proposals from the Conservatives would lead to a near 3 per cent real terms fall in spending per pupil over the parliament, taking it back to its 2010 level."

 

[Dodgyknees]

16 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Got kids? I probably wouldn't vote Tory.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/school-spending-fall-7-per-cent-conservatives-win-election-institute/

 

 

Wow, May really is strong.

(On kids, the disabled, old, poor, young)

But she is strong!

[Dodgyknees]

Quote

To conclude, a reminder of the original question: did Iraq heighten the threat from terrorism and bolster al-Qaeda? I'm sorry to have to inform John Rentoul that this isn't one of those questions to which the answer is no.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/mehdi-hasan/2011/09/iraq-qaeda-verdict-terrorism

 

- Put it in here because the media are rounding on Corbyn already. It could also go into the Manchester thread.