FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Morning.

Well it's all gone quiet on the #ChickenCoup front. And about time. The only mention of Corbyn this morning seems to be that he was right about Iraq.

I really do hope the hints of accommodation and calming down we hear are true.

RobertSnozers wrote: So do I, but you just know the rebels will only be putting their heads down and waiting for the next perceived opportunity, and this ludicrous charade will continue until Labour loses the next GE

Then it'll all be Corbyn's fault

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Well it's all gone quiet on the #ChickenCoup front. And about time. The only mention of Corbyn this morning seems to be that he was right about Iraq.

I really do hope the hints of accommodation and calming down we hear are true.

How do you see this proceeding?

My guess, and it is just that, is that Eagle will stand and lose. Corbyn will win again.

But the 80% of the PLP who gave him a vote of no confidence will continue to refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet and so we won't be able to return to the state of having a fully functioning opposition frontbench. We have no shadow attorney general for example, which at the moment one might have thought was a bit of an issue. The shadow cabinet now has 25 members (from 31) with four doing two jobs. Some of those (Winterton don't support him) Some may consider it a high caliber team, but for me if you have to have Richard Burgon as shadow Lord Chancellor that is very doubtful.

So what happens? I can't see a split, despite some calls in the press. So we limp on until next year, when Corbyn is challenged again.

Someone tell me an optimistic tale where this all turns out well for Labour? How could Corbyn ever lead Labour in an election now? How could a Labour MP go on TV and argue for a Labour government when they have voted that they have no confidence in the leader? Are they to be deselected?

And, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking about blame. I don't want to know that this is all A. B or C's fault. I want to know plausibly how this now goes well (the PLP all just collectively changing their minds and deciding to work with JC again not being remotely plausible). How is the talk of reconciliation going to play out well?

Plenty of people far more optimistic than me here (AK?). Tell me a happy story. This scenario can involve JC either staying or going.

danesclose wrote:

RobertSnozers wrote: So do I, but you just know the rebels will only be putting their heads down and waiting for the next perceived opportunity, and this ludicrous charade will continue until Labour loses the next GE

Then it'll all be Corbyn's fault

A day for remembering who voted for the Invasion and against holding this Inquiry

viewtopic.php?p=117219#p117219" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Have a nice day Angela !

So, what will today lead to ?

The Blair haters will carry on treating him as if he is the devil incarnate and evil personified.
If they don't hear what they want to hear the report will be written off as a whitewash.

There have been a lot of interviews with relatives of soldiers who died in the war, or soldiers who fought and are suffering emotionally as a result.
I don't mean to offend anyone who may have relatives in the military, but what do people think being a soldier is about ? Has there ever been a time that equipment was top class and plentiful ?
Do the relatives queuing up to call for Blair to go to prison ever wonder what their loved ones may have done during active service ? How many children, or innocent civilians may have died as a result of their loved ones signing up to be, let's be honest, killers for the state ?

A lot of the Blair haters are apologists for Palestinians sending rockets, or other violent and counterproductive actions.

So, I shall be gardening today, weather permitting.
It is important to understand what happened and why, and ensure things are different in the future, but feel some of those demanding blood are somewhat hypocritical.

A truck has been driving round London inviting tech businesses to move to Germany.

The ad is from a German liberal political party.

RobertSnozers wrote:Morning.

Chilcot Day...

I would like to respond to comments today but I fear I'm going to be blinded by all the whitewash...

Plus Blair is speaking so I'll also be feeling very sick.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 22101.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Levellers: Another man's cause

[youtube]ScoJcxam7D4[/youtube]

Now she wonders at it all,
Just in whose name do these brave young heroes fall?
And how many more are gonna answer that call?
They're gonna fight and die in another country's war,
They're gonna die for religion they don't believe in at all,
They're gonna die in a place they should never been at all,
Oh, never been at all.

That's the age old story.

See you later, the 9/11 troofers are already out and about on Cif, having set their alarms early.

yahyah wrote: #http://lbc.co.uk/mm/image/40055.jpg


A truck has been driving round London inviting tech businesses to move to Germany.

The ad is from a German liberal political party.

wo sind die gelben Pudeln?

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Well it's all gone quiet on the #ChickenCoup front. And about time. The only mention of Corbyn this morning seems to be that he was right about Iraq.

I really do hope the hints of accommodation and calming down we hear are true.

How do you see this proceeding?

My guess, and it is just that, is that Eagle will stand and lose. Corbyn will win again.

But the 80% of the PLP who gave him a vote of no confidence will continue to refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet and so we won't be able to return to the state of having a fully functioning opposition frontbench. We have no shadow attorney general for example, which at the moment one might have thought was a bit of an issue. The shadow cabinet now has 25 members (from 31) with four doing two jobs. Some of those (Winterton don't support him) Some may consider it a high caliber team, but for me if you have to have Richard Burgon as shadow Lord Chancellor that is very doubtful.

So what happens? I can't see a split, despite some calls in the press. So we limp on until next year, when Corbyn is challenged again.

Someone tell me an optimistic tale where this all turns out well for Labour? How could Corbyn ever lead Labour in an election now? How could a Labour MP go on TV and argue for a Labour government when they have voted that they have no confidence in the leader? Are they to be deselected?

And, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking about blame. I don't want to know that this is all A. B or C's fault. I want to know plausibly how this now goes well (the PLP all just collectively changing their minds and deciding to work with JC again not being remotely plausible). How is the talk of reconciliation going to play out well?

Plenty of people far more optimistic than me here (AK?). Tell me a happy story. This scenario can involve JC either staying or going.

I don't have a scenario, as such. BUT I am intrigued by the continued presence of Burnham as Shadow Home Sec and the addition of two interesting newcomers who are definitely close to him, Debbie Abrahams at Work & Pensions and Angela Rayner at Education.

So, three of the important posts are occupied by a North Western Burnham-ite grouping. This doesn't feel like a coincidence to me. What it means for the future I don't know.

Where are the yellow poodles ? Creating a 'yellow tide' up against a lampost ?

I should add that Burnham, Abrahams & Rayner are in no way Corbynistas. So, the Shadow Cabinet still has considerable breadth across the major roles.

yahyah wrote:xxxx.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pr-firm-director-death-threat-portland-jeremy-corbyn-jo-cox-a7122101.html

In the real world of the Black Arts he might just have sent it to himself ...

Rain forecast in Normandy .

For Saturday night, so I'm resisting other temptations and going gardening too .

RobertSnozers wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Well it's all gone quiet on the #ChickenCoup front. And about time. The only mention of Corbyn this morning seems to be that he was right about Iraq.

I really do hope the hints of accommodation and calming down we hear are true.

How do you see this proceeding?

My guess, and it is just that, is that Eagle will stand and lose. Corbyn will win again.

But the 80% of the PLP who gave him a vote of no confidence will continue to refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet and so we won't be able to return to the state of having a fully functioning opposition frontbench. We have no shadow attorney general for example, which at the moment one might have thought was a bit of an issue. The shadow cabinet now has 25 members (from 31) with four doing two jobs. Some of those (Winterton don't support him) Some may consider it a high caliber team, but for me if you have to have Richard Burgon as shadow Lord Chancellor that is very doubtful.

So what happens? I can't see a split, despite some calls in the press. So we limp on until next year, when Corbyn is challenged again.

Someone tell me an optimistic tale where this all turns out well for Labour? How could Corbyn ever lead Labour in an election now? How could a Labour MP go on TV and argue for a Labour government when they have voted that they have no confidence in the leader? Are they to be deselected?

And, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking about blame. I don't want to know that this is all A. B or C's fault. I want to know plausibly how this now goes well (the PLP all just collectively changing their minds and deciding to work with JC again not being remotely plausible). How is the talk of reconciliation going to play out well?

Plenty of people far more optimistic than me here (AK?). Tell me a happy story. This scenario can involve JC either staying or going.

Of course you aren't interested in blame, because it's the PLP's fault, and before that, it's New Labour's fault for shaping the current PLP.

As to how it could end well: The PLP could respect the mandate the leader has been given. They could demonstrate some respect for the party they profess to belong to. They could stop briefing and plotting. They could 'roll their sleeves up', help Corbyn, actually put their backs into providing an opposition as the people who sent them to Westminster charged them with doing. They could express ideas, develop policies, articulate a vision for Britain which inspires the electorate. They could be Labour.

But they won't, will they?

Up to you entirely what you write, but again what I asked was

(a) a plausible story (and you know yours isn't)

and

(b) not to say "A, B and C" is to blame." I know what you think about that, and you know what I think.

frog222 wrote:

yahyah wrote:xxxx.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pr-firm-director-death-threat-portland-jeremy-corbyn-jo-cox-a7122101.html

In the real world of the Black Arts he might just have sent it to himself ...

Rain forecast in Normandy .

For Saturday night, so I'm resisting other temptations and going gardening too .

I did wonder about how the head of a PR company might act !

Enjoy the garden. May the sun shine on your blooms and you.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Well it's all gone quiet on the #ChickenCoup front. And about time. The only mention of Corbyn this morning seems to be that he was right about Iraq.

I really do hope the hints of accommodation and calming down we hear are true.

How do you see this proceeding?

My guess, and it is just that, is that Eagle will stand and lose. Corbyn will win again.

But the 80% of the PLP who gave him a vote of no confidence will continue to refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet and so we won't be able to return to the state of having a fully functioning opposition frontbench. We have no shadow attorney general for example, which at the moment one might have thought was a bit of an issue. The shadow cabinet now has 25 members (from 31) with four doing two jobs. Some of those (Winterton don't support him) Some may consider it a high caliber team, but for me if you have to have Richard Burgon as shadow Lord Chancellor that is very doubtful.

So what happens? I can't see a split, despite some calls in the press. So we limp on until next year, when Corbyn is challenged again.

Someone tell me an optimistic tale where this all turns out well for Labour? How could Corbyn ever lead Labour in an election now? How could a Labour MP go on TV and argue for a Labour government when they have voted that they have no confidence in the leader? Are they to be deselected?

And, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking about blame. I don't want to know that this is all A. B or C's fault. I want to know plausibly how this now goes well (the PLP all just collectively changing their minds and deciding to work with JC again not being remotely plausible). How is the talk of reconciliation going to play out well?

Plenty of people far more optimistic than me here (AK?). Tell me a happy story. This scenario can involve JC either staying or going.

I don't have a scenario, as such. BUT I am intrigued by the continued presence of Burnham as Shadow Home Sec and the addition of two interesting newcomers who are definitely close to him, Debbie Abrahams at Work & Pensions and Angela Rayner at Education.

So, three of the important posts are occupied by a North Western Burnham-ite grouping. This doesn't feel like a coincidence to me. What it means for the future I don't know.

Burnham is trying to leave Parliament and become mayor of Manchester.

But thanks for your thoughts. I too have no plausible story where this goes well.

Tom McLaughlin ‏@_TomMcLaughlin 13h13 hours ago
Stephen Crabb's stepped aside. Classic crab behaviour.

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote: How do you see this proceeding?

My guess, and it is just that, is that Eagle will stand and lose. Corbyn will win again.

But the 80% of the PLP who gave him a vote of no confidence will continue to refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet and so we won't be able to return to the state of having a fully functioning opposition frontbench. We have no shadow attorney general for example, which at the moment one might have thought was a bit of an issue. The shadow cabinet now has 25 members (from 31) with four doing two jobs. Some of those (Winterton don't support him) Some may consider it a high caliber team, but for me if you have to have Richard Burgon as shadow Lord Chancellor that is very doubtful.

So what happens? I can't see a split, despite some calls in the press. So we limp on until next year, when Corbyn is challenged again.

Someone tell me an optimistic tale where this all turns out well for Labour? How could Corbyn ever lead Labour in an election now? How could a Labour MP go on TV and argue for a Labour government when they have voted that they have no confidence in the leader? Are they to be deselected?

And, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking about blame. I don't want to know that this is all A. B or C's fault. I want to know plausibly how this now goes well (the PLP all just collectively changing their minds and deciding to work with JC again not being remotely plausible). How is the talk of reconciliation going to play out well?

Plenty of people far more optimistic than me here (AK?). Tell me a happy story. This scenario can involve JC either staying or going.

I don't have a scenario, as such. BUT I am intrigued by the continued presence of Burnham as Shadow Home Sec and the addition of two interesting newcomers who are definitely close to him, Debbie Abrahams at Work & Pensions and Angela Rayner at Education.

So, three of the important posts are occupied by a North Western Burnham-ite grouping. This doesn't feel like a coincidence to me. What it means for the future I don't know.

Burnham is trying to leave Parliament and become mayor of Manchester.

But thanks for your thoughts. I too have no plausible story where this goes well.

I don't think Burnham's in any way a shoe-in in Manchester though is he?

RobertSnozers wrote:
Or turn it around. Say it isn't plausible, because the PLP will not accept Corbyn as leader. What do you think gives them the right?

Well, I don't think trying to attribute blame like this is productive, as you and I know each other's positions and won't agree.

What gives them the right is that they are elected MPs who are supposed to act in the best interests of the UK. Their judgment is

1. The UK needs a social democratic government in the European tradition to replace the current one

2. The current leader of the Labour party is wholly unsuited to the job of leader, and presents the largest single barrier to 1.

3. it is their duty to try and achieve 1. and that involves doing their best to try and win an election. That necessarily involves removing Corbyn.

I of course blame Corbyn, his band of Bennite followers, and those who were foolish enough to elect him leader for the current state of the party.

But where does my telling you that get us? You know I think that. Talk about something else. Attributing blame isn't productive at this point.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote: I don't have a scenario, as such. BUT I am intrigued by the continued presence of Burnham as Shadow Home Sec and the addition of two interesting newcomers who are definitely close to him, Debbie Abrahams at Work & Pensions and Angela Rayner at Education.

So, three of the important posts are occupied by a North Western Burnham-ite grouping. This doesn't feel like a coincidence to me. What it means for the future I don't know.

Burnham is trying to leave Parliament and become mayor of Manchester.

But thanks for your thoughts. I too have no plausible story where this goes well.

I don't think Burnham's in any way a shoe-in in Manchester though is he?

No, I wouldn't vote for him to lead anything, but I think it explains why he remained in the shadow cabinet.

RobertSnozers wrote:I can't believe it isn't yet 9 o'clock and we're talking about Corbyn's leadership again.

Well played Hugo - Chilcot day and you're getting your distraction in early.

Ok Chilcot.

Some legal advice.

The invasion was probably illegal in the sense that the UK broke international law. Even the final advice from the A-G said there was a only a 'reasonable case' for the revival of the resolution. Chilcot can't authoritatively rule on this question, which wasn't in their remit anyway.

Blair committed no crime. not even plausibly arguable. Under neither domestic nor international law. Calls for him to stand trial or be impeached are dishonest (or more charitably, unbelievably stupid)

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/jeremy-c ... -party-674" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Iraq War was the biggest foreign policy disaster in my lifetime. I marched against it at the time, FWIIW, because I thought it illegal. I did so even believing in WMDs (which everyone did, up to and including Blair).

Morning all. I wonder what else will be released in the background today?

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/201 ... all-1-year" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

' In cash terms, the education budget is worst hit, losing £765m or 2.3%, although this is partly explained by a shift toward academies, funding for which will move from local government to the Department for Education.

Cultural services are braced for a 5.8% reduction (£145m) and fire and rescue services for a 1.3% cut (£28m).'

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote: Burnham is trying to leave Parliament and become mayor of Manchester.

But thanks for your thoughts. I too have no plausible story where this goes well.

I don't think Burnham's in any way a shoe-in in Manchester though is he?

No, I wouldn't vote for him to lead anything, but I think it explains why he remained in the shadow cabinet.

I used to like him. But his leadership campaign was simply awful. I feel he remains an interesting and influential figure though.

From Green party deputy leader:

https://leftfootforward.org/2016/06/wha ... leadership

While Corbyn’s own colleagues plot against him, they might reflect on the alternative: empower thyself – not to have control over Corbyn, but rather to direct oneself to post-Brexit emergency planning.
This might require rather more leadership than they are used to showing, and it sounds to me, for all their protest, that they would not make for good leaders.

Hmm, a story for Hugo:

Jeremy Corbyn, changes parties & stands as leader for Green party, taking some supporters with him.
Labour unite around a new leader.
Labour win next election.

Sadly, I think my story starts well & then gets progressively less plausible.

Morning all.

You know that if Labour suggested this, the usual suspects would be foaming at the mouth..."typical tax and spend", "spending money we haven't got " etc etc

LOL

Well as least we've got Pistorius to talk about on this slow news day.

Good-morning, everyone.

OK people, web browsers.

I've been using Google Chrome for ages but it seems to now be utter rubbish (slow loading, doesn't auto log on any longer) and message is that they're not now supporting it for XP and Vista.

So what do others use?

RobertSnozers wrote: it helps for people to state their positions so others can see how ridiculous or otherwise they look.

I don't believe that there is anyone here who doesn't already know my view on Corbyn, but if you found it useful to get me to re-state it fine. I agree with the 81% of the PLP. ('Bennite' is the politest and most neutral label I could think of as all do self-describe as fans of the late man. Perhaps "Supporters of Momentum" would be better?)

We are of one mind however that there is no plausible scenario from here where this goes well for Labour. Permanent structural damage (as opposed to short term electoral loss) now looks unavoidable to me.

So, another question, what is the most likely story from here?

Corbyn stays on, is challenged, wins, no split, is my short term prediction.

But, it can't last as Labour can't be a functioning opposition. And many (perhaps most) of the current shadow cabinet are not plauisble figures. Burgon is just the most extreme, and ridiculous, example.

So, Corbyn will be challenged again, next year.

The battle for control of the NEC will continue, and anger with the PLP will move the fight on to deselections.

Is that how it now goes?

Events may intervene of course. Corbyn is 67, obviously unhappy, and can't carry on forever.

Do you think Eagle will bottle it and not challenge? Ridiculous if so. Will the unions ever withdraw support from Corbyn?

RogerOThornhill wrote:OK people, web browsers.

I've been using Google Chrome for ages but it seems to now be utter rubbish (slow loading, doesn't auto log on any longer) and message is that they're not now supporting it for XP and Vista.

So what do others use?

I generally use Kubuntu linux, so may affect my preferences,:
Firefox whenever possible,
Chrome if I really have to (films on Amazon prime)
Opera mini on mobile phone.

RogerOThornhill wrote:OK people, web browsers.

I've been using Google Chrome for ages but it seems to now be utter rubbish (slow loading, doesn't auto log on any longer) and message is that they're not now supporting it for XP and Vista.

So what do others use?

Being predominantly mobile based I'm Chrome, Firefox and Puffin. Not sure that helps.

Thanks, I'll give Firefox a go.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Well as least we've got Pistorius to talk about on this slow news day.

And "much more to come" said the BBC just now. And rightly so . . . .

Good morfternoon.

RogerOThornhill wrote:OK people, web browsers.

I've been using Google Chrome for ages but it seems to now be utter rubbish (slow loading, doesn't auto log on any longer) and message is that they're not now supporting it for XP and Vista.

So what do others use?

Mozilla Firefox

I've got Slimjet on my xp laptop, based on Chromium but much quicker, and loads of privacy/security features.http://www.slimjet.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Also have Firefox on there as a back up

Government adviser repeatedly expressed concerns about head teacher's abilities, court told

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ourt_told/

A DEPARTMENT for Education adviser told a jury she repeatedly expressed concerns about Sajid Hussain Raza’s abilities both in setting up a flagship Bradford free school and as head teacher after its opening .

Ann Connor said Raza was bright, ambitious, determined and articulate, but in the months before the opening she found he was not putting in place the structures needed for the new Kings Science Academy, of which he was the founder.

Yesterday, Miss Connor told Leeds Crown Court, where Raza and two others deny fraud, that on occasions he did not listen to her advice and on others was rude and dismissive.

and

Miss Connor said the job of principal was one of the things discussed and because she was aware he was being put forward to that position, she felt she should talk about it to the trustee without Raza being there.

He was asked to leave the room and, when he returned, she indicated that the post would be advertised in the appropriate educational press and told him he would be able to apply.

“His response was to pick up his mobile phone and to say words to the effect ‘We’ll see what Michael has to say about this shall we.’ “ Asked what she thought he meant, Miss Connor said: “I assumed it was Mr Michael Gove, the then secretary of state for Education and I assumed Sajid had his phone number I suppose.”

She said in fact he made no call in her presence, but subsequently she was told there would be no advert placed. “I was told to back off.”

Any minister likely to come out and say "Yeah, we got it wrong"?

Another day, another set of rhetorical questions, posed to elicit a response which can then be refuted with crystal-ball predictions based on nothing more than personal opinion.

Start with an assumption which as yet has no basis in fact, sketch scenarios 1/2/3/etc. and predict what happens in each, then wait for someone to bite and proceed to argue.

Using more rhetorical questions. Obviously. Do you think this? Yeah but no but yeah but what about that? As X equals Y because I said so, you are wrong but I'll ask another question to make it look like I'm having a debate.......zzzzzzzzzzz

This is what should happen -
1. The PLP ceases with its' ridiculous crusade to get rid of Corbyn which it has been engaged in since he was voted in by a landslide;
2. The PLP supports the leader, offers its' experience and expertise, and does what our Short Money pays it to do - oppose;
3. The individuals who have set all this in motion need to make a decision on whether they are part of Labour as it is now or not;
4. The Labour Party must heed its' members, the people it relies on for the money and work that gets these MPs their jobs.

If it doesn't happen, it is entirely due to people whose arrogance is such that they refuse to accept that the membership - all of it, not just the £3 supporters, but the affiliated and full members too - voted for the candidate they wanted to represent them as their leader.

Blame is absolutely appropriate. None of this would be happening if it wasn't for a bunch of eejits, none of whom have confirmed they will stand as putative leader; this is bitchy, craven, non-collegiate behaviour of which they should be abjectly ashamed - and I blame them for it.

Nobody knows what would happen at a GE. Nobody. Not me, not anyone.

I am heartily sick of comments which assume facts not in evidence.

Legal advice my arse.

Tory Brexit director found dead in bed by fiancee after drink and drugs binge

George Askew, 32, who had campaigned with Boris Johnson, drank heavily and would smoke heroin, snort cocaine and take Ketamine for "recreational" purposes

He died in February and the inquest has just been held. It's very sad that a young man has thrown his life away. It does also raise the question of how someone with serious issues like his could be entrusted by senior Tories and other Brexit types with a job that has ultimately had disastrous ramifications for every citizen of the UK. He was also an election agent for Tory MP Andrew Stephenson.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/to ... irror_main" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo wrote:I did so even believing in WMDs (which everyone did, up to and including Blair).

'Everyone' didn't include me. At the time I couldn't understand why people found it so plausible.

I don't believe I'm alone in that.

ephemerid wrote:Another day, another set of rhetorical questions,

Do you know what a rhetorical question is? (Clue: that isn't one either).

Trying to be serious, what do you expect to happen? Is there a plausible story that goes well for Labour from here?

These are actual questions. You are exactly the kind of person I want to answer them. I am trying to understand the mindset of the Corbyn supporter.

I think your answer (and RS's) is that you don't care, what matters are other things.

To others: sorry for biting.

gilsey wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:I did so even believing in WMDs (which everyone did, up to and including Blair).

'Everyone' didn't include me. At the time I couldn't understand why people found it so plausible.

I don't believe I'm alone in that.

Me neither.

I was waiting for Colin Powell to step up. He did not.

Just been to refresh my memory regarding the press coverage.

http://www.medialens.org/index.php/aler ... peech.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gilsey wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:I did so even believing in WMDs (which everyone did, up to and including Blair).

'Everyone' didn't include me. At the time I couldn't understand why people found it so plausible.

I don't believe I'm alone in that.

What was your evidence to the contrary (at the time)? Why wasn't the view of the UK/US intelligence service the best available, couple with the Saddam Hussein regime's avoidance of inspections? What other evidence was there?

SpinningHugo wrote:

ephemerid wrote:Another day, another set of rhetorical questions,

Do you know what a rhetorical question is? (Clue: that isn't one either).

Trying to be serious, what do you expect to happen? Is there a plausible story that goes well for Labour from here?

These are actual questions. You are exactly the kind of person I want to answer them. I am trying to understand the mindset of the Corbyn supporter.

I think your answer (and RS's) is that you don't care, what matters are other things.

To others: sorry for biting.

I'll nibble. I am a Labour Party member. I am not a momentum member.

If there was enough dissatisfaction in the PLP, flag it up. If it can't be resolved follow the rules, get the 50/51 names and challenge. Make the positive case of why choose them.

Blair did a lot of good stuff, most memorably the Good Friday Agreement and investment in schools and hospitals after years of terrible neglect by Tory governments. But of course it's his disastrous mistake over Iraq that most people mostly remember.

I know it's received wisdom that Blair lied. It'd be more accurate to say he received highly flawed intelligence that he accepted as gospel. He should have emulated Wilson and stayed out of the whole debacle despite intense pressure from the US.

Another thing to remember is that he had to rely on Tory MPs to get parliamentary assent for the invasion, whenever people claim that the Labour Party were all gung-ho for it. A significant number were against it.

I think the only Tory MP to vote against the invasion was Jonathan Sayeed.