| Well said Tim Farron on 13:27 - May 26 with 1202 views | DoobDude |
So how often do Belgium and Sweden deploy troops abroad.
It's nothing to do with our foreign policy or prisons. And everything to do with Muslims not integrating into British society. |  |
|  |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:30 - May 26 with 1192 views | footers |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:16 - May 26 by GlasgowBlue |
I have said that in the past his sympathy has been with the terrorists. |
But the Tories don't just have past sympathies with terrorists, they are presently arming, training and funding them.
Stop Saudi Arabia, stop ISIS. Bit of a shame you're focusing on words rather than actions- one is far more dangerous than the other. |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:31 - May 26 with 1188 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:22 - May 26 by Gromheort |
You can of course fight terrorism by attacking human rights and enabling government repression. It is not a price worth paying. |
Sadly, the reality of the work these people do means you might have to see changes in the way certain activities are carried out.
I know that isn't a great political argument, or one that will be found in a textbook, but it's the reality of what we have to live and work within every day.
If small changes and increased powers of the Security Services in terms of surveillance and use of evidence mean we avoid any more Manchester type attacks or another 7/7, then most of the UK will go with that.
It's not about Government repression or attacking human rights for the people on the front-line doing their jobs, it's about keeping the general public safe. |  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:31 - May 26 with 1180 views | Archer4721 |
| Well said Tim Farron on 12:15 - May 26 by GlasgowBlue |
This is why I believe Corbyn is an utter hypocrite.
Consider this and tell me you don't feel uncomfortable listening to Corbyn talking about how to combat terror.
22 people were blown to bits by an Islamic terrorist in Manchester on Monday evening.
Somewhere there is a useful idiot who will attend a meeting of an event in support of Islamic terrorism.
The programme printed for the event will state ““force of arms is the only method capable of bringing about a middle east free from western intervention.” but the useful idiot will attend nevertheless. In fact it won’t be the first time the useful idiot will attend such an event. He will attend over 70 such events, during which time the Jihadist terrorists will murder more and more people.
At the event, the useful idiot will share a stage and speak alongside a Jihadist who is currently on the run from British security services for the murder of a British soldier. This won’t seem to bother the useful idiot.
This useful idiot will then stand for a minute’s silence in honour of Jihadi John and Salman Abedi. He will then tell the crowd “I’m happy to commemorate all those who died fighting for a middle east free of foreign troops”
As part of the editorial board of a left wing publication he will contribute to an article which says “the British only sit up and take when they are bombed into it”. In the same issue of the magazine they will publish two jokes at the expense of the victims of the Manchester bombing.
The useful idiot, as a member of Parliament will invite hate preachers who support the Manchester bombings to take tea with him in the House of Commons. He will refer to those who committed the bombings as “his friends”.
Also, as a member of Parliament, he will vote against an agreement which it is hoped will begin talks that will result in peace in the middle east.
Despite his best efforts, some ten years later peace does eventualy arrive in the middle east.
At a meeting with former jihadist terrorists, another useful idiot will state that ““It’s about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Salman Abedi that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of IS. Because of the bravery of IS and people like Salman Abedi, we now have a peace process.”
And in thirty years’ time there will be people on an internet message board, who weren’t born or were too young to remember the Manchester bombing and other islamist terror attacks. The people will bend over backwards to defend the useful idiots as peacemakers. Despite all of the above being made available to them the useful idiot’s apologists will put their fingers in their ears and shout very loudly.
And that ulla is why I feel Jeremy Corbyn is completely unfit to be Prime Minster of the United Kingdom. Substitute useful idiot for Jeremy Corbyn or John McDonnel, substitute IS for IRA and substitute Middle East for Northern Ireland and defend Corbyn’s words and deeds. |
The only hypocrite here is you. |  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:32 - May 26 with 1182 views | DanTheMan |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:25 - May 26 by GlasgowBlue |
They say it all the time.
The foiled attacks on the Ministry of Sound nightclub: "no one could turn round and say oh they are innocent, those slags dancing around”.
The foiled attacks on Birmingham nightclubs: ‘the kuffar, slags and whores go drinking and clubbing’ and ‘have sex like donkeys’.
They tell us enough yet we still keep asking why? |
So... they attack some children? Like it would make sense if they attacked a gay bar, or a symbol of liberalism.
They need people to believe that we could stop bombing them etc. and it would continue because they want us to do it so they continue to get people to join their cause.
However my personal belief is either we actually put in some proper effort to snuff them out completely whatever that entails, or we don't get involved. This halfway house just plays into their hands. |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:34 - May 26 with 1165 views | Gromheort |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:31 - May 26 by ElderGrizzly |
Sadly, the reality of the work these people do means you might have to see changes in the way certain activities are carried out.
I know that isn't a great political argument, or one that will be found in a textbook, but it's the reality of what we have to live and work within every day.
If small changes and increased powers of the Security Services in terms of surveillance and use of evidence mean we avoid any more Manchester type attacks or another 7/7, then most of the UK will go with that.
It's not about Government repression or attacking human rights for the people on the front-line doing their jobs, it's about keeping the general public safe. |
The idea that we have to attack human rights in the same way as an autocracy is simply unsupportable.
Can we reduce terrorism by eliminating a free press? Yes. Can we reduce terrorism by giving insane powers to government? Yes. It is, however, completely inconsistent with liberalism. |  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:34 - May 26 with 1161 views | giant_stow |
its tricky to answer |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:35 - May 26 with 1151 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:27 - May 26 by DoobDude |
So how often do Belgium and Sweden deploy troops abroad.
It's nothing to do with our foreign policy or prisons. And everything to do with Muslims not integrating into British society. |
Belgium has been all over the news in recent years:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/belgium-probes-mosul-air-strikes-killed-ci
Like Germany, Sweden takes in a lot of refugees who are fleeing from oppressive Islamic regimes. It's in ISIS' interest to spread unrest in these countries (including ours) to turn people against modest muslims.
Even if Muslims don't integrate, they still need that trigger to turn from normal people into suicide bombers. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:37 - May 26 with 1145 views | feelingblue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:27 - May 26 by DoobDude |
So how often do Belgium and Sweden deploy troops abroad.
It's nothing to do with our foreign policy or prisons. And everything to do with Muslims not integrating into British society. |
a. All the time. Swedish troops were in Afghanistan and Iraq, as were Belgian troops.
b. Why do you have to try to reduce everything to a simple but incoherent assertion?
The fact that Sweden, Belgium, France, Spain etc have had terrorist attacks has something to do with Muslims not integrating into Western societies, something to do with Western foreign policies in the Middle-East, something to do with a fundamentalist phase in certain strands of Islam.
It is not everything to do with anything. |  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:37 - May 26 with 1141 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:34 - May 26 by Gromheort |
The idea that we have to attack human rights in the same way as an autocracy is simply unsupportable.
Can we reduce terrorism by eliminating a free press? Yes. Can we reduce terrorism by giving insane powers to government? Yes. It is, however, completely inconsistent with liberalism. |
And we're not saying we do either of those things to the extremes you are discussing. It's not the argument here at all.
I'm talking about the reality of friends and colleagues doing their day to day jobs and the restrictions they are currently under that they believe are hindering the capture/control of these people who want to harm us.
Yes, there need to be checks and balances, but right now we are fighting it with one hand behind our back. | | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:40 - May 26 with 1122 views | Gromheort |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:37 - May 26 by ElderGrizzly |
And we're not saying we do either of those things to the extremes you are discussing. It's not the argument here at all.
I'm talking about the reality of friends and colleagues doing their day to day jobs and the restrictions they are currently under that they believe are hindering the capture/control of these people who want to harm us.
Yes, there need to be checks and balances, but right now we are fighting it with one hand behind our back. |
You have though haven't you? You have referred to more powers, even though we already have 'extreme surveillance' that goes beyond the powers seen in autocracies.
We're on a path to authoritarianism. That path cannot be justified by the terrorist threat. | | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:44 - May 26 with 1104 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:40 - May 26 by Gromheort |
You have though haven't you? You have referred to more powers, even though we already have 'extreme surveillance' that goes beyond the powers seen in autocracies.
We're on a path to authoritarianism. That path cannot be justified by the terrorist threat. |
More powers doesn't mean the complete removal of free press and abolition of human rights though.
They are subtle, very small changes that would in no way affect 99.99% of the population.
As I said, you have some valid points, but taking everything to the extreme isn't really a valid representation of what we need to do our jobs and protect the UK public both here and overseas.
Out of interest, what do you believe is "extreme surveillance"? | | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:45 - May 26 with 1089 views | BOjK |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:31 - May 26 by Archer4721 |
The only hypocrite here is you. |
I note he refuses to clarify whether it is right or wrong to have a discussion about the best way to tackle terrorism at this time. |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:48 - May 26 with 1078 views | DoobDude |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:37 - May 26 by feelingblue |
a. All the time. Swedish troops were in Afghanistan and Iraq, as were Belgian troops.
b. Why do you have to try to reduce everything to a simple but incoherent assertion?
The fact that Sweden, Belgium, France, Spain etc have had terrorist attacks has something to do with Muslims not integrating into Western societies, something to do with Western foreign policies in the Middle-East, something to do with a fundamentalist phase in certain strands of Islam.
It is not everything to do with anything. |
These ISIS nutters still talk about the Crusades!
You think Corbyn getting in and apologising for our part in Iraq will change a thing?
We weren't very nice to the Hindus before World War 2 but they don't feel the need to kill our children. | |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:49 - May 26 with 1072 views | Gromheort |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:44 - May 26 by ElderGrizzly |
More powers doesn't mean the complete removal of free press and abolition of human rights though.
They are subtle, very small changes that would in no way affect 99.99% of the population.
As I said, you have some valid points, but taking everything to the extreme isn't really a valid representation of what we need to do our jobs and protect the UK public both here and overseas.
Out of interest, what do you believe is "extreme surveillance"? |
Already quoted from a Liberal on how this has enabled political repression. If you're happy with that, fair enough. However, it is perfectly valid to note that Corbyn's approach has been about defending liberal democracy.
Think the Snowden quote ably advertised what extreme surveillance entails...
Got to go now. Hopefully you're return to defending liberalism soon enough! | | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:50 - May 26 with 1064 views | feelingblue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:48 - May 26 by DoobDude |
These ISIS nutters still talk about the Crusades!
You think Corbyn getting in and apologising for our part in Iraq will change a thing?
We weren't very nice to the Hindus before World War 2 but they don't feel the need to kill our children. |
When I say incoherent.....wtf are you on about? | | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:53 - May 26 with 1055 views | homer_123 |
| Well said Tim Farron on 12:40 - May 26 by lowhouseblue |
suzanne evans on manchester: "'As I said, I think when 9/11 happened we should have had a serious rethink about immigration, it didn't happen.' She added: 'Frankly, if they're not prepared to stand up and do what needs to be done to keep people safe then they're simply not fit to govern.
yes my viewpoint is that using manchester to push an anti-immigration line is pursuing a nasty end. do you not agree? |
No - not at all. What you've described there is something very simple.
"As I said, I think when 9/11 happened we should have had a serious rethink about immigration, it didn't happen."
What you are quoting there is a comment made by Evans at the launch of their manifesto, where (as we have already agreed between us) you would expect any party to talk about Foreign Policy - I don't see the above as anything outside of what we've seen from UKIP before or after Manchester.
So, I don't agree. You need to separate your views and look at the wider picture. Pretty sure we, between us, could find similar examples of the above from all political parties.
In this situation, Farron is the one that has been point scoring. |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:56 - May 26 with 1045 views | FrowsyArmLarry |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:22 - May 26 by Gromheort |
You can of course fight terrorism by attacking human rights and enabling government repression. It is not a price worth paying. |
There would be an attack of the scale of Manchester every two months if it wasn't for the security services. Roll back their powers and it would probably be one a month.... not sure how long we could take that without a full on race war developing so I think you should wind it in a bit |  | | |
| on 13:57 - May 26 with 1038 views | _ |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:56 - May 26 by FrowsyArmLarry |
There would be an attack of the scale of Manchester every two months if it wasn't for the security services. Roll back their powers and it would probably be one a month.... not sure how long we could take that without a full on race war developing so I think you should wind it in a bit |
|  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:00 - May 26 with 1034 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:25 - May 26 by BOjK |
I thought you were of the opinion that now isn't the time to be talking about this. |
Nice swerve. Before Gav messed up the board I had already said that now Corbyn has decided to politicise the Manchester bombing then is past record is fair game to scrutinise in the context of recent events. |  |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:01 - May 26 with 1028 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:32 - May 26 by DanTheMan |
So... they attack some children? Like it would make sense if they attacked a gay bar, or a symbol of liberalism.
They need people to believe that we could stop bombing them etc. and it would continue because they want us to do it so they continue to get people to join their cause.
However my personal belief is either we actually put in some proper effort to snuff them out completely whatever that entails, or we don't get involved. This halfway house just plays into their hands. |
You mean like the Pulse nightclub in Orlando? | |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:03 - May 26 with 1020 views | Yaffle |
| Well said Tim Farron on 11:19 - May 26 by connorscontract |
What part of:
"That assessment in no way reduces the guilt of those who attack our children. Those terrorists will forever be reviled and held to account for their actions"Â
don't you understand.
Disingenuous playing of the man, not the ball, there, Glassers. At least be accurate and debate it properly. Like we're supposed to in a democracy. |
You should know by now, that's his style. |  | | |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:11 - May 26 with 991 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 13:34 - May 26 by giant_stow |
its tricky to answer |
And none of the apologists have attempted to try.
The three main players in the current British Labour Party:
Jeremy Corbyn, Leader: Whilst attending a Pro IRA event in which the programme stated "“force of arms is the only method capable of bringing about a free and united Socialist Ireland.” stands for a minutes silence for IRA murders who were recently shot by the SAS and says "“I’m happy to commemorate all those who died fighting for an independent Ireland"
John McDonnell, Shadow Chancelor: “It’s about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA. Because of the bravery of the IRA and people like Bobby Sands, we now have a peace process.”
Dianne Abbott, Shadow Home Secretary: Talking about the IRA "“It is our struggle. Every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.”
That is the leadership of the Labour Party in 2017. | |
| |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:13 - May 26 with 983 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Well said Tim Farron on 14:03 - May 26 by Yaffle |
You should know by now, that's his style. |
Ironically you haven't added to the debate but have played the man.
Hypocritastic!! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
