Thursday 3rd December 2015

Post by **refitman** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 7:09 am

Morning all.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 7:38 am

Morning, Refitman, and all.

OGRPPFGTCC has got his war thanks to the ridiculous events of yesterday, and we are now at more risk of a terrorist attack than before.
Not one of his arguments bears scrutiny.

Our forces are already engaged in bombing in Iraq. Our forces are already providing logistical support and military intelligence.
There is no rule that dictates we must support France. There is no evidence that there are 70,000 ground troops.

Cameron is now basking in approval from his "friends" Barack and Francois, oblivious to the fact that they think he's a bit of a dick.
Cameron is now playing at being an international statesman, going to war with the very people he wanted to support 2 years ago.

This issue has brought Labour's divisions to the fore, and the Tories must be rubbing their grubby little hands with glee.
While people are busy being outraged by warmongers or peaceniks or whatever, the Tories can entrench their position and take the piss - and, no doubt, sneak in something shitty while we're all occupied in sniping at each other and not paying attention.

Much of what happened yesterday - with a few notable exceptions - was about political posturing and in-fighting. Shameful stuff.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:07 am

Good morning to sll.

It is International Day of the Disabled.

Not that you would notice, though Debbie Abrahams is hosting an event at Portcullis House. (Oddly I learned of this event through a friend in New Zealand. The main event that is.)

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:12 am

Hilary Benn now favourite to be next leader

: ScreenShot01172.jpg (41.59 KiB) Viewed 11899 times

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:18 am

TobyLatimer wrote:Hilary Benn now favourite to be next leader
ScreenShot01172.jpg

Morning

Is this how shallow politics is?

One speech low on useful content but high in rhetoric is considered to be enough for a political leader? The same happened with the Tories and they were left with The Liar rather than the more impressive Davies (not a massive fan of him but he does seem to have some standards)

Benn can surely not win with the current membership after voting for this stunt and being gushed over by the Tories?

I still cannot believe that some Labour politicians actually take what The Liar says as being the truth!

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:31 am

Hilary learned a lot of how to speak with passion from his father no doubt. At times he comes across so alike he could be a clone not just his son. Strong genes in that family. The hand gestures, the melodramatic pauses, the way he uses emotive phrasing, softly spoken one second raising to a crescendo the next. It was a tour de force of a speech, mesmerising even.

He was still wrong though.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:35 am

Flaws in Home Office security forcing staff to rely on incomplete intelligence

National Audit Office finds that system due to be replaced and used to identify potential terrorists regularly collapses with 16 million people going unchecked (Guardian)

Well, now we're precision-bombing them before they get anywhere near the UK borders it won't matter - so I don't see a problem.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... telligence

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:35 am

Interesting that Hilary made a point of how and why the United Nations came into being.

His father made a much better point in his Iraq vote speech

[youtube]HfXmpJRZPYI[/youtube]

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:37 am

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... y-strategy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It’s Cameron, not Corbyn, who is the terrorist appeaser
Simon Jenkins

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:47 am

Morning

Benn's speech was very tricksy, obviously paced and written to press all the right buttons.
Which, of course, is what a stirring speech should be, designed to cause a rush of blood, and influence the vote. He seemed like an actor acting it. Much to admire, but for what reason ?
I've had no animus for Benn, but it leaves me wondering about his full motives.

As McDonnell pointed out on Radio 4 earlier, it was like Blair's call to war for Iraq.
Good oratory doesn't always lead to the right decisions/outcomes.

I don't know about others, but I hope those of us who are concerned about airstrikes turn out to be wrong.
Because if we/Corbyn/McDonnell/Ed M/most Labour MPs/Snp/some Tories & Norman Lamb are right then there will be a lot more trouble and bloodshed ahead, mostly for innocent people.

People misunderstand karma as meaning some sort of divine punishment.
It isn't, it is about causes and conditions. In Sanskrit it means "action" or "doing".
In the Buddhist tradition, it is the action driven by intention which leads to future consequences.
We will have to wait and see what those consequences are, not all will become apparent quickly.
Some effects some may take years or generations to play out, as history has surely shown.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:49 am

David Camerons plan to scrap the Human Rights Act delayed until 2016.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -2016.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:50 am

As usual I've come late to things, reading last night's posts.

Woodcock has deleted his post - what did he say ?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:53 am

Also have to say Caroline Lucas has been impressive on this.

edited to add: can you hear that coming out between gritted teeth ?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 8:59 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... y-strategy

It’s Cameron, not Corbyn, who is the terrorist appeaser
Simon Jenkins

Blimey, did somebody spike Simon's coffee? Proves he can write decent stuff when he wants to, even if he doesn't usually bother.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:00 am

Another Tory decision from 2010 coming home to roost. What is it with our governments that they cannot get a grip on their IT ? Seems like a lot of their pet ideas are coming unravelled, and I wonder what their plans are. As I see it they will either a)go ahead with dismantling all means to oppose them, or b) decide they really need to take a break because there is nothing left to sell. c) realise they have sacked too many people but being unwilling to admit it allow Labour a term of office in which they can take the blame for all the cockups.

Flaws in Home Office security forcing staff to rely on incomplete intelligence.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... telligence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:06 am

Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:07 am

Oldham by-election today (as I expect you all know).

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:10 am

Wonder if Cameron factored that in when he only allowed a day of debate before the vote ?

'We're bombing Islamists, most of the Labour party and that nasty murderous pacifist communist Corbyn don't want to'
will be a rallying cry for Oldham UKIP & Tory activists today.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:13 am

Hilary Benn: "I share the concerns about possible civilian casualties. But unlike Daesh, we don't act with the intent to harm them"

Isn't that casuistry ?

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:14 am

He was right in his opening remarks though, addressing Cameron directly over the terrorist sympathisers slur.

[youtube]m_dRCzd19Uc[/youtube]

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:18 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Hilary Benn now favourite to be next leader
ScreenShot01172.jpg
I hate to say 'I told you so'...

He is now too closely associated with our latest military adventure to be a wise choice though, isn't he?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:23 am

PorFavor wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Hilary Benn now favourite to be next leader
ScreenShot01172.jpg
I hate to say 'I told you so'...
He is now too closely associated with our latest military adventure to be a wise choice though, isn't he?

Yep.
But the bubble have bought into him now, so expect him to be referenced rather a lot.

McDonnell was good on Today.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:29 am

yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?

As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

I'm not happy with last night's result. I'm not happy with the Labour MPs who voted for it (and there were a few names on there that surprised & shocked me). But I'm also not happy with the growing atmosphere of recrimination and the cries of "deselection" (which remind me so much of Monty Python's "She's a witch" sequence from Holy Grail) every time somebody does something the mob doesn't like; their silly little games are playing straight into the hands of the MSM, helping them to undermine Corbyn & Labour, and removing any vestiges of hope for the vulnerable in society who were looking to us for help.

Post by **refitman** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:31 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?
As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

I'm not happy with last night's result. I'm not happy with the Labour MPs who voted for it (and there were a few names on there that surprised & shocked me). But I'm also not happy with the growing atmosphere of recrimination and the cries of "deselection" (which remind me so much of Monty Python's "She's a witch" sequence from Holy Grail) every time somebody does something the mob doesn't like; their silly little games are playing straight into the hands of the MSM, helping them to undermine Corbyn & Labour, and removing any vestiges of hope for the vulnerable in society who were looking to us for help.

All of this^ (although I do wish there was some more discipline for serial offenders like Danczuk, but not as far as deselection).

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:36 am

How Much Will Airstrikes On IS Cost Taxpayer? http://news.sky.com/story/1342768/how-m ... t-taxpayer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

: ScreenShot07501.jpg (62.29 KiB) Viewed 11740 times

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:43 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... y-strategy

It’s Cameron, not Corbyn, who is the terrorist appeaser
Simon Jenkins

I remember when Sir Simon Jenkins was considered a pretty hard-line Thatcherite. He's an old school, cynical, world weary, establishment High Tory. His views on most things have remained pretty consistent over the last 30 years, but now the mad as a sack of squirrels wingnuts and their fellow travellers colonising the Graun website consider him a Maoist-Trotskyite-Leninist-appeasing-Commie who must be "defeated".

How times have changed.

He's right about IS, Syria and the lightweight PR man we have for a prime minister though.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:47 am

yahyah wrote:Hilary Benn: "I share the concerns about possible civilian casualties. But unlike Daesh, we don't act with the intent to harm them"

Isn't that casuistry ?

It's dishonest.

From what I have read about casualties when they bomb cities they exoect 10 civilian deaths to every 'target' on average, and that is considered an acceptable ratio. Even with the technology. I've no faith in the clean technology, it doesn't allow for wrong targets, bystanders, or joystick mentalities. I remember the 'precision' bombing in Iraq1 when a very large building being used by civilians as an air raid shelter was targeted with huge loss of life.

Weapons are used to kill. Drop them on cities and civilians will die. The intent is in using them.

He hasn't got his dads heart, has he, but then his dad didn't have his sons stomach either.
The road to being noble isn't straight by any means, he differs from his dad in that too - he had a special kind of humility.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:51 am

Apparently, overnight, we've been successfully bombing Isil's oilfields. Genuine question (I know next to nothing about military hardware and so on) -

Are oilfields so difficult to find and pinpoint? If they aren't, why couldn't somebody else have struck them earlier? There seems to be a lot of strutting peacock "our bombs and bombers are better than their (our "allies'") bombs and bombers" stuff going on.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:54 am

refitman wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?
As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

I'm not happy with last night's result. I'm not happy with the Labour MPs who voted for it (and there were a few names on there that surprised & shocked me). But I'm also not happy with the growing atmosphere of recrimination and the cries of "deselection" (which remind me so much of Monty Python's "She's a witch" sequence from Holy Grail) every time somebody does something the mob doesn't like; their silly little games are playing straight into the hands of the MSM, helping them to undermine Corbyn & Labour, and removing any vestiges of hope for the vulnerable in society who were looking to us for help.
All of this^ (although I do wish there was some more discipline for serial offenders like Danczuk, but not as far as deselection).

Doesn't deselection happen when a term of office is coming to a close, and then you either get reselected or deselected? That is my understanding, it isnt the same as being sacked. If so then isn't it just saying, no matter how aggressive the tone, don't expect us to select you next time.

Reminds me of cybernat tactics, tbh. They use a lot of invective and rough language.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 9:58 am

yahyah wrote:Hilary Benn: "I share the concerns about possible civilian casualties. But unlike Daesh, we don't act with the intent to harm them"

Isn't that casuistry ?

Yes, it is - OED: "The use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially with regard to moral questions; sophistry".

So he shares the concerns, is aware that there may be civilian casualties, but it's all fine and dandy because we mean well. FFS.

This is risible. Our contribution to this bombing in Syria is not much - there are hundreds of planes from various countries dropping bombs; there are warships in the Gulf capable of firing missiles. It hasn't stopped ISIS and a year later not a lot has changed.

The US-led coalition includes the UK, France, Canada, Australia, Jordan and Morocco now bombing in both Iraq and Syria; Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands in Iraq only; Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and Turkey in Syria only.
The Russian-led coalition includes Iran, Iraq, Hezbollah, Kurds, Turkmen, and various other groups and alliances.

This is gesture politics. This is OGRPPFGTCC wanting to play with the big boys. If there was any will whatsoever to find a political solution to this mess it's long gone in the rhetoric. I am disgusted with those who voted in favour of airstrikes in Syria and I reserve particular venom for Benn.
It seems to me that if, as a shadow minister, he was unable to support his leader then he should have declined the opportunity to close the debate for his party. Despite the 66 who voted for airstrikes, 152 voted against - Benn closed the debate for Labour in direct opposition to what the majority of Labour MPs wanted.
I happen to think this is reprehensible behaviour. A free vote is one thing - but if Benn truly thinks airstrikes are the right thing to do, he should have made his little speech with the rest of the hawks and left the closing of the arguments to someone who supported the majority view of his party's MPs.

He, like all the others who voted for this, will have blood on their hands. Disgraceful.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:05 am

Completely agree ephie.
Burnham wasn't on the list, I wonder what the overlaps like of those that nominated Cooper and Kendall with those that voted Yes.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:07 am

PorFavor wrote:Apparently, overnight, we've been successfully bombing Isil's oilfields. Genuine question (I know next to nothing about military hardware and so on) -

Are oilfields so difficult to find and pinpoint? If they aren't, why couldn't somebody else have struck them earlier? There seems to be a lot of strutting peacock "our bombs and bombers are better than their (our "allies'") bombs and bombers" stuff going on.

From what I understand about what John McCain said, this is only a gesture on Britain's part and doesn't actually add much to what's going on already.

It all we're doing is cutting off access to funds and not targeting towns then maybe the harm to people won't be as great as has been suggested.

Incidentally did Cameron really say there would be a comprehensive review of access to funds from the UK...but reporting next week? Doesn't sound that comprehensive to me...either that or they've already done it.

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:11 am

PorFavor wrote:Apparently, overnight, we've been successfully bombing Isil's oilfields. Genuine question (I know next to nothing about military hardware and so on) -

Are oilfields so difficult to find and pinpoint? If they aren't, why couldn't somebody else have struck them earlier? There seems to be a lot of strutting peacock "our bombs and bombers are better than their (our "allies'") bombs and bombers" stuff going on.

As far as I know the US, France and GB have been bombing the oilfields since the end of 2014. However, this wasn't as successful as they hoped because IS were able to repair damage done very quickly.

This was why they turned to bombing the oil transport trucks but this is tricky because of civilian casualties. Since Paris there seems to be less qualms about civilians. I'm not sure whether they are back to bombing the infrastructure as well but Putin is doing this.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:18 am

FWIW the campaign manager for the Kendall leadership campaign voted against,just perhaps ,earth shattering as it may come to those so certain of their position and certain as to why those you happen to disagree with,voted the way they did,their judgement,albeit wrong-headed in your view,was honestly made.

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:22 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

[/quote]

The right wingers and far-right wingers who make dozens of posts every day everywhere on the internet they can, who reject compromise positions, who shout down all opposition (sometimes complete with veiled - or not so veiled - threats), who demand "make the left history", who misinform, repeatedly lie and sneer at anyone who thinks maybe letting disabled people starve in the streets isn't a fantastic idea aren't a lynch mob?

The current recession has had a similar polarising impact on politics as the 1930s one. Not surprising, because the ruling class response to recession has been similar to the 1930s - recuperate their losses by clamping down on dissent, taking from those that have least and hoping to kick the can a few more yards down the road before the next crisis.

So some people are going to behave in a less than gentlemanly way towards Labour MPs and Lords who are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as joining in with hammering the least well off.

It's no coincidence that the media is full of "Corbyn must go" while the goings on in the Tory "youth" movement and the links some of its leading lights have to some very right-wing organisations indeed hardly get a mention.

(edited because I made a mess of the quotes tags)

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:23 am

TobyLatimer wrote:He was right in his opening remarks though, addressing Cameron directly over the terrorist sympathisers slur.

[youtube]m_dRCzd19Uc[/youtube]

I couldn't bear to watch him last night and I still can't.

I thought Labour was supposed to be traumatised over Iraq? Not half traumatised enough, if you ask me.

In the long run it may be a small mercy that the motion would have passed without the 66.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:35 am

On that point about Cameron's remarks...

Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab):
Before I respond to the debate, I would like to say this directly to the Prime Minister: although my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and I will walk into different Division Lobbies tonight, I am proud to speak from the same Dispatch Box as him. He is not a terrorist sympathiser. He is an honest, principled, decent and good man, and I think the Prime Minister must now regret what he said yesterday and his failure to do what he should have done today, which is simply to say, “I am sorry.”

Odd that the frothing right wingers eager to cheer Hilary Benn seem to have very carefully ignored that bit.

But we know that Cameron doesn't do apologies.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:42 am

A link from last year, interesting because of the pipeline bombing and its symbolism in terms of how the UK has just enteresed into the Syrian part of this conflict, but also for the source. (There was a map too showing the existing operational pipeline and the one due to be operationl in 2016. They intersect in the middle of Syria before heading westward. Couldn't grab it to post,)

Pipeline politics in Syria.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/pipel ... -in-syria/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:42 am

Hilary Benn now favourite to be next leader

Looks to me like he's aiming to do what his father - because he had such high principles - never managed, and that's to be leader.

Not with my vote. And he's just lost Labour an awful lot of voters...

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:46 am

seeingclearly wrote:Doesn't deselection happen when a term of office is coming to a close, and then you either get reselected or deselected? That is my understanding, it isnt the same as being sacked. If so then isn't it just saying, no matter how aggressive the tone, don't expect us to select you next time.

Reminds me of cybernat tactics, tbh. They use a lot of invective and rough language.

It's amazed me how many people I've come across over the last couple of months who think a party deselecting an MP in some way immediately negates the election that put the MP in parliament, "overides the voters" and removes the MP from parliament.

Once an MPs' elected they stay elected until either the next general election, they resign their seat, are 'elevated' to the Lords, found guilty of a sufficiently severe offence, become seriously mentally ill or they die, whichever comes first.

MPs have been expelled from their party and continued to sit and left their party and continued to sit. That so many people seem unaware of this is a sad reflection on the UK education system.

Post by **refitman** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:47 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
TR'sGhost wrote:
It's no coincidence that the media is full of "Corbyn must go" while the goings on in the Tory "youth" movement and the links some of its leading lights have to some very right-wing organisations indeed hardly get a mention.

(edited because I made a mess of the quotes tags)
Much as I dislike 'whataboutery' I do think there's a lot in this. (Note the glee with which our sometime visitor leapt on it yesterday). There is a genuine bullying scandal in the Tory party which is being completely overshadowed by hysteria (and I don't think that's an exaggeration) over completely fabricated tales of the Labour leadership marshalling a fictional army of thugs. Yes, there is bad behaviour over social media but this is military action we're talking about - it's an emotive subject. The extremely passionate opposition to the Iraq war didn't need there to be a shadowy leftwing conspiracy to explain it, so why does it now that passions are running high over Syria?

Laura Kuennsberg leapt straight from a group publishing a list of MPs who had voted for airstrikes to an assertion that this could be part of an orchestrated campaign of abuse. Well if that's the case then we've been guilty of that here repeatedly.

The implication is that Corbyn has brownshirts. It stinks.

Maybe Kuennsberg should have a word with this bunch of hard-left, Marxist entryests:

BBC News (UK)
✔
@BBCNews

Did your MP vote for air strikes in Syria? Find out here http://bbc.in/1Tyzb0j" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; pic.twitter.com/HcGwDgHWsb
9:46 AM - 3 Dec 2015

Oh, wait...

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:48 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?
As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

I'm not happy with last night's result. I'm not happy with the Labour MPs who voted for it (and there were a few names on there that surprised & shocked me). But I'm also not happy with the growing atmosphere of recrimination and the cries of "deselection" (which remind me so much of Monty Python's "She's a witch" sequence from Holy Grail) every time somebody does something the mob doesn't like; their silly little games are playing straight into the hands of the MSM, helping them to undermine Corbyn & Labour, and removing any vestiges of hope for the vulnerable in society who were looking to us for help.

Morfters...surprisingly, the rush to war hasn't left me as despondent as I thought it would - as Peter Jukes has been saying, in the fullness of the action already taking place, a 'few more missiles'* are about as noticeable and effective as the 1,001st flea on a camels a******e...or a chocolate ashtray on a motorbike...and the mess (which, of course, it will be) is all Clouncys' now (and the 66).

I too was sad to see people like Heidi Alexander on the list - she's supposed to be quite good, but to use her as an example, how can you argue for anti-austerity and proper efficient management of NHS budgets if you actively vote for Clouncys' Comedy Crusade and the attendant extra spending? (From the 'magic money tree', to be repaid by the poor, the sick, the old and the disabled)

On Yvette Cooper, I would just say that I'm not surprised - Mr Cooper, otherwise known as Ed Balls, although no longer in Parliament as an MP and not Shadow Canchellor, did attend the (tin-foil hat on) Bilderberg Conference this year...along with Gidiot - it would be interesting to know what they talked about...but, even though their travel and expenses are (as I understand it) paid for by the taxpayer, it not something for us plebs to worry about. As a link to Oldham, one of the most impassioned speeches at the Bilderberg Fringe Festival 2013, against Bilderberg and the secrecy surrounding it, was delivered by Michael Meacher - reinforcing my long-standing respect for him (I know - the 'festival' was a corporate stitch-up, but they had to do something, as so many wanted to protest - it really was like turning the clock back - I would've liked to have taken RIP with me

)...but of course, now that I'm just a trouble-making£3Corbynistadangerouspeacenikterroristsympathiser I'm aware I have no right to think, say or do anything....tugs forelock, murmuring 'Yassr' whilst shuffling away in reverse at the correct Clouncy 45 degree angle...oh, but then again, maybe not...

Not sure what the thoughts are about Frankie Boyle, but will link couple of his recent efforts...

Andrew Neil went viral with an impassioned eulogy that, like most eulogies, was just inaccurate nonsense in the form of nice memorable words strung together with angry sad words. A speech that would have made those named within it proud, but only because a good few of them were nihilistic absurdists. Listing the great French thinkers in a tribute to nuclear power showcased the worst aspect of historical fame: these were figures Neil could name but appeared to know nothing about.
For a list supporting the French government’s foray into bombing its former colony he chose Satie, a composer so questioning of state he put a question mark into La Marseillaise; Zola, a man so adamant about the function of a fair and full trial he may have been murdered for his beliefs; Rousseau – “Those who think themselves masters of others are greater slaves than they”; Ravel, who rejected all state honours; Gauguin, a passionate defender of indigenous peoples; and Camus, the great Algerian-born philosopher, who died in 1960, a year before he would’ve been thrown into the Seine at the orders of the Nazi head of the Parisian police.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/n ... -autopilot

Because problems are presented as insoluble doesn’t mean that they are. We could probably treat every wounded soldier from the last decade of war for the cost of the first missile we drop on Syria. We could change our institutions so they helped us grow rather than imprisoned us. Poverty, whether physical, intellectual or spiritual, is manmade, and we can unmake it. I think we could start by trying to change our founding principle from We are civilised and other people are not to
There is a place beyond this. And it’s going to be beautiful.

http://www.frankieboyle.com/one-time-4-mind/ (apparently taken from his first ever 'lecture')

Back to Clouncy Funt and his Comedy Crusade - as the dust starts to settle, I'll be very glad when we get the full explanation from Benn and Watson (wasn't that a boxing match

) as to precisely what, in the PRPMs performance yesterday, answered their well-circulated questions about the 'plan' and its' 'effectiveness'...no?...oh...

*to be clear - I believe(TM) that the zone should be de-militarised immediately, using a vast force of blue-helmeted UN organised troops, mainly (but not only) from Muslim nations (purely (the Muslim nations bit) to aid and support the local INNOCENT civilian population in dealing with the recovery from the massive trauma, the rebuilding of their society and trust in others.)

(Note to self - stop adding bits you nucking fumpty

)

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:55 am

TR'sGhost wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:Doesn't deselection happen when a term of office is coming to a close, and then you either get reselected or deselected? That is my understanding, it isnt the same as being sacked. If so then isn't it just saying, no matter how aggressive the tone, don't expect us to select you next time.

Reminds me of cybernat tactics, tbh. They use a lot of invective and rough language.
It's amazed me how many people I've come across over the last couple of months who think a party deselecting an MP in some way immediately negates the election that put the MP in parliament, "overides the voters" and removes the MP from parliament.

Once an MPs' elected they stay elected until either the next general election, they resign their seat, are 'elevated' to the Lords, found guilty of a sufficiently severe offence, become seriously mentally ill or they die, whichever comes first.

MPs have been expelled from their party and continued to sit and left their party and continued to sit. That so many people seem unaware of this is a sad reflection on the UK education system.

Possibly confusion arising from the discussions around a policy to 'recall' an MP if said MP is not 'performing'...wasn't it some sort of Tory manifesto commitment?...in the name of 'democracy'?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 10:56 am

From last night:

@ohsocynical

Thanks for the update. I hope you can relax a bit tonight. Do you know yet if you can have a gin?

Can't yet...Had the scan yesterday she said she couldn't see anything too drastic - meaning the big C - but I wasn't expecting she would. Doc thought it's something caused by the drugs I'm taking. All three can do it.

I've been on two of the pills for eighteen years so it's probably not them. The third has been for just over a year, and she thinks it's that one.
I have more blood tests on the tenth.
If I have a choice I'll leave off the suspect drug. I've never liked taking it. It won't kill me if I do.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:11 am

PorFavor wrote:Apparently, overnight, we've been successfully bombing Isil's oilfields. Genuine question (I know next to nothing about military hardware and so on) -

Are oilfields so difficult to find and pinpoint? If they aren't, why couldn't somebody else have struck them earlier? There seems to be a lot of strutting peacock "our bombs and bombers are better than their (our "allies'") bombs and bombers" stuff going on.

Don't know the specifics of last night's op, what exactly was being targeted in those oil fields, so can't comment on why nobody tried it earlier. But the "our bombs & bombers are better" rhetoric is pretty much correct.

The main strike aircraft being used are Tornados (the Germans will be using the same when they join in) which is an old design but perfectly suited for this kind of warfare (to be fair, both the Americans and French have very capable aircraft too, but the doctrine behind the RAF's use of Tornado gives them an edge); way back in the days of Desert Storm the Tornado fleet got the job of attacking the Iraqi airfields & infrastructure because they were trained in the sort of low level missions needed - when an American pilot flies low level there is enough space underneath them for an RAF pilot to do aerobatics!!! Well, slight exaggeration, but the USAF don't fly below 250 feet and our guys go right down to the deck.

But it is the bombs that make the difference, and one in particular. The Tornados are armed with laser guided (and now GPS guided) smart bombs, which the Americans and French also have; they use the Storm Shadow cruise missile, a 'fire & forget' precision guided anti-runway and anti-bunker weapon, but the French also use that one; the jewel in the crown, so to speak, is Brimstone.

Brimstone is a small dual-mode 'fire and forget' weapon; "dual mode" means it has both laser guidance (so specific targets can be selected by a 'spotter') and millimetric wave active radar homing guidance. The principle is that the target is selected by the spotter (of which more later) and targeted by laser, the missile is fired and then continues to home in on the selected target using the radar; it makes it especially effective against vehicles as it can still track them at speeds of up to 70 mph. It uses a shaped warhead which makes it very effective against tanks and also creates a smaller blast area, which is the 'selling point' as far as OGRFG is concerned; that specific and contained blast radius means that the damage is done to the target itself, with little 'collateral damage' - note I say "little" because, however much Dave tries to pretend, it still isn't a perfect magic bullet.

Against fast moving vehicles, small specific targets and light armour Brimstone is the best weapon in the Allied armoury, no question; the Americans have been considering purchasing it for some time, as have the French (and Indians), but neither have thus far for domestic political considerations, "not invented here" syndrome.

Ok, 'spotters'. Laser guided weapons fly toward a target "painted" by a laser designator (best to think of this as the little red dot beloved of all writers of police procedurals), so obviously you need somebody to select and 'designate' your target for you. There are two ways of doing this, airborne designation (your laser marker is on another aircraft, the method predominantly used during Desert Storm & Desert Shield) or ground designation; the latter is obviously the most effective, somebody on the ground will be able to select and designate the target without the need to be looking around as his/her aircraft is hurtling around the sky (although modern targeting pods alleviate a lot of that), but ......

Well, the "but" is obvious. To ground designate you need somebody on the ground, so who is doing that for the RAF; is it these 70000 FSA troops Cameron claims are waiting to rush to the rescue, or are there special forces on the ground? Despite his claims of "no boots on the ground" in Libya, there were SAS and SBS troops doing exactly this job there, as they did in Iraq (think Bravo Two Zero) and Afghanistan. Still questions to be addressed here, and I don't think he'll be too forthcoming with the answers.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:17 am

TR'sGhost wrote:The right wingers and far-right wingers who make dozens of posts every day everywhere on the internet they can, who reject compromise positions, who shout down all opposition (sometimes complete with veiled - or not so veiled - threats), who demand "make the left history", who misinform, repeatedly lie and sneer at anyone who thinks maybe letting disabled people starve in the streets isn't a fantastic idea aren't a lynch mob?

Have I suggested they aren't? I strongly suspect that they form part of the activity on social media, masquerading as something they aren't much as they did during Indyref. But does that excuse factions on the Left who are making the job of the Tory media all too easy for them?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:18 am

yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?

Yes, that is what much of the MSM *would* like. Plus doing away with actual political parties in any meaningful sense and letting them decide everything.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:18 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
PorFavor wrote:Apparently, overnight, we've been successfully bombing Isil's oilfields. Genuine question (I know next to nothing about military hardware and so on) -

Are oilfields so difficult to find and pinpoint? If they aren't, why couldn't somebody else have struck them earlier? There seems to be a lot of strutting peacock "our bombs and bombers are better than their (our "allies'") bombs and bombers" stuff going on.
Don't know the specifics of last night's op, what exactly was being targeted in those oil fields, so can't comment on why nobody tried it earlier. But the "our bombs & bombers are better" rhetoric is pretty much correct.

The main strike aircraft being used are Tornados (the Germans will be using the same when they join in) which is an old design but perfectly suited for this kind of warfare (to be fair, both the Americans and French have very capable aircraft too, but the doctrine behind the RAF's use of Tornado gives them an edge); way back in the days of Desert Storm the Tornado fleet got the job of attacking the Iraqi airfields & infrastructure because they were trained in the sort of low level missions needed - when an American pilot flies low level there is enough space underneath them for an RAF pilot to do aerobatics!!! Well, slight exaggeration, but the USAF don't fly below 250 feet and our guys go right down to the deck.

But it is the bombs that make the difference, and one in particular. The Tornados are armed with laser guided (and now GPS guided) smart bombs, which the Americans and French also have; they use the Storm Shadow cruise missile, a 'fire & forget' precision guided anti-runway and anti-bunker weapon, but the French also use that one; the jewel in the crown, so to speak, is Brimstone.

Brimstone is a small dual-mode 'fire and forget' weapon; "dual mode" means it has both laser guidance (so specific targets can be selected by a 'spotter') and millimetric wave active radar homing guidance. The principle is that the target is selected by the spotter (of which more later) and targeted by laser, the missile is fired and then continues to home in on the selected target using the radar; it makes it especially effective against vehicles as it can still track them at speeds of up to 70 mph. It uses a shaped warhead which makes it very effective against tanks and also creates a smaller blast area, which is the 'selling point' as far as OGRFG is concerned; that specific and contained blast radius means that the damage is done to the target itself, with little 'collateral damage' - note I say "little" because, however much Dave tries to pretend, it still isn't a perfect magic bullet.

Against fast moving vehicles, small specific targets and light armour Brimstone is the best weapon in the Allied armoury, no question; the Americans have been considering purchasing it for some time, as have the French (and Indians), but neither have thus far for domestic political considerations, "not invented here" syndrome.

Ok, 'spotters'. Laser guided weapons fly toward a target "painted" by a laser designator (best to think of this as the little red dot beloved of all writers of police procedurals), so obviously you need somebody to select and 'designate' your target for you. There are two ways of doing this, airborne designation (your laser marker is on another aircraft, the method predominantly used during Desert Storm & Desert Shield) or ground designation; the latter is obviously the most effective, somebody on the ground will be able to select and designate the target without the need to be looking around as his/her aircraft is hurtling around the sky (although modern targeting pods alleviate a lot of that), but ......

Well, the "but" is obvious. To ground designate you need somebody on the ground, so who is doing that for the RAF; is it these 70000 FSA troops Cameron claims are waiting to rush to the rescue, or are there special forces on the ground? Despite his claims of "no boots on the ground" in Libya, there were SAS and SBS troops doing exactly this job there, as they did in Iraq (think Bravo Two Zero) and Afghanistan. Still questions to be addressed here, and I don't think he'll be too forthcoming with the answers.

Thanks for that.

Didn't I hear that the Saudis also have Brimstone but can't use it? If I heard correctly, then that puzzles me. Do you know why or if that's correct? They've never struck me as being in the market for buying weaponry that they can't deploy.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:18 am

TR'sGhost wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:Doesn't deselection happen when a term of office is coming to a close, and then you either get reselected or deselected? That is my understanding, it isnt the same as being sacked. If so then isn't it just saying, no matter how aggressive the tone, don't expect us to select you next time.

Reminds me of cybernat tactics, tbh. They use a lot of invective and rough language.
It's amazed me how many people I've come across over the last couple of months who think a party deselecting an MP in some way immediately negates the election that put the MP in parliament, "overides the voters" and removes the MP from parliament.

Once an MPs' elected they stay elected until either the next general election, they resign their seat, are 'elevated' to the Lords, found guilty of a sufficiently severe offence, become seriously mentally ill or they die, whichever comes first.

MPs have been expelled from their party and continued to sit and left their party and continued to sit. That so many people seem unaware of this is a sad reflection on the UK education system.

Thanks for posting on this question. I'd got about halfway there, hadn't considered mental health. I had forgotten they could be deselected and still sit, am I right in thinking they can also cross the house too?

Another question. Is there a removal process at constituency level at all? I rather thought not, because by the time they become an MP it is a matter for all constituents rather than a local party branch, my understanding on this that a candidate is nominated to stand for their party. If I've got this wrong I would like to know.

There are a lot of 'we need to get rid' statements today about the ones who voted with Cameron, even some which a bit stupidly say there will be blood on their hands, which strictly cannot be true as none of the Labour votes affected the outcome. But there are more about Cameron and they say a lot worse, the Teflon is starting to wear thin.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 03 Dec, 2015 11:23 am

refitman wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
yahyah wrote:Hasn't it always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs ?

How are we supposed to know whether to vote for them in general elections if we are supposed to ignore how they've voted/acted while our MP ?

Maybe Kuessenberg would like it all to be kept secret ?
As much as I hate to admit it Laura K may have a point. Yes, it has always been part of the process for people to contact their MPs, but I don't think anybody here seriously believes the group who mobbed (and I use that word advisedly) Stella Creasy's office were all constituents of hers; this whole thing, on social media, online and now on the streets increasingly resembles a lynch mob, how long until we start seeing the pitchforks and flaming torches?

I'm not happy with last night's result. I'm not happy with the Labour MPs who voted for it (and there were a few names on there that surprised & shocked me). But I'm also not happy with the growing atmosphere of recrimination and the cries of "deselection" (which remind me so much of Monty Python's "She's a witch" sequence from Holy Grail) every time somebody does something the mob doesn't like; their silly little games are playing straight into the hands of the MSM, helping them to undermine Corbyn & Labour, and removing any vestiges of hope for the vulnerable in society who were looking to us for help.
All of this^ (although I do wish there was some more discipline for serial offenders like Danczuk, but not as far as deselection).

There is - its called withdrawing the whip. Though the party is understandably reluctant to feed Simon's victim-cum-Napoleon complex further.......