Labour Leadership

[andymac]

It's a strange world when opposition to city killers and empire is considered radical. I of course know what you mean, just from where i'm sitting it seems crazy. I'm sure i'm thought of crazy by someone who does like them though. So least it balances out.

Indeed but it does not make it dictatorship propaganda.

[Ally Bongo]

Indeed but it does not make it dictatorship propaganda.

It doesnt but it is getting very close to it

[andymac]

It doesnt but it is getting very close to it

Er, how?

[Orraloon]

How is it?

He is CND and anti-NATO. If you believe in the current set-up that is pretty radical

Do you think wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons is radical?

[Ally Bongo]

Er, how?

Hitler believed that his opponents should not be argued with - they should be attacked and shouted down.

[andymac]

Do you think wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons is radical?

Depends on how you get rid of them but my views are not relevant, As I said if you are part of the group in society that believes a nuclear armed NATO then JC's views would represent a threat to national security. If they say so, it hardly makes it dictatorship propaganda.

Hitler believed that his opponents should not be argued with - they should be attacked and shouted down.

He might have done but what the has that got to do with the current situation?

[Ally Bongo]

He might have done but what the has that got to do with the current situation?

Im sure you are clever enough to see the similarities and are being obtuse

However to help you along the current Government is not only demonising it's opposition as a threat to national security but at the same time trying to destroy the trade unions

[andymac]

Im sure you are clever enough to see the similarities and are being obtuse

However to help you along the current Government is not only demonising it's opposition as a threat to national security but at the same time trying to destroy the trade unions

I see no similarities at all. Politician says views held by another politician are a threat to the people. He is not threatening to pack him off to a concentration camp or a gulag. It is the opening shots in the political debate that will take place culminating in an election. What should he do? Not say anything?

Equally the Conservatives won an election with Trade Union reform swishing about in their manifesto, whether you agree with it or not it has been through due process.

Just because you don't agree with somebody's doesn't make them some sort of fascist.

Edited September 13, 2015 by andymac

[FuNsTeR]

I just don't get that. What does he want from a Labour Party?

another Tony Blair like politician his (my dad) grandfather and my great grandfather was a communist ... he does not like communist emblems like the hammer and sickle (i've got a few of those t-shirts)

[Scunnered]

Chuka hinting in his statement that Corbyn may back a No vote in the EU referendum. What a bounce if true!

[Ally Bongo]

I see no similarities at all. Politician says views held by another politician are a threat to the people. He is not threatening to pack him off to a concentration camp or a gulag. It is the opening shots in the political debate that will take place culminating in an election. What should he do? Not say anything?

Equally the Conservatives won an election with Trade Union reform swishing about in their manifesto, whether you agree with it or not it has been through due process.

Just because you don't agree with somebody's doesn't make them some sort of fascist.

It depends if you agree that attempting to frighten the public into keeping you in power by making them believe the lie that your opposition poses some sort of threat to the national security of the UK is worthy of politicians in a democracy or not.

Do you actually seriously believe that he does knowing how the machinery of the UK political establishment works even if he did become prime minister ?

Also 63% of the UK voting population rejecting the Tory manifesto policies yet having them foist upon them is hardly due process - it just shows how ludicrous our electoral system is.

The only threat to our national security that i can see is the austerity policies being undertaken which bring drastic cuts to our Police and Armed forces not to mention the current Government completely ignoring a parliamentary vote and taking it on their own hands to carry out air strikes in Syria

[Ally Bongo]

[Barney Rubble]

Kezia Dugdale since yesterday - cringeworthy.

[Ally Bongo]

Murnaghan ‏@SkyMurnaghan 9h9 hours ago

We asked the Government and the @Conservatives for an interview with any Minister/MP to defend the Trade Union Bill. No one was available.

[scotlad]

Andy Burnham to be named Shadow Health Secretary:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34240869

Looks like there will be a role for Hillary Benn too; a good appointment, albeit he's no a patch on his auld man.

John McDonnell being touted on Twitter as being either new Shadow Chancellor or Work and Pensions Secretary. I wonder if Jez will break with Labour tradition and have a left-winger as his Chancellor. Personally, I'd love it, love it, if he put McDonnell up against the loathsome IDS.

[andymac]

It depends if you agree that attempting to frighten the public into keeping you in power by making them believe the lie that your opposition poses some sort of threat to the national security of the UK is worthy of politicians in a democracy or not.

Do you actually seriously believe that he does knowing how the machinery of the UK political establishment works even if he did become prime minister ?

Also 63% of the UK voting population rejecting the Tory manifesto policies yet having them foist upon them is hardly due process - it just shows how ludicrous our electoral system is.

The only threat to our national security that i can see is the austerity policies being undertaken which bring drastic cuts to our Police and Armed forces not to mention the current Government completely ignoring a parliamentary vote and taking it on their own hands to carry out air strikes in Syria

What I think is neither here nor there. Try suspending your own beliefs for a moment,

If I am ( one is) in (or one of the leaders of) a party that believes that NATO and nuclear deterrence is the bulwark for the security of the UK then yes I would regard a leader who was personally committed to unilateral disarmament and withdrawal from NATO and has expressed (that I read today) that the money would be better spent elsewhere as a threat to my view of national security.

You never answered the question about what do you expect Cameron and his crew to say?

If you are PM and have enough votes you can make anything happen or at least we have to pretend you can or there is no point in anybody voting. As you point out they buggered off and performed a drone strike.

After that you are way of on a tangent that has nowt to do with how it started but for the record you will never see me defend FPTP and equally, that is the big flaw in some of the TU reform stuff. Tighter rules for TUs than for government?

I'm not sure what a letter to a newspaper (the Gruniad from the type face?) proves. Other people have a similar view to you? Nor do I see why a tweet from Sky saying nobody is available for comment is important. I would expect they are all in a smoked filled room smoke free room planning their approach to the coming bills with JC as the leader of the opposition.

[Ally Bongo]

If I am ( one is) in (or one of the leaders of) a party that believes that NATO and nuclear deterrence is the bulwark for the security of the UK then yes I would regard a leader who was personally committed to unilateral disarmament and withdrawal from NATO and has expressed (that I read today) that the money would be better spent elsewhere as a threat to my view of national security.

You never answered the question about what do you expect Cameron and his crew to say?

If you are PM and have enough votes you can make anything happen or at least we have to pretend you can or there is no point in anybody voting. As you point out they buggered off and performed a drone strike.

Before i defend Corbyn id just like to point out that i will never vote Labour in my life

However he has made his views on NATO clear - He wants to have a serious debate on the powers of NATO and that there isnt an appetite for people to leave it and so would argue for NATO to restrict its role (it's expansion eastwards for example which is causing tensions with Russia) not have the UK withdraw.

You could argue that NATO is currently putting your security at risk rather than defending it - the job that is supposed to do.

I wont even address the point that having nuclear weapons makes us safer as it's ludicrous not only against the threats we face at the moment but also because it's the end of us all if they are ever used.

However id wager that it's more than likely that Corbyn will backtrack on that also and have a minimalist nuclear deterrant - but thats just my opinion.

As for your last point you are advocating a dictatorship ?

What if they lose the democratic parliamentary vote on Trade Union "reform" but decide to implement it anyway through the back door ?

Because thats what they did with air strikes on Syria which many of their own party voted against.

Thats when you should be asking why do we bother voting FFS

And as for your question - Cameron wasnt asked if he thought Corbyn posed a threat to National Security

Edited September 13, 2015 by Ally Bongo

[andymac]

Before i defend Corbyn id just like to point out that i will never vote Labour in my life

However he has made his views on NATO clear - He wants to have a serious debate on the powers of NATO and that there isnt an appetite for people to leave it and so would argue for NATO to restrict its role (it's expansion eastwards for example which is causing tensions with Russia) not have the UK withdraw.

You could argue that NATO is currently putting your security at risk rather than defending it - the job that is supposed to do.

I wont even address the point that having nuclear weapons makes us safer as it's ludicrous not only against the threats we face at the moment but also because it's the end of us all if they are ever used.

However id wager that it's more than likely that Corbyn will backtrack on that also and have a minimalist nuclear deterrant - but thats just my opinion.

As for your last point you are advocating a dictatorship ?

What if they lose the democratic parliamentary vote on Trade Union "reform" but decide to implement it anyway through the back door ?

Because thats what they did with air strikes on Syria which many of their own party voted against.

Thats when you should be asking why do we bother voting FFS

And as for your question - Cameron wasnt asked if he thought Corbyn posed a threat to National Security

So the short answer is no you can't put your own views to one side.

[Ally Bongo]

So the short answer is no you can't put your own views to one side.

Nope because your reasoning as to why Cameron said Corbyn was a threat to National security is horseshit (in my opinion)

Im sure you know this (again my opinion)

[Pool Q]

I think Corbyn has said he sees 'no need' for further devolution to Scotland, though he may have been misreported/misrepresented. The hysterical reaction to his election as Labour leader has been something to behold. There's no doubt the full force of the MSM will be turned against him and his challenge to the cosy neo-liberal consensus of most of UK politics. Whether that will have the same effect today in the age of social media as it would have done in the past only time will tell.

The narrative that his victory will benefit Labour in Scotland is developing quickly, in some ways no doubt it will. Certainly his anti-austerity and anti-Trident views will chime with many, while the SNP may, as time goes on, be seen by increasing numbers as the establishment, government party (they have been in power for a while here now) responsible for, amongst other things, a creaking NHS and police service. However if it does appear that Corbyn is unelectable in England (I'd say he is) and that his leadership ultimately means more Tory rule, it is a reach to see how this will benefit Labour here in the medium term.

[Lamia]

I am so interested to see how the Labour Party will vote on Trident.

[Orraloon]

I am so interested to see how the Labour Party will vote on Trident.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron and co just bash on with it without even having a vote on it. They have already announced spending £500 million on it. Not sure when they are due to start spending that though.

[ErsatzThistle]

Corbyn already under fire and from the left of the party !

He appointed a Lord as Shadow Justice Secretary and has given the top jobs (Shadow Chancellor, Home Sec, Foreign Sec) to middle aged white men.

[Scunnered]

Corbyn already under fire and from the left of the party !

He appointed a Lord as Shadow Justice Secretary and has given the top jobs (Shadow Chancellor, Home Sec, Foreign Sec) to middle aged white men.

Not from where I'm sitting he's not.

[Huddersfield]

Corbyn already under fire and from the left of the party !

He appointed a Lord as Shadow Justice Secretary and has given the top jobs (Shadow Chancellor, Home Sec, Foreign Sec) to middle aged white men.

They are only the top jobs ("great offices of state") as defined by the old, white, upper class establishment. Health, education, employment, etc. are every bit as important in the modern world.