By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
To avoid a long and protracted debate (which I will leave to those who see it as a bit of sport on this forum) I think we will have to agree to disagree.
All I want to see is people applying scrutiny fairly by trying to suppress their bias and/or prejudice when analysing information.
It is the next part which is exactly what I want to hear from a leader which is what they propose to do about it. I want to hear all parties proposals as to how they would address the current climate and mitigate the very real threats we are currently facing.
Just because an election is imminent the Prime Minister is not excused from their duty of leading the country.
Having taken issue with TM outlining her approach to tackle this extremist behaviour I suppose you take issue with JC who has already shared his views on what he feels needs reflecting on (police and intelligence resource)?
I am baffled as to why for many TM can do no right and JC can do no wrong?
I think both leaders have their merits and both have opportunities for refinement/improvement.
On the subject of TM's speech, i think it is unfair to brand it "meaningless sloganeering" based upon a snippet extracted. In fairness to her she went on to clarify "enough is enough" by identifying four points that required further action to address recent events.