O/T Jeremy corbyn

[animallittle3]

Is there any polititions over all the party's who would be a good pm?. Or are they just there to be shot down? Genuine question as I don't do politics often

Well apparently the less you say and acknowledge in a live debate designed to find out the best candidate to lead the country the more your chances of success are increased .

I think that just about sums up where we are as a nation .

The less the opposition leader says on matters such as brexit the more likely he is to remain in a job too .

Perhaps someone should place The deaf , dumb and blind kid who sure plays a mean pinball into office .

He would be perfect .

[John2]

An event is winding up Trump and other non communist countries that will deter investment, we currently have a 63% in fintec vacancies (this will rise as I predicted to you two years ago) many are from America.

The other impact will be his close links to countries who operate through terrorism who he seems to like the most, this will also impact on investment.

Ill post another reason tomorrow for you John

LOL, your cognitive dissonance is so strong. You think 'winding up Trump' is going to bankrupt our country, but heading out of the world's largest market and crashing onto WTO tariffs of 10%+ for almost half our exports will be fine! You just don't have a clue how economics works, I look forward to tomorrow's giggle of the day.

[John2]

I agree in principle with your post. but don't think that it gets Corbyn fully off the hook. He knows (or ought to know) that neither the UK nor the US are going to reveal much of the evidence that they hold, as to do so could compromise either the human sources or non human techniques through which intelligence is gathered. That isn't a satisfactory position from a democratic accountability point of view, but it's another example of an inconvenient reality.

You're being very unfair here. His job is to hold the government to account and be the opposition and demand answers and evidence. He's damned if he does damned if he doesn't under your rules of engagement.

He absolutely should be asking these questions, the government can state that sources are sensitive or brief him privately, but to suggest he just shouldn't challenge things because it might be confidential is a bit of a poor argument.

[John2]

Do we not meet those standards now?

He was making the point that we'll STILL have to produce them to the EU standards so it won't really be "on our terms" it will be on theirs.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Many of our standards existed before we joined the EU and some even before the EU existed.

For example many of our Health and Safety regulations and food safety regulations.

Most of the EU regulations were brought in to provide consistency across the EU not necessarily to improve them.

There’s absolutely no real evidence that existing laws will be scrapped in the U.K. if we leave the EU.

[Exiletyke]

He was making the point that we'll STILL have to produce them to the EU standards so it won't really be "on our terms" it will be on theirs.

I really don't think he was
We were & are members of the EU & as such will have been instrumental in forming those standards

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

We were & are members of the EU & as such will have been instrumental in forming those standards

Yes correct, and we can continue forming good standards as we did before we joined the EEC.

The rest of the EU could copy if they wished.

[ragingpup]

I’m obsessed with Corbyn? I’ll repeat the point that I made the other day that it isn’t so long since you were trilling away about how people were chanting his name in Grime Clubs. It’s only since you’ve realised that he is a toxic brand that you’ve come all over sceptical about him.

I don’t know whether the Leader of the Opposition is entitled to intelligence briefings. I think it has always been a matter of convention, but I know of no law that requires it. It’s difficult to see how there could be oversight of such an arrangement and I can’t see the security services being too keen to share information about intelligence held on Iran with someone who has taken handsome payments from an arm of the Iranian government. Can you? Do you seriously think it would be a good idea, bearing in mind the intelligence will almost certainly be based in part on human sources and that Iran isn’t known for its tolerance and open and independent judicial system ?

You have to bear in mind that Corbyn is a man of principle and that the principle is ‘anyone who doesn’t like the USA and the West is ok with him’.

It’s a tricky one though isn’t it? Corbyn and by extension you as a Labour voter, want Diane Abbott to be the next Home Secretary - a woman who said of the PIRA "Every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed" in charge of the police and security services… I really don’t care how many haircuts she’s had since she said it, I wonder if she would like to explain it to the friends and families of the people who were blown up in Guildford or Birmingham or the parents of the 3-year old and the 12-yr old who were killed in the Warrington bombing.

And you spend days making daft points about how ‘far right’ Farage is for some stupid comment about Romanians whilst getting on the knocker to try to catapult Corbyn, Abbott and the equally extreme McDonnell into power. It beggars belief and you really need to have a word with yourself.

I don't know if a ‘more cynical scrutiny’ of evidence might have prevented the war in Iraq and unnecessary death of soldiers, because I don’t know what the evidence was.

What a shamelessly one dimensional post that was. You can sometimes carry arguments that show some elements of being able to understand nuance and complexity in political ideas. This one was pure 'Daily Express'.

Anger for the victims of abimanable IRA terrorist actions yet no thought at all for the innocent lives lost over the years to the victims of the British state in successive governments. Likewise you repeatedly post about abominable actions of the Palestinians without any acknowledgement of the abominable actions of the Israeli state. You profess to be a reader of The Guardian paper which in fairness generally shows two sides to each narrative. I see no rub off of such sophistication from you here. You'll of course claim to be independent and above such influences. But it honestly would do you good to read both sides of political history, but just the UK imperialist one that you continually spout.

And most offensively of all you claim you "don't know what the evidence was" of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that sent our soldiers to their deaths. Absolute shame on you.

There was none.

We went to war based on knee jerk, erroneous evidence that played, as we always do, to the imperialist gut of our idiot leaders (and followers, shame on us too) And we wandered, blindly into it killing our own and creating circumstances that fuelled terrorist revenge that we still suffer from. Corbyn wanted further evidence of these "weapons of mass destruction", as did most right thinking snowflake libtards. Grist and Fire will be very proud of your post. And for that you should feel quite ashamed.

[rolymiller]

Mr Kerr raison d'etre is to be a critic of the left. He has no interest at all in criticising the right. Why not is a total mystery for someone who purports to be fair minded. His obsession with the Labour party is just so spiteful and unnecessary. Nobody says labour is perfect but neither are the other partys. To say that a Corbyn govt for this country would lead to some sort of cataclysmic economic disaster will just not be true. Even the most biased person realises that there really ain't much difference between the political party's and that is why voters are so pissed off on general with politics and look to nutters like farage as some sort of escape.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

The Guardian is to the left as the Daily Mail is to the right.

You won’t get balanced articles in either.