UK opposition leader Corbyn: "difficult" talks needed with Saudis after London attack

[baboon]

17 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Jeremy Corbyn, a man who makes Vidkun Quisling look like a freedom fighter.

 

Anyone supporting his views on security should be looked upon with contempt.

...like having more police on the streets. Listen instead to the party of law and order who got rid of 20000 officers while simultaneously kneecapping the armed forces.

 

[Flustered]

7 minutes ago, baboon said:

...like having more police on the streets. Listen instead to the party of law and order who got rid of 20000 officers while simultaneously kneecapping the armed forces.

 

Your knowledge of law and order as well as the Armed Forces as it is with most liberal lefties is flawed beyond belief.

 

More police on the streets would not have stopped any of these attacks....

 

In which way have our Armed Forces been "kneecapped"?  Cut backs does not equate to knee capping.

 

It was Blair that sent the military into Iraq and Afghanistan unprepared and with the wrong equipment.

 

Nothing more than Corbyn sound bites.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Flustered

[baboon]

2 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Your knowledge of law and order as well as the Armed Forces as it is with most liberal lefties is flawed beyond belief.

 

More police on the streets would not have stopped any of these attacks....

 

In which way have our Armed Forces been "kneecapped"?  Cut backs does not equate to knee capping.

 

It was Blair that sent the military into Iraq and Afghanistan unprepared and with the wrong equipment.

 

Nothing more than Corbyn sound bites.

"More police on the streets would not have stopped any of these attacks...."

 

You have no possible way of knowing that. But leaving terrorism to the side, I take it you are against the notion of more police on the streets? That you think the party of law and order cutting out 20,000 officers is a good thing? That sweeping cuts to the armed forces is a good thing?

[Flustered]

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

"More police on the streets would not have stopped any of these attacks...."

 

You have no possible way of knowing that. But leaving terrorism to the side, I take it you are against the notion of more police on the streets? That you think the party of law and order cutting out 20,000 officers is a good thing? That sweeping cuts to the armed forces is a good thing?

Why not put words in my mouth? that is the normal Liberal Leftie approach.

 

More police on the streets would not stop these attacks. More police on the streets is a very good move but who pays for them? If we cut back on Foreign Aid, that would work and I am in agreement on that approach  or perhaps we can use the Diane Abbott formula for police costs.

 

Now in as few words as possible, explain the "sweeping cuts" to the military. And be my guest and go through the budgeted costs.

[baboon]

8 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Why not put words in my mouth? that is the normal Liberal Leftie approach.

 

More police on the streets would not stop these attacks. More police on the streets is a very good move but who pays for them? If we cut back on Foreign Aid, that would work and I am in agreement on that approach  or perhaps we can use the Diane Abbott formula for police costs.

 

Now in as few words as possible, explain the "sweeping cuts" to the military. And be my guest and go through the budgeted costs.

Look for them yourself. I'm not your research butler. Or are you saying the cuts didn't happen?

So more police on the streets is a good idea but you will continue to support the party of law and order who got rid of 20,000 of them. As for funding them, isn't it funny how money is no object when the banks want it from us?

 

You still have no way of knowing that more police on the streets would have prevented the attacks.

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by baboon

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, Flustered said:

 

More police on the streets would not stop these attacks. More police on the streets is a very good move but who pays for them? If we cut back on Foreign Aid, that would work and I am in agreement on that approach  or perhaps we can use the Diane Abbott formula for police costs.

 

 

If, as you say, more police on the streets would not have stopped these attacks, why then do you go on to say that more police on the streets would be a 'very good move' if they would be as ineffective as you insist?

[Flustered]

Just now, baboon said:

Look for them yourself. I'm not your research butler. Or are you saying the cuts didn't happen?

So more police on the streets is a good idea but you will continue to support the party of law and order who got rid of 20,000 of them. As for funding them, isn't it funny how money is no object when the banks want it from us?

 

Trying to explain anything to you is a waste of time as by your own admission you will not do the research.

 

All you and other Lib lefties do is repeat parrot fashion the Corbyn sound bites.

[Flustered]

Just now, RuamRudy said:

 

If, as you say, more police on the streets would not have stopped these attacks, why then do you go on to say that more police on the streets would be a 'very good move' if they would be as ineffective as you insist?

Rudy, you can do better than that.

 

I will take this slowly.

 

More police on the streets will not stop these Islamic terrorist attacks, that is a fact.

 

More police on the streets will cut down on crime, vandalism and loutish behaviour.....A very good thing.

[baboon]

1 minute ago, Flustered said:

Trying to explain anything to you is a waste of time as by your own admission you will not do the research.

 

All you and other Lib lefties do is repeat parrot fashion the Corbyn sound bites.

No, I said I would not do your research for you. Are you saying there weren't cuts to the armed forces?

 

Your second sentence is too risible to concern myself with.

[Flustered]

5 minutes ago, baboon said:

No, I said I would not do your research for you. Are you saying there weren't cuts to the armed forces?

 

Your second sentence is too risible to concern myself with.

Military spending goes up and down as the demand takes it. Having spent many years in the military I feel qualified to talk on the matter. This is an entirely different subject to the thread which you have neatly (as is the Lib Lefty way)  diverted from.

 

Be my guest and open a new thread on UK military spending and I will happily spend hours taking you through military spending chapter and verse but keep this thread to the subject in question.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Flustered said:

Rudy, you can do better than that.

 

 

I first need the material...

 

1 minute ago, Flustered said:

More police on the streets will not stop these Islamic terrorist attacks, that is a fact.

 

More police on the streets will cut down on crime, vandalism and loutish behaviour.....A very good thing.

This thread is specifically about the London terror attacks. As my good friend Morch likes to say, stop deflecting.

 

However I have seen interviews with several experienced and senior police officers over the past few days who claim that, contrary to your assertion, police cuts are directly impacting these recent terror attacks.

 

There are a few interviews you can find on YouTube or Twitter where they outline their concerns - here is an article entitled I'm a seving firearms officer and the Government is wrong to claim police cuts have nothing to do with recent attacks

 

So I need to ask the question - who is wrong, you or them?

[baboon]

3 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Military spending goes up and down as the demand takes it. Having spent many years in the military I feel qualified to talk on the matter. This is an entirely different subject to the thread which you have neatly (as is the Lib Lefty way)  diverted from.

 

Be my guest and open a new thread on UK military spending and I will happily spend hours taking you through military spending chapter and verse but keep this thread to the subject in question.

So another one you won't answer.

[nausea]

Have to agree with Corbyn on this one, "the elephant in the room" as that young Moslem woman put it on BBC's Question Time.

[Bluespunk]

7 hours ago, champers said:

So how was the conflict in Northern Ireland resolved? It was jaw jaw, not war war. If we stopped selling weapons to the Saudis, that would be a decent start.

The IRA and the British  Establishment realised neither side could win and entered into peace talks initiated by Gerry Adams and John Hume is how peace came about in Northern Ireland.

[dabhand]

5 hours ago, helpisgood said:

Just googled it.  I have so far only just read the Jerusalem Post's report:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Uproar-over-Corbyn-visit-to-grave-of-Palestinian-terrorist-from-Munich-attack-494217

 

That paper states that Corbin "...reportedly traveled to Tunisia in October 2014 to visit the grave of Atef Bseiso, the former head of intelligence for the Palestine Liberation Organization and direct accomplice involved in the Munich terrorist attack."

 

Of course, we have to consider that the Post may, or likely, be biased.  Also, the Post was careful to use the modifier "reportedly."  No reliable sources or records?  Since it supposed to have happened in only back in 2014 and in Tunisia, surely there must be records of Corbin making such an international trip. 

 

I really don't know for sure if this is true or not.  This is the first time I have heard of this.  However, I am willing to guess that the Israelis would very much more prefer May as PM.  So, I'd like to see more before I believe it. 

 

 

Maybe you might consider this link from The Independent to be more acceptable.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-latest-general-election-staying-on-ian-lavery-palestinian-fighter-wreath-conservative-a7761016.html

 

Mr Corbyn travelled to Tunisia in October 2014, less than a year before becoming Labour leader, and attended a ceremony where wreaths were laid. Writing in the Morning Star shortly afterwards, he said he had laid a wreath for those killed by an Israeli air raid on the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and on the graves of people "killed by Mossad agents in Paris".

 

[Nigel Garvie]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Of course no need to address the sponsors of Shi'ite terrorism. Nope, their politically correct terrorists. And might even be socialists!

 

Usual Labor and Corbyn hypocrisy.

I'm cautious of joining this conversation, but a couple of points do need to be made for the sake of accuracy. When was the last time that you read about a Shia suicide bomber? It is the Sunni Wahhabi ideology that is behind the overwhelming majority of Islamist terrorism. There is not a single country in the Middle East that can be described as having a Socialist government. Iran - the leading <deleted> power - actually has elections, (although their religious leaders are totally wacko). They send their own troops to Syria and Iraq to fight ISIS, the same foul people we are fighting. That is not terrorism unless the western powers are terrorists as well (We usually get others to do our dirty work for us). 

BTW it's the Labour Party, I can overlook Americans spelling colour incorrectly, but please!

[dabhand]

Another interesting snippet from The Independent concerning John McDonnell and the claim that he had called for MI5 to be disbanded.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/john-mcdonnell-insists-he-did-not-read-leaflet-he-signed-calling-for-mi5-to-be-disbanded-a6740821.html

 

The controversy emerged after it was revealed that Mr McDonnell's name had been included as a signatory on a list of “demands” compiled by a group called the Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory ahead of the last General Election.

The final paragraph of the 12-point document stated that a future Labour Government should “Disband MI5 and special police squads, disarm the police.” The letter was dug up by The Sun newspaper yesterday, and used to highlight the supposed weak national security credentials of Jeremy Corbyn’s team following the Paris attacks.

 

He, of course, denied signing up to it or even being aware of the contents, but...........

 

But a photograph later emerged of Mr McDonnell smiling and posing with what appeared to be the document. A spokesperson for Mr McDonnell then said he was unaware of the exact nature of the “demands” in the letter.

 

Yes, we believe you John........

[dick dasterdly]

More police on the street would not have stopped these attacks, and the same applies to increasing military expenditure.

 

I'm very impressed that armed police turned up in 8 minutes!  But of course it was a central London location.

 

Can we get back on topic about how Corbyn is right in directing attention on the Saudis - something that has been ignored by all other politicians (for obvious reasons) for way too long?

[champers]

So, we are in the last week of an election campaign and the press are smearing prominent Labour figures. Surprise, surprise.

Of course, all Tories are paragons of virtue. You may need to look outside the mainstream press to read about their misdemeanours.

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I've been out of the UK for too long and so don't know enough to hold an opinion on (most) politicians.

 

Nonetheless, I gather the vast majority of Labour supporters support brexit - and also that he wasn't overly enthusiastic about the EU previously?

 

So why did he decide to support remain - other than for political reasons that benefit him personally?

 

Back on topic - I agree with him that its time to address the Saudi 'problem'.

If the "vast majority of Labour supporters support Brexit" that would mean that at least a majority of Conservative voters oppose it.  Really?

[dexterm]

How about some honesty and integrity rather than platitudes from May.

 

There's an excellent article in the Independent on the OP subject...well worth a read.

 

"May needs to talk to us about the “difficult conversations” she must have with the Saudis and their Gulf allies, not to Muslim British citizens. But she is too gutless, too cowardly, to deal with the Gulf Arab autocrats to whom she sells weapons (albeit not on the scale of Donald Trump, whose principal Arabian dictator, the head-chopper-in-chief, is so worthy of our mourning that May’s predecessor lowered the British flag to half-mast on his death). 

 

Yes, to confront this Salafist-Wahhabi state and Gulf citizens’ financial contributions to Isis would be a "difficult conversation" indeed for Theresa May."

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/london-bridge-terror-attack-theresa-may-terrorism-speech-downing-street-what-she-refused-to-tell-you-a7773011.html

[dexterm]

2 hours ago, champers said:

So, we are in the last week of an election campaign and the press are smearing prominent Labour figures. Surprise, surprise.

Of course, all Tories are paragons of virtue. You may need to look outside the mainstream press to read about their misdemeanours.

It goes deeper than simply the press. Investigate in which foreign power's interest it is to besmirch Corbyn, because of the consequences were he to become PM.

[bert bloggs]

16 minutes ago, dexterm said:

It goes deeper than simply the press. Investigate in which foreign power's interest it is to besmirch Corbyn, because of the consequences were he to become PM.

There is no need to besmirch Corbyn , he has done a grand job of doing it himself , 

as far as i am concerned he may think differently to Blair ,but he came out from under the same rock . and no i am not standing up for the Tories ,

[Khun Han]

4 hours ago, dabhand said:

Another interesting snippet from The Independent concerning John McDonnell and the claim that he had called for MI5 to be disbanded.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/john-mcdonnell-insists-he-did-not-read-leaflet-he-signed-calling-for-mi5-to-be-disbanded-a6740821.html

 

The controversy emerged after it was revealed that Mr McDonnell's name had been included as a signatory on a list of “demands” compiled by a group called the Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory ahead of the last General Election.

The final paragraph of the 12-point document stated that a future Labour Government should “Disband MI5 and special police squads, disarm the police.” The letter was dug up by The Sun newspaper yesterday, and used to highlight the supposed weak national security credentials of Jeremy Corbyn’s team following the Paris attacks.

 

He, of course, denied signing up to it or even being aware of the contents, but...........

 

But a photograph later emerged of Mr McDonnell smiling and posing with what appeared to be the document. A spokesperson for Mr McDonnell then said he was unaware of the exact nature of the “demands” in the letter.

 

Yes, we believe you John........

 

Oh dear. And McDonnell is the main power broker in the Lab party.

[Nigel Garvie]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

How about some honesty and integrity rather than platitudes from May.

 

There's an excellent article in the Independent on the OP subject...well worth a read.

 

"May needs to talk to us about the “difficult conversations” she must have with the Saudis and their Gulf allies, not to Muslim British citizens. But she is too gutless, too cowardly, to deal with the Gulf Arab autocrats to whom she sells weapons (albeit not on the scale of Donald Trump, whose principal Arabian dictator, the head-chopper-in-chief, is so worthy of our mourning that May’s predecessor lowered the British flag to half-mast on his death). 

 

Yes, to confront this Salafist-Wahhabi state and Gulf citizens’ financial contributions to Isis would be a "difficult conversation" indeed for Theresa May."

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/london-bridge-terror-attack-theresa-may-terrorism-speech-downing-street-what-she-refused-to-tell-you-a7773011.html

Yes everything Robert Fisk writes is worth reading, his background knowledge of the history of the Middle East is vast. Here he hits the nail on the head again, May is loosing it big time, and despite the strongest efforts of the Tory gutter press, the ordinary UK voters can't help noticing.  The problem is, that it is the religious leaders of Saudi that need to be taken out, the Princes are only interested in power, money, and abusing their Phillipino maids, while they keep their own women dressed up in bin bags.

 

On the other point, despite the fears of the loony right in this forum, Labour is not coming into power. TM may be denied her majority, but the SNP will take Scotland, so no free reign for MacDonnell or anyone else.