Sometimes we do not know when small actions could have the most momentous effects. The Archduke Franz Ferdinand loved his wife, which was most unusual for a Hapsburg. She was not of royal blood and strict protocol meant she could not appear in public ceremonies with him in Vienna. Which is why he chose to undertake a royal visit to the obscure Serbian provincial city of Sarajevo for her birthday. The rest, as they say, is history.
AJP Taylor liked to list Franz Ferdinand’s love for his wife as a cause of the First World War, a reminder that history is the study of human beings. Of course the massive arms race between the imperial powers, and the nationalist and democratic forces acting on old heterogenous dynastic empires, lay at the root of the First World War. But Taylor’s absolutely correct point is that even the greatest store of paraffin will not ignite without a spark, and perhaps the spark may never come. I am with Taylor on this, against the rigid determinists.
The vast transfer of wealth from everybody else to the bankers in the great banking collapse, and the huge growth in wealth inequality and obscene concentrations of wealth in a tiny number of private hands, are the underlying causes of the collapse in old political party structures across the western democracies and the rise of insurgent politics in all its various forms, mostly under the careful control of the elite using all their media control to misdirect popular blame for mass poverty against immigrants.
There are however genuine examples of insurgent politics seeking to craft a fairer society in the UK, of which the SNP and Yes Movement in Scotland, and Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters in England and Wales, are the most important examples.
Unusually for me, this article is addressed primarily to Corbyn supporters down in England and Wales. You don’t have to be an Austrian Archduke to stand at the moment when your own small actions can have profound, indeed historical ramifications. If just a few score less ordinary people had listened to and acted on Camille Desmoulins’ great speech as the revolutionary impulse teetered, the world might have been very different. Corbyn supporters are at that moment of historic decision right now – and mostly do not realise it.
Jeremy Corbyn represents the only realistic chance the people of England and Wales have been given in decades, to escape from the neo-liberal economics that have impoverished vast swathes of the population. But he leads a parliamentary party which is almost entirely comprised of hardline neo-liberal adherents.
The majority of the parliamentary Labour party are the people who brought in academy schools, high student tuition fees, PFI, who introduced more privatisation into the health service than the Tories have, and who brought you the Iraq and Afghan Wars. They abstained on the Tory austerity benefit cuts and on May’s “hostile environment” immigration legislation. They support Trident nuclear missiles. Many hanker after bombing Syria, and most are members of Labour Friends of Israel.
Even before the current disintegration of UK political structures, there was no way that these Labour MPs were ever going to support Corbyn in power in seeking to return the UK towards the mainstream of European social democracy. They have spent the last four years in undermining Corbyn at every turn and attempting to return Labour to the right wing political Establishment agenda. In the current fluid state of UK politics, with sections of Labour MPs already having split off and others threatening to, it is even more important that the very large majority of Labour MPs are replaced by people who genuinely support the views and principles for which Jeremy Corbyn stands.
Regrettably Labour MPs do not automatically have to run for reselection against other potential party candidates, but under one of those hideous compromises so beloved of Labour Party conferences, they have to notify their intention to again be the party’s candidate for the constituency, and there is then a very brief window of a couple of weeks in which local branches and trade union branches can register a contest and force a challenge.
That process has now been triggered and it is ESSENTIAL that every Labour Party member reading this blog acts NOW to try to get rid of those dreadful Blairite MPs. If you do not act, the historic moment will be missed and the chance to move England and Wales away from neo-liberalism may be permanently surrendered.
The right wing forces have the massive advantage of inertia. The local MP is very likely a crony of the chairs of the relevant local branch institutions and of the appropriate local trade union officials (and there is insufficient public understanding of the fact that historically the unions are very much a right wing force in Labour politics). I am willing to bet that in the vast number of constituencies local officials and MPs are pretty confident of getting through this without the large majority of their members – especially the vast new Corbyn supporting membership – even noticing that anything is happening.
Which is why you need to act. Phone the chair of your local constituency today and demand that they tell you how to go about forcing a reselection battle. Make sure that they give you the phone numbers for any local branches or institutions you have to go through. If you do not know the phone number for your local constituency chair, phone Labour HQ and get them to tell you. If you are a member of an affiliated trade union or organisation, take action there too
Do not be put off. Do not follow any instruction from anyone, not even Momentum, about MPs who ought not to be challenged. Politics is a dirty game and full of dirty deals. Use your own judgement. Certainly any of the Labour MPs who abstained on Tory welfare cuts, failed to oppose the “hostile environment” immigration policy or voted to bomb Syria must be subject to challenge. I would recommend that you challenge any Friend of Israel, given that Israel is now openly an apartheid state. Remember, you may be able to influence two constituencies – that where you live, and through your trade union branch that where you work.
Whether or not you are a Labour Party member (and remember I am not), please bring this article to the attention of any and every Labour Party member you know. Progress reports in the comments section would be extremely welcome, as would anyone willing to take the time to draw up “hit lists” based on the kind of criteria I outline above.
While the media are concentrated on the Tory shenanigans, it is the Labour Party members who have the chance to make choices which could have in the long term much more important effects upon society; if people act as I recommend, this could be a historic turning point. Otherwise it will just be one of those moments that passed, and the Corbyn insurgency a small footnote of might have been.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
You are entirely correct.
The Westminster selections were made in Scotland a year or so ago.
As far as my understanding goes, only seven Scottish MP’s will receive the letter you refer to. All the others, and there’s a fair number who favour the status quo, will still be PPC’s.
I really DO hope that this is successful. I’m not a Labour member, nor even a Labour voter (I’ve been SNP some years now) But I DO still have fondness for genuine Labour principles and realise, obviously, that SNP can never form a Westminster Government.
Corbyn is the closest we’ve had in decades to someone who actually holds the founding principles of the party. And, as you say, the PLP have done their level best, legally and illegally to oust him. Now they are using dirty tricks to such an extent that they are shredding their own support. They are using smear tactics and lies to bring him down. The truth is that COrbyn more accurately reflects the membership than they do.
I hope your article is shared on other political blogs too. Labour Party members need to get off their arses and DO something. They should reflect on what happened to the party in Scotland ie going from ‘weighing the votes’ to third place irrelevancy in a few short years. The party got lazy, cronies voting for cronies, members being disinterested and allowing incompetent right wingers into office. I am personally acquainted with one Labour Party Activist who epitomises everything wrong in the Labour Party. He espouses all of their policies, as you might expect, but when asked to explain WHY he thinks any of these are a good idea he is utterly unable to do so. He knows WHAT he thinks but not WHY he thinks that. A disengaged activist, almost perfect to be an MP! This kind of lazy thinking has killed Labour in Scotland. Perhaps Momentum CAN save Labour but they’ll need to get Corbyn supporting MPs in place first and THIS is the only way to do it.
Personally I think Labour was fatally wounded years ago, it’s having a long, painful and very public death. The Blairites are the final stab in the back that will finish the party, ripping it to shred to get Corbyn out, forgetting that Corbyn is the very reason they got as many votes as they did in the last GE – and that with the loss of one of their oldest hearltands – Scotland…
Your understanding is what we need more of, that the Scottish should absolutely support Corbyn in principle though not necessarily at the ballot box.
Scotland must have independence and even though the Labour party as constituted is disinclined, we must make the argument that the majority of us have far more in common than anything which divides us. True Labour folk must learn to recognise that Scottish independence helps their causes and their aims immeasurably, altering the dynamic of power in the UK in favour of the people, decentralising power once and for all and potentially creating an entirely new template for governance on these islands, governance entirely at odds with the current model from Westminster. For the Scots primarily, but by influence and osmosis for Britain as a whole, including the Northern Irish, Welsh and Cornish peoples.
That dream is entirely the responsibility of the SNP to create and to pursue, and whomever follows after them. We English desperately need Scottish independence every bit as much as the Scots need Scottish independence. This is simply the truth although as a whole we English don’t yet fully understand that we do, or why we do. This is the argument which must be made. This is the burden of invention and vision resting upon the shoulders of the Scottish people. They have it, but will they seize it and use it? The English are too enchanted by their cultural dominators in America to rouse themselves from their deep slumber. Can Scotland revive itself and thus revive the dormant spirit of England by accident? For we are truly one people. Though the Scottish must do it for themselves and for their own purposes, by doing so, we may all prosper.
For all your purple prose and your use of italics to emphasise what you perceive to be an imperative and a desperate need, and for all your commitment to administrative reform brought about by political party
twatsrepresentatives that will lead to a new model of “governance” (of what?), I note you don’t mention any kind of problem or inconvenience or annoyance in the lives of real people in the working class majority either North or South of the border that interests you so much.“altering the dynamic of power in the UK in favour of the people”
Yeah – monarchy goes so well with the idea of “power to the people”. Are you planning to get the deranged crown prince on your side?
I’m stopping my contributions here now.
“I’m stopping my contributions here now.”
N_
I hope you’ll reconsider.
N_ may have meant he is cancelling his subscription_ (previously known as donation_). That would be in_convenient and ann_oying, I suppose. Otherwise farewell N_ and please accept this rededicated haiku from all of us.
N_
NN__
NNN___
Plop plop plop!
Whatever dude.
It’s Corbyn and his gang who are out of step with the vast majority of members on brexit, as are McCluskey and some unions. It just isn’t a simple blairite us and them narrative, much as they would like you to believe it. Corbyn might have admirable principles, but he is a terrible party manager and leader who will not be able to turn around the negative perception of him, especially by the great majority who could care less about the utterly dull internal party machinations and factions – which are meat and drink to the true believers, at the cost of real progress.
I don’t think many of my own CLP members would agree with any of that! It’s just Guardian stuff. Unfortunately this is a very safe con seat so there is not a lot we can do.
@ Ian June 27, 2019 at 22:19
It is the PTB, including of course foreign entities, that are against Corbyn, and naturally their pliant Presstitutes in the MSM poison the minds of many of the working class with their constant propaganda.
‘Israel secretly operates a troll army of thousands, partly funded by a government department.
The Ministry of Strategic Affairs is dedicated to a global “war” against BDS, the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement for Palestinian rights.
To conceal its involvement, the ministry has admitted to working through front groups that “do not want to expose their connection with the state.”
The troll army Act.IL is one of many such groups. It focuses on spreading Israeli propaganda online.
What does it do with its million dollar budget?’
[..]
‘Influence campaign against Corbyn
In August last year, Act.IL ran a campaign directing its troll army to make and promote comments online against the British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, accusing him of anti-Semitism.’
https://electronicintifada.net/content/how-israeli-spies-are-flooding-facebook-and-twitter/27596
Does Shai Masot still participate?
Collusion!!
Paul, misses the point entirely of what i was saying, and indeed only strengthens it.
Ian
I think you’ve missed a great deal yourself during the entire period since Corbyn was elected. A concerted campaign against him began on day one by a core group within the PLP to undermine him. There was a challenge to his leadership within a year. He won again. And still it went on.
By that time we’d had the Brexit result yet still the priority was to damage Corbyn. These people didn’t seem to care that they were also damaging their Party. They weren’t for changing their focus on to Brexit either despite the potential consequences. The priority was still to take Corbyn down.
Journalists now openly admit that they receive information about Party business and meetings regularly from some of these Labour MPs. The media has been only too willing to help!
There were Labour MPs who actually seemed disappointed when their Party won recently in Peterborough. There are Labour MPs now who seem as keen as the Tories to see Labour lose another General Election!
That they have sunk to the depths we’ve seen is deplorable. They are a disgrace.
I am not interested in defending those people, or their attempts to undermine Corbyn. I am not missing that. What I am saying is that none of that makes him an effective or successful leader, and that the simple narrative of us and them is an absurd simplification which it suits Corbyn supporters to cling to. An awful lot of them would much prefer to spend all of their time on internal party politics rather than addressing the crisis we are going through. It is beyond dull and depressing, and is reflected in their polling.
Ian
I’m not a “Corbyn supporter” but I do have an interest in politics, have done for a long time. What’s going on in the Labour Party right now is deeply sinister and the concerns being expressed about the role of certain Labour MPs are not what any reasonable person would call an “absurd simplification”.
«I’m not a “Corbyn supporter” but I do have an interest in politics, have done for a long time. What’s going on in the Labour Party right now is deeply sinister»
When M Thatcher said “There Is No Alternative” that was not a claim, it was a strategic plan: to ensure that all party leaderships were thatcherite, just of different flavours, vanilla thatcherite (New Labour), hard thatcherite (LibDems), extreme thatcherite (Conservatives). The result has been a huge fall in New Labour membership and in general a big rise in people who don’t vote. Some quotes:
A commenter on “The Guardian” in 2018: “I’m nearly thirty, which means I grew up under Major (just), Blair and Brown then Dave and Nick. In my considered opinion and the opinion of my peers – you couldn’t fit a fag paper between them.”
Chuka Umunna in 2015: “Our policy agenda was thoroughly pro-business, but sometimes people got the impression that it wasn’t. It sometimes gave the impression that they weren’t with the wealth creators. You’ve got to be with the people who create wealth because they create jobs.”
“The Times”, 2016: “Labour MPs have raised concerns that Jeremy Corbyn’s rhetoric on tax avoidance could appear anti-aspiration.”
“The Guardian”, 2015: “Tristram Hunt, the shadow education secretary, said Labour would only win if the party championed aspirational voters who shop at John Lewis and Waitrose.”
A Campbell’s deputy spinmaster in 1999: “Philip Gould analysed our problem very clearly. We don’t know what we are. Gordon wants us to be a radical progressive, movement, but wants us to keep our heads down on Europe. Peter [Mandelson] thinks that we are a quasi-Conservative Party but that we should stick our necks out on Europe.”
@ Ian June 27, 2019 at 22:19
It’s ‘Corbyn and his gang’ who are the heart and soul of the Socialist Labour Party, the REAL Labour Party.
British people, including Labour Party members, are split almost equally between Brexit and Remain.
Jeremy Corbyn had an almighty task ahead of him even without the Brexit business; the PTB cannot abide a decent, people-oriented, anti-war, Nationalising Labour Party. Then we have the anti-S^^itism BS smears, and though many respected J^^s have come out and said just that, still the smears continue.
The AS Campaign clearly shows the extraordinary influence of a Foreign Apartheid Regime, and it’s apologists and money, on British Politics. Remember Shai Masot, because the MSM won’t remind you, though it will trawl through decades-old comments to find something that they can paint as an AS attitude.
Paul
Remember too that we saw this from Mike Pompeo in recent days.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/09/mike-pompeo-leaked-recording-corbyn-labour-jewish-leaders
In it Pompeo acknowledges that Corbyn is currently being made to “run the gauntlet” here in the UK. His words, recorded and leaked, show that this is about much more than, as Ian calls it, “Us and Them.” or boring internal Party stuff. It’s much bigger.
I hope Ian will read it, Paul. The gauntlet represents the “moderates” in the PLP and the vicious tactics they have used against Corbyn. Pompeo’s audience was a group of J^^^sh leaders. They were discussing how to keep Corbyn out of Downing Street. I found the dialogue chilling, personally.
I’ve read it, and I’ve seen the AL Jazeera documentary, I know all about Shai Masot. Of course it is outrageous, illegal and subverts UK politics.Why won’t Corbyn say so? He is remarkably sanguine, or feeble, or just too timid. Same over brexit, he has lost the initiative, at a time of crisis, and when we have had by far the worst government of our lifetime and still he struggles to make any headway against them. However admirable his principles he is just not cut out for leading from the front and dealing with these difficult problems. And his inner circle just do not help him, especially the utterly reprehensible McCluskey. Murray and Milne are unconvincing as well, and see determined, like McCluskey, to ignore the members and push their own limited agenda, an approach which is not getting much, if any, traction. It is the same old leftwing politics, where internal processes and factional infighting and turf wars consume most of the time and energy. i have lost count of the numerous times when the opportunities were missed to both slam the government and promote alternatives, Jeremy just goes missing, or a pained, dull press release is issued on Facebook, ffs.
The leadership are letting down particularly the young members whose energy and commitment got Jeremy where he is now. I do wonder if his time is up.
Blaming, as is the conventional party line, the Israel lobby and the PLP, as if that was the only thing holding him back, just avoids a lot of the issues, although it doesn’t mean they don’t need to be tackled. There’s a lot more than that that needs to be done, though. We want opposition, proper opposition, we’re not getting it.
On Radio four, just now, they were saying Jeremy is past his best, he is having memory problems.
It was rather spiteful.
Ian
Thanks for clarifying. I appreciate your response.
@ Ian June 28, 2019 at 23:11
What other Western leader has ever been subjected to such across-the-board attacks, smears, back-stabbing from his own ‘side’, open talk by the US Secretary of State that he was being made to run a ‘gauntlet’, and if he survived that there were other tricks in store to stop him, foreign regimes spending hundreds of thousands of pounds to undermine him, then when exposed getting off with an ‘apology’ from the relevant Embassy, across -the-board MSM demonisation, and you find it a sign of his weakness that he cannot adequately deal with it?
Who could, given the main source of all the attacks, with their armies of Fifth Columnists here and abroad? What justice have Palestinians managed to gain, despite the self-evident rightness of their cause? Do you lambaste them too, for not coming up with an adequate response?
Or like so many of the Palestinians, do you think JC ought to show his mettle, by marching towards the machine guns and howitzers of his tormentors bare chested?
There should be a mighty revulsion arising from his supporters against all his back-stabbing ‘colleagues’, and the MSM lying propaganda, and the murderous policies of apartheid, repression, colonisation/Ethnic Cleansing and associated War Crimes.
The letter demanding Chris Williamsons expulsion identifies 90 labour MPs that need to be replaced. these people are either: a) ardent supporters of a foreign rogue state b) opponents of Corbyns leadership from the start c) naively & lazily following the manufactured narrative that has been blasted from MSM loudspeakers for months d) MPs that dont really want to improve society much, prefering to take their monthly paycheck- Or a combination of these.
It’s getting to the point where Corbyn has nothing to lose by facing them down.
How long has he got left as leader, he’s 70 years old now.
He could come out very forcefully for Open Selection and pitch all these troublemakers against alternative candidates, letting their CLPs decide if they should remain as the official Labour candidate in any given constituency. The ‘broad church’ and ‘risk of division’ arguments against this, don’t hold when the right of the party makes lists; refuses to accept and indeed has never accepted the left is in the ascendancy among the members, and those members wanted Corbyn to be allowed a fair chance to reflect their views.
Those individual MPs will have to be deselected at the ballot box if the Labour Party wont do it.
And elect who?
I mean, take BoJo today, saying he backs Trump 100% on Iran. And at the same hustings, Hunt claiming Iran is responsible for most of the trouble in the ME , as if Al Q. and IS and various other extremist factions weren’t actually Sunni extremist factions, backed by the Gulf monarchies. Hezbollah who they frequently name drop, are in govt in Lebanon and as far as I know don’t carry out any activities against the west.
You could despair at this often idiotic, rotten level of debate in this country.
Jeremy Corbyn is six years younger than Vince Cable
and three years younger than Donald Trump,
so a lot of life left in him yet.
Sorry to say my own MP Chris Matheson signed that. He’s been lukewarm on many of the important questions. Admittedly he’s been a good local MP, responsive and committed to his constituents, but he also signed one early no confidence declaration in Corbyn, I can’t remember which one.
I think that despite being a fine local representative I’m beginning to concur. His response to my letters regarding Assange revealed him to be extremely poorly informed and easily led by media. I suspect this is typical of many MP’s. On the one hand he seemed open to revising his initial stated view on Assange once I’d sent him a well sourced letter setting out the facts, but he has yet to make a public statement. He responded well to my concerns on bombing Syria and voted against in 2015. His record is largely positive except on Trident and investigation of Iraq for example. Very importantly to me, he voted against Fracking and turns up to demonstrations. If he can’t get fully behind Corbyn by standing up for MP’s like Chris Williamson for example, both in principle and in practice where it counts amid the current witch hunt, then I’m beginning to see that in the larger scheme of things he’s probably a liability, whatever his virtues as a local MP. On the whole I’m inclined to give him a chance because he doesn’t seem particularly right wing, just too reliant on the media view (he’s a new MP, elected in 2015.)
I’m still torn on this. What do others think?
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25411/chris_matheson/city_of_chester/votes
Try having a Tory MP like mine and you can lose the will to live. Any replies to requests for help or action are met with 100% anodyne.
Or try contacting an SNP MSP when you’re being caused difficulties in receiving what is supposed to be a public service by what is obviously SNP government corruption and a culture of lying and thieving, even if you know better than to refer to what is obvious and you concentrate solely on the non-delivery of the supposedly public service.
Then there are the Labour and Tory and Liberal Democrat MSPs who are so stupid that the main problem is trying to couch things in language that the morons might understand, bearing in mind that they do not want to upset or provoke any “stern looks” from colleagues who are little more intelligent and “connected” than they are and who are psychologically deeply committed to viewing themselves as the world’s most skilled Machiavellis or Borgias.
N, I sympathise. I’ve never argued SNP is the answer, quite the contrary. But they’re certainly the likeliest vehicle. What happens after that is about whatever Scots can imagine. They’ve got an impressive track record when they put their mind to it.
My sympathies. That was my point really, apart from his odd media centric views, Chris is a model MP. Very pissed at him for signing that filth, but he’s a pretty decent bloke on the whole.
Johnson spoke at a Conservative Friends of Israel dinner last week, saying that Tory MPs would back a no deal Brexit to avoid a Corbyn government. He is obviously a highly principled character. Not.
Boris Johnson has told a Conservative Friends of Israel dinner that in the event of a no-confidence vote in the government, Tory MPs would back a no-deal Brexit to avoid the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister.
The Tory leadership favourite made his claim as he spoke to around 80 CFI supporters at a dinner at a Whitehall hotel in central London on Tuesday evening.
/..
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-tells-cfi-dinner-tory-mps-would-back-no-deal-brexit-to-avoid-jeremy-corbyn-government-1.485802
He said much more that must have satisfied his audience.
Sorry Craig, but politics as usual are on hold until Brexit id dealt with. Corbyn has let down the country by not doing what opposition MPs are supposed to do, oppose. Brexit means austerity for all except the very rich, and if Corbyn really wants to end it he should oppose Brexit. You don’t mention Brexit at all, but it is the elephant in the room. It is a thousand times worse than university student fees.
OK. Lets just suppose Corbyn steps out tomorrow morning and shouts at the top of his voice ‘I oppose Brexit’ What happens next? Just what is he supposed to do exactly? England is divided roughly 50/50 on this. Whichever ‘side’ you are on it is madness to just ignore the other side. As far as I can see Corbyn is the only politician trying to ‘respect the referendum’ AND push for a very soft landing. But thats not good enough it seems, there are those on both sides who want it ALL their own way and bugger the others. And remember, Labour are not in power, there’s not a huge amount they can do actually.
No, the country has changed its mind. Poll after poll reveals a majority for Remain now. Older voters (mostly pro-Brexit) have died, younger voters (mostly pro-remain) have become eligible to vote. Also, the 2016 referendum is invalid anyway: the Brexit side cheated and lied. Whatever happens, one group or another is going to feel aggrieved.
James, you’re are deluding yourself in only a way a liberal can. Opposing Brexit will cost Labour the next election. We carry out our own polls you know? Not paid for by remain supporters like Alister Campbell and carried out by remain supporting yougov. Our polls consist of us going door to door canvassing, we KNOW what potential labour voters have told us which is why you’ll find many of the right who are opposed to Corbyn still supporting a managed Brexit.
I suspect you are one of Campbell’s paid trolls, but so labour losing would probably suit you, but we and the country can’t afford the risk.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to attend to my dying father who has contracted MRSA in an underfunded NHS hospital. Tory policies. Which we face ten more years of.
Remainers need to stop stamping their feet and grow up.
“Opposing Brexit will cost Labour the next election.”
I doubt it. I don’t see the argument. That’s what the Brexiters claim. Even if it were the case, there’s something to be said for doing what’s right for the country.
It’s precisely this sort of ya-boo ad personam tone, practised at Westminster and now seeping out into the country at large, that has landed the UK in its current mess. If the political parties had to actually work with each other like in civilised countries with PR, they might begin to listen to and respect each other.
James Charter
Remain also lies on a regular basis, for example on state aid. I can say this with confidence having read all the main EU treaties apart from the CETA agtement as this runs to a 1000 pages.
You are being disingenuous, name me one election or referndum that was not built on lies? How was the EU referenda different? Remainers are if anything more dishonest than leavers as they belive their lies as they are part of a cult that is based on faith and is imune to evidence.
Can you give me exact referenced examples of Remainer lies?
Why should leave voters accept the result of a second referenda, if remain refuse the results of the first?
Waiting for old people to die indicates the moral bancrupcy at the heart of Remain.
Why should the dead have more of a say on the matter than the living?
After all, it’s the living who have to put up with the consequences.
It is the young’s future that has been sold down the river. They stand to suffer the most, and for longer. Nice try, calling me out for my supposed attitude to the old, when I am in my late 60s myself, exactly the age groups among which support for brexit was the highest! Nice try, but this sort of ya-boo attempt at point scoring reveals more about your attitude than mine.
Practicaly all the target seats for labour are leave voting costuencies and all 6 constituences lost in 2017 voted leave.
See labour list.
No the country cannot be said to have changed its mind on the back of unreliable referenda, Remain was after all ahead when leave won the referenda. You are essentially a clueless cult member as you have no understanding of the EUs history or structure. Those that wait for the old to die so they can re run a referenda to get the right result are beneath contempt.
If Remain did not the result of the last referenda, why should leave respect the result of the next one?
If remain do not let the UK Government respect the referenda, we will destroy the EU, the last EU election was just the start.
That is if the EU does not do it first by fining Italy for violating the excess deficit procedure, making Italy default on the massive amount of Italian debt held by French Banks, Agrecole and BNP Parabas particularly with Deucher Bank being next.
The first referendum took place in 1975 and Remainers won. By your own arguments, this is the ref result that should be respected.
Steph
Brexit is 100% a Tory problem a turf war between shall we say ants and worms in a gatden or empire2 nationalists and super-globalist business.
Cornyn foolishly does not dare to oppose the empire2 nationalists who are in reality USUKIS Zionists intellectually, probably because Labour leaders know that intellectual rants are universally disliked, and he doesn’t have a logical argument against globalist business either because he’s not a socialist.
I dared to suggest the other day in this space that Tories directly oppose green environmental change except where change would affect business profit and I got blown out of the water by an admiral using his eye with the eyepatch in place.
Cornyn should firmly connect with banking and financial regulation wherever it exists even in Europe .
He needs to find what unites us with the rest of the world and kick this narrow Tory infatuation with profit in the balls.
The slathering Awxford drawl of the ERG offends all people of all nations who ever tasted the colonial dinosaurs who inhabited the UK before us. Why is it so hard for Cornyn to tell the world that there is no place for them on 21st Century Earth?
@ James Chater: “Brexit means austerity for all except the very rich …”
No James, it is remaining in the EU (as it is currently constituted) that means austerity for all except the very rich – in perpetuity.
Just take a look at ‘The Fiscal Compact’, then have a look at their privatisation policies, then have a look at their ‘competition’ policies.
The EU would present as great an opposition to a Corbyn government as anyone else.
The ‘Left Critique’ of the EU goes completely unspoken and unheard – suppressed you could say – in the MSM.
I voted leave for those reasons and would do so again in a second referendum, but I remain open to argument. If anyone can convince me of the case for ‘remain and reform’, a discussion which, again, has not even begun to be had, I might possibly change my mind.
I wanted to vote ‘remain and reform’ last time but, looking at it, it appears that neoliberal interests and policies, along with their supporters, are too deeply embedded in the EU and therefore, as things stand, meaningful reform seems impossible.
“it is remaining in the EU (as it is currently constituted) that means austerity for all except the very rich – in perpetuity.”
Difficult to believe, when it’s the EU that stands up for individual rights, and the it’s the GB Brexiter government that doesn’t find them necessary.
@ Laguerre
“Difficult to believe, when it’s the EU that stands up for individual rights …”
Difficult to believe if you soak up everything you see and read from the BBC and the Guardian.
Check my references and then ask the Greeks what they think about the EU’s respect for people’s rights.
They voted to stay in the EU.
Peter you have a point. I don’t agree with everything the EU does. The Euro was spread to too many countries, Portugal refused austerity and seems to be doing quite well, I don’t think VAT is a good tax; it should be replaced with a carbon tax. I would like to see the EU more critical in a constructive way. I think remain and reform is the way to go. There is so much more that Europe could do, especially a better train service, an integrated energy policy and so on. But this would require countries to stay on board and criticise and propose changes from within.
Leaving the neo-liberal EU just means direct neo-liberal rule from Washington without the mitigating effect of the remnants of the post WW2 settelment. Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Peter, if you can point me the way to informed leftist critiques of the EU I would be grateful. The only one I know is Jan Varoufakis, who is deeply critical but, in fact, not in favour of Grexit or Brexit.
James Charter
Nonsense, Remain was weponised to remove Corbyn as Remainers are so lacking in understanding they do not understand this.
What evidence is there for your statement ‘Brexit means austerity for all except the very rich,’ other than the Golldman Sachs GS at the Bank of England, who is yet to get an economic forcast correct? I have yet to come across a Remain supporter that has a clue about the EUs history and structure, until they demonstate they understand how the EU works they do not have a thing to say worth listening to.
Repeating other peoples arguments without thought or undestanding is not particuarly persuasive.
“Repeating other peoples arguments without thought or undestanding is not particuarly persuasive”
How do you know when its being repeated without thought or understanding?
Johny Conspiranoid
Because Remain supporters display no understanding of the EUs structure, by repeating lies about the EU in the guardian. Such as State Aid not being a bar to nationalization, and the EU Commission being no different to the UK civil service.
I have read all the main EU treaties, (apart from CETA, a very long document), so I know these are lies, or just ignorance by pro EU cult members, whose belief is more faith based, because the are sad and want something to believe in like religion.
I generally ask remainers a series of questions on the EUs structure to see if they have any understanding, I have yet to come across one that does. Varafacus is the exception, who is arrogant enough to believe he can reform the EU even though he was a abject failure in obtaining reform as Greek finance minister. His book ‘and the weak suffer what they must’ is a must.
I have really appreciated reading all the comments here. There is true discussion and people seem informed, willing to share and polite in their disagreements!
People are trusted as being of good intent with maybe different views/wrong info, but that’s ok; we can chat. It reminded me of the really early days of internet chat rooms. More like a face-to-face conversation than a point-scoring exercise.
I just wanted to say thank you all for reminding me of these ‘good old’ days and for the very informative chat.
Welcome to you.
I’m afraid this has not been my experience. My rather, I would have thought, innocuous post was met with ad personam comments and insults. Of those who disagreed with me, only one was remotely polite or helpful. I suppose it is because the EU issue is can of worms.
Interesting – shared to Fb page Stand by Jeremy Corbyn
While I wish England and Wales well, I can’t help but wonder what Scotland would get from a Corbyn/McDonnell government? Like many on the hard left (largely Labour or ex-Labour types) they openly support a United Ireland, whilst simultaneously opposing an independent Scotland. No-one of that ilk has ever satisfactorily answered my challenge that this is a contradictory stance, but I fear that, given real power (i.e. the keys to Downing Street) they would simply continue the path the Tories have taken with regards Westminster rule over Scotland.
Conversely, I’m far from convinced that the current SNP leadership wouldn’t cop out by doing a deal with him – devo-max or FFA in exchange for a DUP/Tory-style deal, perhaps?
If they are democrats, there is no contradiction.
There was a landslide democratic vote in favour of a united Ireland, independent of Britain, in 1918. It was blankly ignored by the British government but it happened nonetheless. Were there ever such a vote in favour of Scottish independence you can be sure Corbyn would be among the staunchest in demanding it be honoured.
Well, bear in mind that the Scottish Government consultation showed Devo-Max was the preferred option among those who participated. The SNP wanted it on the Referendum ballot paper. It was Cameron who said no to that.
What about those of us in non Labour constituences? Is there anything we can do? I am a member of Unison and work for a branch of the NHS based in Hemel Hempstead, also returning a Tory.
I would heartily recommend that you join the Labour party and attend your local CLP meetings, and get involved in the selection of parliamentary candidates that way.
If you prefer not to, as is your choice… you’re left with hoping the local CLP choose a socialist Candidate.
That said, with either option, you can help your local Labour members to campaign in the event of a general election by leafletting etc.
I agree we are at a critical point in our history, where we all need to step up and actually be the change we want to see. No one ardently opposed to socialism will give in and give it to us. We need to make our stand and actively fight.
Indeed.
Tom Watson has quite helpfully compiled the required hitlist with that “open letter” dishonestly attacking Corbyn over the readmission of Chris Williamson.
Indeed. You might even call it “Adverse Deselection”.
The component of the Labour Party under Tom Watson’s wing is pursuing a doctrine similar to that of the Democrats in the USA during the 2016 presidential election, and even more so the next. They both seem determined to lose. They have a sad resignation to sustain right-wing politics whether under a Trump or a Johnson, because they cannot get their own act together.
Donald Trump did not win the 2016 election so much as the Democrats lost it because of their arrogance and their choice of pursuing a coronation of Hillary Clinton. The Dems will almost certainly lose the next election if they cannot do better than J. Biden.
The Tories took a beating in Theresa May’s general election which smashed her majority in the House. The mess of Brexit withdrawal turned into a complete shambles. These signalled opportunities for Labour whenever the next election comes along. Instead the Labour Party clucks like chickens and divides itself into factions responding irrationally to the voices within the Party who wish it were still 1997 with Tony Blair sweeping into power, long before anyone understood all his motives and long before the carnage of Iraq.
The so-called “anti-semitic” fever of M. Hodge and her faction driving “1997 Syndrome” is sickening and guarantees another term of the Tories. The Conservatives now identify the Brexit Party and Farage as a far more present danger than Labour. How absurd.
Watson is flailing very badly, the East Midlands Labour Party have been under investigation for sometime with a lot of the right being driven out of the party, it means that fiefdoms like Watson’s are under threat. I’m not sure how he thinks he’s going to pull it back, but it seems clear to me that he’s taken to man donations from the Mafia embassy and now he’s expected to do their bidding.
On Watson’s donations, spot on. The real shock, however, is that we have to look for this stuff ourselves because it won’t be published in the MSM.
Shatnersrug,West Midlands i think you mean!
Sorry you’re right
Its divide and conquer and labour is falling for it. Lefties against lefties and the tories have won.
No, it’s a genuine divide. There is a critical mass of current Labour Mps would derail Corbyn’s program if he becomes PM. They will never be reconciled to his policies. So CM is right. If Britain is to finally move on from the Thatcher era, this boil needs to be lanced.
Well, QT last night certainly threw up a few issues.
Those of a Labour persuasion on the panel – Ayesha Hazarika and Caroline Flint – were happy to put the boot into Chris Williamson so Fiona Bruce didn’t have to go on the offensive this week.
Liz Truss, for some reason, also got a very easy time of it indeed from Ms Bruce. Truss is backing the guy who has just rowed right back on the decision, made on live television by all five candidates in the leadership contest, to instigate a full external investigation into Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Fiona Bruce failed completely to challenge Truss on this.
Given that all Boris is offering now is an internal Party investigation why did Bruce ignore the original plan agreed live on the BBC? Here we had an early, very clear example of Boris moving the goalposts on a very important issue. Why did this not come up? Truss went to town on Labour and made all sorts of claims about anti-Semitism yet Bruce spared her any interogation re Boris’s U-turn on an external investigation into Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Ayesha Hazarika did try to challenge Truss on it but Bruce intervened and moved on. Bad form indeed.
Fiona Bruce is a follower, not a leader.
Ms Bruce aka Mrs Sharrocks is a BBC stooge.
She is coining it from the licence fee payers, ie a salary said to be in the region of £500,000.
Mr Sharrocks coined it from his advertising business, Carat at Aegis Media, until 2013 when Aegis was sold for £3.2bn to Dentsu Corp.
https://www.moreaboutadvertising.com/2013/05/top-aegis-exec-nigel-sharrocks-steps-down-following-dentsu-sale/
The pair are doing very nicely.
Fiona Bruce should stick to Antiques Challenge- a show that accommodates her limited ability.
Bruce is good on the Antiques Roadshow, but she’s completely out of her depth on QT.
Most weeks she combines a quite aggressive interrogatory style with a lack of basic knowledge about the subject she’s haranguing a particular panellist about (usually a Labour shadow minister on the receiving end). There was one programme, in which Bruce kept demanding to know if Labour would drop its ‘Red Lines’ over Brexit?!?
Bruce has all the classic traits of a bully. When Isabel Oakeshott, Bruce and Rory Stewart were ganging up on Diane Abbott (who admittedly is quite annoying herself at times) it was like a scene from the film Mean Girls.
“Bruce intervened and moved on.”
Just as she did when a Sikh (to judge from his turban) was the only individual with the mettle to point out that Williamson’s (and of course Corbyn’s) accusers were being noticeably too vociferous about perceived anti-Semitism but equally quiet concerning Israel’s behaviour toward the Palestinians.
Indeed.
BBC website –
‘Labour MP Caroline Flint also said Mr Williamson should not have been readmitted.
“He seems to have gone out of his way to support people who have been expelled from the Labour Party for anti-Semitism,” she told the BBC’s Question Time.
Jon Lansman, chair of the Labour grassroots group Momentum, said Mr Williamson “has to go” and tweeted that the MP had shown “not one iota of contrition nor any acknowledgement of wrongdoing”. ‘
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48790803 3 hrs ago
Flint is a long standing member of Labour Friends of Israel.
She looked really pleased with herself a few years ago on Question Time (I had the advantage of watching a recording which allowed me to spot it).
Anyway, what caused this was the fact that Heseltine thanked her for supporting nuclear weapons!
Similarly, during the 2010 Labour leadership election I noticed Andy Burnham’s face light up when someone asked about bombing Iran.
Caroline Flint is a right-winger who acts 100% establishment defender and is all about Caroline Flint. If left to her , she’d have bailed out May over the withdrawal agreement.
I don’t know why she was Labour’s pick for the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) . I know that candidates are vetted and the PM has to approve them, based on that advice from the security chiefs, and I don’t know(?), but I wonder if Labour put forward someone else who was rejected? Because if you recall, the ISC didn’t sit for months and months (10 months?)after the election because they couldn’t finalise who’d sit. Maybe Craig knows?
Flint backs May’s deal , but does she honestly believe her constituents support May’s withdrawal agreement plus vague political declaration? I doubt it.
She appears to hope Jeremy Hunt becomes PM now, because she thinks he’ll go to Brussels be rebuffed and bring May’s deal back before parliament again. But she doesn’t take into account the huge ERG grouping didn’t back Hunt and have no loyalty to him, and they will take a very dim view of hunt if he puts May’s deal before parliament again.
She’s a real box of tricks. Like Lisa Nandy she is more concerned with keeping her seat than anything else.
“Nandy was parachuted into a safe Labour seat in Wigan, in 2010, since her arrival almost a decade ago she has claimed an eye-popping £1,629,569.80 in expenses on top of her annually salary each for being a member of Parliament.”
In one year alone her expenses claims rocketed to over £220,000.
You can understand it.
They do hold different opinions , but have you noticed how they ALL seem to vote AGAINST any investigations into the Iraq war.
Admirable sentiments, but ultimately a complete waste of time. The UK political landscape has shifted well past the point where ‘tinkering’ with it can achieve any reform. The system is irretrievably broken, and the UK is corrupt to the point where ‘repair’ is impossible. The entire system needs to be completely destroyed, and we can then start from scratch. Unfortunately, that means change by force of arms.
After three years of dithering on Brexit the Tory Party are in a Massive Mess,
the Labour Party should be a Shoe-In at the forthcoming General Election
but they too are in such a pickle.
Corbyn should make an official statement that it is the Israeli Government which is organizing the Anti-Semitic twaddle.
He should open up, more honesty might just cause the rest of the LFI to join Chukka on the Liberal benches, where they can fill their boots.
The media would destroy him.
Lots of very pro-Israel people in the media, lots of proudly Jewish journos who take very pro-Israel positions(note. nothing wrong with being proudly Jewish). Corbyn simply isn’t equipped to make such an accusation then withstand the shit storm that would be sure to follow. Plus ‘The Lobby’ programme, in and of itself isn’t enough to make such a sweeping allegation. Corbyn doesn’t even have the cabinet support either to say such a thing – half his cabinet would resign including Starmer and Thornberry.
Look at Marc Wadsworth and Ruth Smeeth’s theatrics. It’d be chaos with Tom Watson as ringleader.
“The media would destroy him.”
Could they say much more than they are doing now? Frankly he would do better to say outrigiht that he’s pro-palestinian. A large proportion of the British public is pro-palestinian, possibly a majority. That’s what you see in the comments. The pro-Israel camp is a minority, who are expert in palace politics.
This^
«Frankly he would do better to say outrigiht that he’s pro-palestinian.»
That is absolutely false! J Corbyn is very pro-Israeli, and absolutely against palestinian terrorism, and for the right of Israel to exist and all israelis to live in peace, free of terror and worries for the future, and with equal rights for all.
He is equally against Likud brutality, and for the right of Palestine to exist and all palestinians to live in peace, free of brutality and worries for the future, and with equal rights for all.
Which is the official position of the UN, Israel, USA, UK, and of the Labour party: the two state solution. The problem is that the Likud party and their coalition allies are very much opposed to that (it is in their charter!), and the agents and supporters of Likud in the UK and elsewhere claim to represent not just for all israelis, but also for all jews worldwide, a typical antisemitic action, and that any criticism of Likud is therefore an attack on all jews and Israel itself.
People like our blogger feed that by referring to the propaganda and actions of Israel, when instead those are the propaganda and actions of Likud.
“J Corbyn is very pro-Israeli”
Oh really?
“by referring to the propaganda and actions of Israel, when instead those are the propaganda and actions of Likud.”
No, it isn’t only Likud. They, along with the rest of the even more extreme right, are only continuing a policy started by Ben Gurion in the late 1930s. The Palestinian population had to be got rid of. That was what most of the 1948 war was about. It’s a long-standing national policy.
I’ve just re selected Lloyd Russell Moyle; from emails
I find him left wing. I hope this is the case.
He is very anti war and opposed to the arms industry.
https://youtu.be/wdy12LQYaVc
No
Have you now, how?
I’m a Labour party member, in his constituency – didn’t get any e-mails re re-selection..
I am, most likely with my political leanings, someone you would strongly dislike. Which is a pity because opinions are not people but that is the way most of us operate.
Thank you very much for the reason for their trip and that they loved each other. That was a gift that too few people bother to make the effort.
Charles you are making a false assumption. I have many good friends with very different political opinions to my own.
In hyper-partisan times, how easy is this?
Nothing partisan about the times. It was all identity politics, to distract from the resoundingly uniform policies. Until Corbyn.
Isn’t it amazing that no one has grasped at Angela Merkel’s moment in history?
Have her hands started shaking because she is sick because of all her twists and turns politically, suffering from alcoholism. or living in anxiety for fear she will be outed for being a former communist spy ANITA once she loses the protection of being Chancellor?
I think that comment is very nasty indeed.
Could it not be the visible proof of earthquake rays you’ve been waiting for?
Merkel denies that the Stasi recruited her during her professor days. She was a member of the (FJD) a German Communist Youth movement.
The trembling could be a thyroid problem, dehydration is the offical narrative. I recall Hilary Clinton acting strangely months ago as well.
You know Jack s..t about why Angela Merkel is shaking, Trowbridge, your comment is uneducated. Maybe she has got Parkinsons, we don’t know. And she has got a successor shadowing her every move, something that might cotton on here in a while, whence the ancient electoral system has been finally changed.
I am not a CDU member, nor would I ever join them but you seem to think you’re better than her, why don’t you list what you achieved in your life Trowbridge, so we can compare it to Andrea Merkels record.
That’s an unfair comment.
Merkel has been very good for Germany: a stable, intelligent, sensible leader of the kind the US could desperately do with over Trump and ‘bomb ’em’ Bolton. As for her East German roots, she’s more likely to be in the US camp. When Obama left office, the first country he visited and person he raced to have a face to face with was Merkel. A sure sign she is highly valued and rated by the US. If you remember when the NSA spying on Germany and on her mobile story emerged via Snowden, she was strangely relaxed.
Goose
Merkel has overseen a shrivelling of Germany’s welfare state, a dismantling of worker protections and a vast increase in the proportion of low-paid, short-term mini-jobs. (The proportion of Germans earning less than two-thirds of median income is now the highest of any state in Western Europe, and is fast approaching US levels.) The lower-middle and working classes – women especially – are encountering a degree of poverty and job insecurity they had never known. That is her vision for Europe as a whole.
Joel
I meant it more as a comment on her and Germany’s international standing during her time as Chancellor, not domestic German policies. On the world stage and in international affairs she has always seemed fairly sure-footed. I only have a broad-brush overview of German domestic policies , its party leaders and understanding what each party stands for.
Yeah, no problem mate. I used to live over there and am still regularly back and forth. The picture is now very different to the rosy one we’re fed over here by the likes of the Guardian, etc. Wolfgang Streeck is a very good guide to the direction of travel under Schroeder and Merkel in the past twenty years or so if you are interested.
Accusing Merkel of alcoholism is very bizarre. It could be any disease. Frankly she’s done a great job as chancellor, one of the greatest politicians of this century.
@ Craig
‘…Of course the massive arms race between the imperial powers, and the nationalist and democratic forces acting on old heterogenous dynastic empires, lay at the root of the First World War. But Taylor’s absolutely correct point is that even the greatest store of paraffin will not ignite without a spark, and perhaps the spark may never come. I am with Taylor on this, against the rigid determinists…’
That is the ‘Official’ ‘Halal’ version of history. In reality, the ‘massive arms race’ between Britain and Germany existed on only Britain’s side; the German arms building was greatly exaggerated.
Britain’s arms building program, however, was designed with the express purpose of crushing Germany, leading to Anglo-American domination of the world.
I really hope anyone who disputes this, would read two books, ‘Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War’ and ‘Prolonging the Agony: How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-And-A-Half Years’, both by Jim MacGregor and Gerry Docherty, before they comment.
The clue is in the first book title, ‘Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War’. This true history is dynamite, and has therefore been carefully hidden and kept secret, just as were the secret plans from the early 1900’s, carefully kept secret from most of the British Parliament by an immensely powerful cabal of Imperialist plotters.
@ Paul Barbara June 28, 2019 at 13:13
I forgot to deal with the ‘spark’, which ‘..may never come..’. That too was carefully planned; there was far too much at stake for the assassination to fail (though the plotters did have a ‘Plan B’, in case the ‘Triple Alliance’ didn’t react in a way as could be construed a ‘casus belli’ by Britain, France and Russia, which was to foment a Civil War in Ireland, with both sides armed with German weapons bought and ‘secretly’ transported to Ireland by British agents) (the Loyalists with far more, and more modern, weapons than the Southern Irish), which was to be a backup ‘casus belli’ for Britain to declare war on Germany.
Alfred Milner – virtually unknown today, but one of history’s greatest villains.
@ J Galt June 28, 2019 at 22:47
Sorry, I’ve only just seen your reply. If you’ve read the books, perhaps you encourage others to read them; they are so damning and openly ‘name names’ of the majorr perps for the mass slaughter of WWI.
Yesterday, Armed Forces Day, I managed to give a brief review of both books to a uniformed soldier who I came across on London Bridge.
I admire your nerve Paul, hopefully it will be an eye opener for him!
“In reality, the ‘massive arms race’ between Britain and Germany existed on only Britain’s side; the German arms building was greatly exaggerated.”
No, this is not right. Germany united after 1870 quite reasonably wanted to be recognised as a major European power, as they have done finally today. Unfortunately at that time they chose a military solution, invade France and Russia, as they did in 1914. But also a navy intended to challenge Britain in the North Sea. It couldn’t do much else, as short range. The battle of Jutland may have been a stand-off, but it served Germany’s interests not at all. They would have done better not to contest Britain’s domination of the seas.
Have a wee look at the facts – the first contact between the Germans and the Russians and the French took place on German soil.
Indeed the abandonment of East Prussia and a falling back behind the Vistula by the German 8th Army was only narrowly avoided when Von Moltke sent Hindenburg to relive Von Prittwitz, Hindenburg nearly lost it too, however in a series of brilliant manoeuvres exploiting internal lines of communication the Russian invasion was halted.
In the west the French attacked Alsace and Lorraine, the German attack through southern Belgium was designed to turn the left flank of the French, however first contact with the French was made on German territory.
The clear aggressors were the Russians and the French, particularly the Russians who were the first to mobilize, however the arch aggressors were the British. Britain used both the Russians and the French and plunged Europe into horror. The British Establishment, a shower of shit by any standards.
My point was about the Navy, and the plans the Germans made, rather than what actually happened.
Fair enough, the development of the Navy meant that the army was neglected throughout the 1900s. However by around 1912 the race, if indeed it had been a race, had been won, by the British.
@J Galt
“In the west the French attacked Alsace and Lorraine, the German attack through southern Belgium was designed to turn the left flank of the French, however first contact with the French was made on German territory.
“The clear aggressors were the Russians and the French…”
Might you expand on this a little? I thought the first act of aggression was Germany’s violation of Belgian neutrality. You appear to be suggesting this occurred subsequent to some other engagement, i.e., between the French and Germans, and on German territory.
You may be correct and that the significance of the Belgian episode was that it brought the UK into the arena. (I should go and look it up but it’s quicker to ask). Given the prevailing (non) diplomatic circumstances at the time, I think it’s a touch OTT to label Russian mobilization as an act of aggression. If my understanding is correct Russia was allied to Serbia, against whom an ultimatum was delivered threatening aggression in the event of Serbia’s non-compliance. In that scenario Russia’s move could be interpreted as defensive, since an army cannot be put into the field without first being mobilized.
None of which contradicts your closing statement.
By 1914 the Germans faced an estimated 187 entente divisions on three fronts. They had, including their Austro-Hungarian allies 128, the odds were not good, but it was worse, 49 of these divisions were Austrian and by far the lowest quality of the five major powers. They were up against it in no uncertain terms.
The only hope was to fix in place the main French force in Alsace and Lorraine whilst turning the French left flank in the north in order to force a decisive action before the French could withdraw into their interior. To do that the German right wing required to transit southern Belgian territory
So called Belgian “neutrality” was a luxury that unfortunately could not be afforded. The Belgians had abandoned their neutrality anyway and were a de facto part of the entente even holding staff talks with the French and British. Mobilisation plans even included Belgian officers being allocated to British divisions to aid their passage through Belgium on their way to attack the German right flank.
The Germans and the French did in fact meet for the first time on German territory when the French made their opening attack.
As early as 1911 the French and the Russians had agreed an aggressive policy of a joint attack on Germany no later than day 16 of mobilisation, and that is what they put into effect in 1914.
@J Galt
Thank you for your detailed reply. Having since dipped into ‘The Hidden History…’ myself I can see where you’re coming from. Clearly events such as this are grossly over-simplified when taught at School level – like the coarse digitizing of an analogue recording. There is much by way of precursory diplomacy (if I may use that term) to be taken into account. This morning I pondered the topic while walking the dog. If the war per se were compared to an amateur chess match, then equally important, and unseen, would be the behind-the-scenes jockeying for position over who got to play white and make the first move, before the combatants even sit at the table (take the field if you will). As you have illustrated matters are considerably more complex than we are generally led to believe.
Doodlebug
It’s nice to have a courteous discourse, it doesn’t seem to be the norm on here!
By the way my late father remembered hearing a Doodlebug, he didn’t manage to see it, in London in 1944 where was transiting between ships – he was a merchant seaman. He said it was unnerving when the engine cut out and you wondered where it would land, luckily (for him that is) it landed some distance from him!
@J Galt
Thank you. Always happy to engage in a civil exchange of opinion. Thank you also for introducing myself and others to the alternative view of developments pre-1914. I shall definitely scrutinize more than the handful of chapters from ‘Hidden History’ I’ve skimmed so far.
I too heard stories about the V1 attacks from my own parents. My chosen ‘nom de plume’ however is a coincidental pun. A friend of mine with whom I play string quartets signs his emails to me ‘VII’ and addresses me as ‘VI’. I’ve simply given that label a verbal interpretation.
Its time for the list of demolisher to feel what itmeans to be deselected becausr of constant disruption false aquisations and continuous backstabbing.
Margret Hodge, one of the tingleaders of this pro consrtvative minded rebellion within Labour, will have to be the first in line, her prominence and access to all varieties of scribes is reason enough to deselect her.
Once that list has been deselected, moves to exchange a sole Labour friends of Israel for an internationalist friends of all nations, its long overdue that this political cancer is cut out, its influence on elected members, disproportional to its miniscule interest group within the Labour party, is a danger to the existence of the aims and objectives.
The PLP will have to answer for its canivance and cooperation with austetity Tories, and all who voted to attack Iraq on false pretences must / should publicly apologise for their grave mistake.
Those who are now smarting to attack Iran, although not practical or possible, should be asked to voluteer their sons/ daughters, or themselves to the frontline, or stop wagging their tails to Boltons madcap rants.
There is a fight-back:
‘We welcome Chris Williamson’s reinstatement! Now use trigger ballots to get rid of the saboteurs!’:
http://www.labouragainstthewitchhunt.org/our-positions/we-welcome-chris-williamsons-reinstatement-now-use-trigger-ballots-to-get-rid-of-the-saboteurs/
Still, mighty kind of the back-stabbers, Quislings and Fifth Columnists to have given Left-Wing pro-Labour activists a handy ‘dump’ list.
I see the despicable Owen Smith signed it, let’s hope he has signed his way out of Mr.Corbyn’s party – for good, he can join the Liberals.
The ludicrous thing, is the fact that if these so-called Labour ‘moderates ‘ did take over the party they’d put it where the SPD are in Germany – on about 15% – Germany’s SPD it used to be tied with the CDU/CSU and seen as a direct challenger, the quite radical Greens have taken over the SPD in some polls. The guardian used to hold up Macron as the poster boy for centrists, and look how far his star has fallen as his supporters realised his true agenda was the same old thing.
Centrism – third-wayism -Blairism whatever you call it, it ain’t popular anywhere in Europe or the US, at the moment. I could pick out lots of faults/ problems with Corbyn but at least he’s genuine and unlikely do something that horrifies his supporters like Blair did with Iraq.
Did the Guardian hold up “hold up Macron as the poster boy for centrists”? Your memory is evidently a lot more fertile and creative than mine, as I can remember no such thing though I look at the Guardian every day. The fact is, Macron is not bad, which is all you can hope for, and much better than his predecessors Hollande and Sarkozy, both of whom were pretty disastrous. It’s the nationalist far right populists who paint Macron as evil, and who think his star has fallen. So you’re going along with them there.
You are plain wrong on three counts. The
— The Guardian did and still does hold Macron up as a centrist poster boy.
— Macron is generally perceived in France to be the President of the Rich, something not intended as a compliment or an expression of affection
— The Gilet Jaunes are mostly left-wing, according to publications whose readers just want straight facts, not propaganda or spin.
https://www.ft.com/content/47d7d4ea-4d8e-11e9-9c76-bf4a0ce37d49
cv. 15 years at the beeb and big pharma
Corbyn destroyed in him in that Dimbleby moderated Question Time special debate. Because these centrists are hollow; basically they are just caretakers or placeholders until the Tories get their act together to win again.
They put the TV debate on , I’d wager, with the express hope Owen Smith would defeat Corbyn in debate and Smith had nothing to say really, other than offer weaker, slightly less attractive policy than Corby wants.
Sorry, update, apparently Chris Williamson reinstatement has been postponed because of the disruptive elements that have not stopped their destructive activities for three years.
We should be asking as to who lead and financed these anti Labour forces? Should we accept that these minority elements carry on with their destruction, or should they now be axed for their open insurrection?
Thanks for lifting my spirit, which at the moment is quite low due to the hostile climate created by the media and neo-liberal Labour MPs who are intent on getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn. He pi’s the only chance we have to improve the lives of the many in this country and, as you rightly point out, it is up to us, members of the LP and Union members, to achieve it
Carmen
Ultimately, the people in the PLP trying to destroy Corbyn, can’t win. Because, even if they get rid of him somehow, they’ll either face another person with similar views, elected by the membership – or if not – they’ll see the huge membership quit, and find themselves getting around 25% in the general election on a centre-right Blairite manifesto with most of them losing their seats. Little comfort, if the Tories hold power, true, but it’ll end Blairite fantasies. Scotland can of course choose independence.
There may even be a new left-wing party that emerges to replace a Tory-lite Labour party in that scenario. As appears to be happening in Germany as the Greens ease past the centrist SPD in recent polls, they also beat them in the European elections.
Maybe Chuka will try to join?
The Labour Party’s original aim was to remain and reform the EU from within.
The main reform for the UK and the EU to do is end austerity.
A hard brexit will make austerity worse – not as Johnson et al are waffling about.
The truth is for the enemies of Corbyn is that they do not want an Election ( they may be deselected or worse still lose)
and they would rather have a NO Deal or preferably May’s wretched deal to try and sell to their Brexit leaning constituents.
They do not think ending austerity in Europe or the UK is a good thing.
May’s deal will not end austerity.
Labour’s soft Brexit would be less damaging to ordinary people.
In essence the vast majority of the Corbyn assassins are a poor parody of the Corporate Democrats in the US.
Their future employment relies on doing the right thing now after the political career is over.
Blair has never looked back since.
He is thei rrole model.
11 years since the financial crisis after Greece and Italy and the failure of even Macron to obtain even limited reform it is not credible to try and obtain reform of the EU. To reform the EU treaties requires unanimity in its members.
Even since the Lisbon treaty the only reform has been to make the EU more neo-liberal, the ‘six pack’ amendment to the fiscal compact in 2011, and the two pack amendments in 2013 have made the fiscal compact much more stringent, with less room for manoeuvrer in the budget and with eurozone members having to get their budgets pre approved by the EU commission.
It is worth noting that Blair and all the big US banks all supported remain as free movement of capital is guaranteed by the EUs single market. You have the assertion unsupported by evidence that Labours soft Brexit would be better for ordinary people. The term ‘soft Brexit’ is a meaningless one, does that mean complying with the requirement of free movement of capital that enables tax evasion and undermines long term investment and government policy by enabling speculators?
Does is mean complying with EUs state aid rules? The stability and growth pact? The common external tariff?
Free movement of labour goods and services?
What would a labour soft Brexit plan look like given the EU has refused to renegotiate the EU withdrawal bill?
Having read Theresa May’s EU withdrawal agreement, no Theresa May’s deal will not end austerity. It after all adherers to EU rules on State Aid adherers to EUs free movement of capital, has some limited restricting on free movement of labour.
It also takes the UK outside the customs union. It also allows the EU to impose new State Aid rules for up to 4 years after the UK exits the transition agreement, that the UK has to adhere to without any input from the UK. The EU also has a veto on the UK exiting Theresa May’s transition agreement that keeps the UK in the customs Union and NI in the single market.
All while the UK remains open to the EUs trade surplus and pays it lots of money.
This is a truly awful deal, giving the EU all it could possibly want, which is why they will not renegotiate it.
Given that, any supposed Labour ‘Soft Brexit’ would be Theresa May’s deal with a customs union tacked on, possibly with free movement of labour from the EU.
Why Theresa May’s deal is so bad is that it derogates from the least damaging aspects of the EU (Customs Union and free movement of labour), while retaining all the worst aspects, free movement of capital and EU state aid rules.
I know people rave about free movement of labour but the worst aspects could be mitigated with correct policy under a government less committed to crushing the poor. Iceland is after all part of Schengen, while remaining one of the most egalitarian OECD countries. A soft brexit that would retain free movement of capital and EU State Aid rules would not allow the UK to undertake the massive restructuring needed away from fiance and rebuild its manufacturing capacity.
This is why a no deal Brexit is the only way to allow the UK to undertake the restructuring in needs with massive Government investment supplying the patient capital needed. The UK could then join a customs union with the EU at a later date, providing this does not require adhering to EU rules on free movement of capital and state aid.
https://off-guardian.org/2019/05/29/costas-lapavitsas-discusses-the-eu/
https://corporatewatch.org/false-dilemmas-a-critical-guide-to-the-euro-zone-crisis/
So, you’re a Little Englander, who doesn’t need a job. The British government will never, ever, provide the “massive Government investment” you’re demanding. They’ve always, for ever, been far too mean.
“… Labour MPs … have to notify their intention to again be the party’s candidate for the constituency, and there is then a very brief window of a couple of weeks in which local branches and trade union branches can register a contest and force a challenge.”
Craig,
Please correct me if I am wrong but I think you may have misunderstood the procedural timetable. As I understand it, the two-week window to which you refer, that ends on 8th July, is just the beginning of the selection process in which sitting MPs have to inform the Party of their intention, or not, to stand again.
From the Labour Party Rule Book on candidate selection (P32, P35 of the pdf):
“5. If a CLP is represented in Parliament by a member of the PLP:
A. If the sitting MP wishes to stand for re-election, a trigger ballot will be carried out through Party branches and affiliated branches according to NEC guidelines.
B. If either one third or more of Party branches, or one third or more of affiliated branches, indicate that they wish a selection to take place, a selection shall proceed. The MP shall be included in the shortlist of candidates from whom the selection shall be made. ”
That appears to me to mean that, in any case, all Party branches will undertake a “trigger ballot” to ascertain whether the constituency wishes to have a vote on who their candidate should be. If one third or more of the constituency votes for a ballot, then a selection contest will follow.
The ‘trigger ballot’ process has not yet begun and when it does all members should be notified of this.
If I have understood this right, then the re/deselection process is much easier than you suggest.
This may explain why, having received their letters, many MPs have burst out in anger this week – a fire which, it seems, is not going to go out anytime soon.
The Labour Party Rule Book:
http://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Rule-Book-2019.pdf
Corbyn is not Galloway. He gives the Blaities enough rope. George is a joy to listen to and calls a spade a spade. I look forward to the day he is back in his Labour party where he belongs. The likes of Benn and Watson have had their day.
George speaks well ut is an ardent leaver, which given that leave will mean that we will be the 51st state with chlorinated chicken and antibiotic reared beef and roundup GM foods as staple. He is also very much against Scottish independence which proably means that there are not many fans of his here.
Au contraire. I’m even blocked by George for disagreeing with him, but his qualities are why I admire him..
Canada already has chlorinated chicken, that CETA when fully ratified will allow investors to sue the EU governments under a ‘investor state dispute Settlement procedure’ similar to NAFTA, TTP and TTIP, for projected loss of income without democratic oversight, and removes the precautionary principle with damage having to be proved. US firms could also sue EU countries if they have a office in Canada.The judgments against Canada under NAFTA indicate how this will work.
EU State AId legislation is also written into the 2012 Health and Social Care Act that enables privatisation, and is referred to directly in the explanatory notes.
https://www.tni.org/en/publication/making-sense-of-ceta-2nd-edition
It is also rather bizarre for you to refer to Roundup, as Monsanto was taken over by Bayer, a German company. Some US States have banned Glyphosate, and the US have awarded massive damages against its manufacture for health effects, unlike the EU.
Germany and the EU multinationals practically write EU legislation to benefit itself. The Single European Act was written by the European Round-table of Industrialists. The emissions standards were written to benefit the German Car manufacturer’s.
Large fines handed out in the US, but not in the EU over the emissions scandal. I am not suggesting US standards are better, only that is is far more nuanced than described with both the US and EU damaging to human centred progress.
The massive increase in Greek suicides for example due to EU austerity as described by the BMJ, is not very progressive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E
https://www.rt.com/shows/renegade-inc/453503-european-dream-economy-challenge/
God willing the sixty odd who signed the letter calling for Williamson’s re-suspension have put themselves firmly in their local members’ sights. Williamson’s speech that night pointedly condemned “the scourge of antisemitism,” as they well know, and contained nothing that was incorrect or controversial. Jon Lansman, the property king leader of momentum, is another McCarthyite who supports Corbyn like a rope supports a hanging man. He too will have to go.
One of the areas of business that the Lansman property interests are involved in (source: their guy Simon Atherton boasts about it) is building “a portfolio of land assets to host energy generation units, for flexible back-up power.”
Flexible backup power? Are they expecting something?
Meanwhile let’s not forget that Boris Johnson’s stepmother’s family owns Marks and Spencer, the “fair traders”.
I watched Louise Ellman on Channel Four News last night. It was NOT a pleasant experience!
This woman spouted her venom against Corbyn and all the imagined anti-Semites, saying that is anti-Semitic to criticise the Jewish people or say that Jews dominate the political and economic power in the world.
Well, of course it IS anti-Semitic to hate Jews per se or to consider them as inferior in some way, but I would say it is a fact that Jews do tend to have a massive influence in the world’s political and economic affairs. She maintained these ideas were conspiracy theories. Well, you just have to look at the massive preponderance of Jews among the Neo-Cons. A disproportionate preponderance in any ruling elite is surely a bad thing for democracy – it doesn’t matter if they’re Jews, English, American, Russian or Chinese or whatever. I might add that I admire the many great Jews – Einstein, Noam Chomsky, Rosalind Franklin, Niels Bohr, etc.
Of course, Holocaust denial IS anti-Semitic (or at least psychotic) and I recognise that Jews have been appallingly persecuted over the centuries.
People like Louise Ellman move the goal posts to suit their nefarious agenda of getting rid of Corbyn.
The facial expressions and whole demeanour of this woman in the interview suggested to me a very bitter and twisted old witch – right down to the quick and completely false smile she gave to the interviewer after each poisonous outburst. She must be a good pal of Hodge. The pathetic Matt Frei failed to tackle her on Israel Embassy interference with UK political affairs.
As far as I’m concerned, these ‘Friends of Israel’ are enemies of the UK.
Very unpleasant indeed.
Can you imagine were she to face three other candidates in a hustings to become official Labour candidate for Liverpool Riverside.
Just imagine ….Addressing potential local members before they vote in that hustings .. Question from the audience…. Q. Will you be loyal to Jeremy Corbyn should you be elected?
This is why Labour desperately need Open selection. People like Ellman would be removed democratically in a fair process, replaced by people who actually want a Corbyn-led Labour govt. Those defeated son to be former MPs, could of course stand as independents but that’s their decision.
@Garth Carthy
You’ve just about ticked every box.
Thanks, Doodlebug. It’s good to know I’ve got some support from the likes of you and Goose!
I felt a bit apprehensive about submitting that post – maybe that underlines my point – maybe the Israel Inquisition have got us all frightened to criticise or give an honest opinion anymore…
“I felt a bit apprehensive about submitting that post.”
Garth
Yes, such is the climate we’re living in. Fear and apprehension accompany many of us when this issue is raised. I heard Andrew Castle, LBC, tell a caller earlier, “Yes, you’re being AS, you just don’t realise it!”
People are being actively silenced using tactics that are dishonest and worse.
Something else occurred to me the other day. In all the years I’ve been paying attention to politics an MP’s religion didn’t interest me. Indeed, it wasn’t something individual MPs normally highlighted anywhere either. How times have changed! The very dangerous thing in our politics now, it seems to me, is that MPs of a particular religion are seen to be entitled to close down debate and even to end the careers of others if necessary by being able to dictate what can and cannot be said. Incredibly, other MPs not of that religion appear happy to indulge them. It’s a very dangerous message.
You’re so right on every level.
Garth, Ellman is a Zionist. Zionism is a type of European ideology steeped in the Victorian values of national supremacy and ethnic purity. It is a wholly racist ideology that promotes bigotry and intolerance. Zionists are committed to the state of Israel right or wrong and they are expected to put it first. After world war 2’s horrors many Jews became passively supportive of an Israeli state, usually lied to and told the land they were taking was empty.
But Jews are not automatically Zionist and Zionists are not automatically Jews. What we have now is a situation that more and more western Jews want nothing to do with Israel or it’s ideological Codswallop this is causing the zionists to turn up the scorn on antizionist Jews, so now we have the quite extraordinary situation where zionists are anti-Semitic toward any left wing or antizionist Jew. It’s a disgraceful. I know of one Jewish labour left member who has been called all sorts of terrible things – antisemetic things – from the awful Gnasherjew brigade – who ironically enough are doing their bit to dismantle antisemetic tropes by demonstrating categorically that Jews are not all intelligent!
Many of the same people who constantly bash Corbyn today loathed Ed Miliband (Jewish himself), because he was a little too independent-minded and supported the idea of a Palestinian state – a big no-no! to them.
The Israeli govt supported a planned major US assault on Syria in 2013 – according to reports the US were literally going to bring the B-52s in and blitz Damascus – in a regime change operation. And Ed Miliband led the revolt that defeated that in the UK parliament. Some of these MPs were the first to call for Gordon Brown to resign too. The only Labour PM they’ve truly been happy with is Tony Blair and they constantly heap praise on David Miliband their preferred future Labour leader. Ye gods !
@Shatnersrug.
You’re not wrong.
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/netanyahu-advisers-hatched-anti-semitic-conspiracy-against-george-soros
I thought it was just me, but I also noted that sneer at the end of every lie she was allowed to make.
Yes, I noticed that too.
Spot on Garth Carthy. It needs saying. I had said something similar wayback on the disproportionate power of the Jewish lobby relative to the size of the UK general population on the old Medialens Message Board, was taken to task and banned! Says it all.
Hodge was given her damehood in 2015 from Cameron. Ellman was given hers last year from May. Both Cameron and May have spoken to large gatherings of Conservative Friends of Israel, lunches or dinners.
May’s latest – ‘ Prime Minister Theresa May underlines UK-Israel relationship …
https://cfoi.co.uk/prime-minister-theresa-may-underlines-uk-israel-relationship-strong…
11 Dec 2018 – Prime Minister Theresa May said that UK-Israel ties are “stronger than ever”, … In her wide-ranging speech that received a standing ovation from the …. free trade we will look to friends like Israel to broaden and deepen our links. … And the friendships that have been built between UK Conservatives and our …
My attempt to read the link was met with: ‘Error establishing a database connection’ – in large bold print. ?? but there is a link to the cached version.
Regev, Pickles and Crabb also spoke at the lunch which was attended by ‘800 guests, including 200 Conservative Parliamentarians and 17 Cabinet members’. So there!
I saw that interview. She wasn’t challenged throughout. A very bitter lady indeed and a vicious one.
It is tempting just to give up on politics at the moment. When an MP can be suspended twice for fairly innocuous remarks and the media give the whole thing top billing, at the same time that a Prime Minister is imposed on us without the public having a say and without a majority in Parliament, it starts to feel as though change will have to come some other way. I actually laughed out loud at the news earlier, with earnest analysis of May’s antics at the G7 and the Williamson storm in a teacup – it’s either that or you cry.
Crazy isn’t it, a non-story , padded up and wrapped in layers of media hysteria. At the core of the story – what he said – it wasn’t even in any way anti-Semitic, he was merely expressing an opinion, albeit forcefully, about Labour’s reaction to accusations against the party.
I’m now convinced this PLP would rather have the Tories win a landslide than allow a Corbyn-led govt. I really think the situation is that bad.
Only drastic democratic action by the membership can stop this PLP’s determination to destroy the party rather than let it win under Corbyn. I doubt they’ll act on Craig’s advice however, because most MPs can turn the charm on and off with their CLPs.
But these PLP saboteurs are a total nightmare for those who simply want a fair chance and a clear run at fighting and defeating the Tories.
Of course there was nothing anti-semitic in what he said but its being presented as him saying Labour was — “too apologetic” about antisemitism — the Guardian’s words… something entirely different.
Its the nature of a witch hunt that guilt is a foregone, and anyone who challenges the hunt in any way must also be a witch.
“I’m now convinced this PLP would rather have the Tories win a landslide than allow a Corbyn-led govt.”
Totally agree. Been thinking that for some time. There was clear disappointment from many in Labour that they won Peterborough. The usual suspects then set about the winning candidate. In fact, Andrew Neil immediately attacked the winning candidate live on TV right after the count in a very aggressive interview and basically called her AS.
Yes I heard the same …I could hardly believe it was to be taken seriously….The description of Mays furious face when she shook hands with Putin…it was absurd….and Putin …how does he bare it? I’m not sure about Putin, but he seems a much, much more serious statesman than any others in that gathering. Our own Prime ministers posturing made me feel ashamed.
The UK, and especially US feel like the most dangerous unstable countries in the world today.
We’ve got a PM who doesn’t seem to have a grip on what’s going on under her nose. and in the US a game show host President surrounded by an administration made up of ‘the family’ and assorted unelected hawks playing ‘nuclear war’ chicken with a non-nuclear state.
When, as a westerner you see Iran, China and Russia as the sensible, calm countries, you know things are pretty fucked up.
Either May is a hard-faced lying so-and-so or she’s an extremely silly bint and believes everything MI6/CIA tell her.
Of course, these options are not mutually exclusive…
What did Trump say he thought it was ‘the usual spy games’.
Putin is a former spook himself.
Putin probably smirked and applauded the spycraft involved in setting the Russians up like suckers if that’s what happened, cos I don’t know? I bet he was furious about how easily they got all the names and identities of the GRU agents tho, to begin with, that was just plain sloppy.
Goose, do you want to add any evidence to your unhinged conspiracy story?
Muller after all is also a spook and a proven liar on WMD.
It doesn’t happen often but Trump made me laugh yesterday. A journalist, sounding very outraged and indignant, called to Trump, “Mr President will you tell President Putin not to interfere in the 2020 election?” Trump turned to Putin and, mimicking the journalist, turned to Putin next to him and said, “Don’t interfere in the 2020 election!”.
It was most amusing seeing their “greeting”.
You could see the amusement on Putin’s face also.
That this absolute nothing, Theresa May, a zero of a human being, was even standing beside Putin is quite something.
Taking the high ground, spouting the same old garbage about the Skripals which surely only morons now agree with!,
What amazes me is how the MSM journos parrot ‘Novichok this, Novichok that’ without so much the slightest hint of scepticism or doubt, nor even querying things like the Skripals whereabouts or lack of interviews? These are Oxbridge graduates incapable of asking basic questions.
It’s been claimed even the police investigating this case are baffled by certain aspects; such the sealed box and the fact those collection bins are emptied regularly. I haven’t followed it particularly closely but even I know that ….because it was reported on TV.
If you assume the GRU list of IDs was obtained first, not last , it makes all the rest of it far easier to pull off if it was a framing exercise i.e., ‘spy games’ as Trump called it.
Oops! Left out a plural possessive apostrophe.
Those Oxbridge grad journos would no doubt have noticed that.
Goose, I noticed the lack of an apostraophe and I went to a secondary modern and left school at 16.
@ Goose
“‘”
There you go.
May had clearly been rehearsing that face. She looked ridiculous!
I’ve been thinking the same this evening. I am absolutely disgusted with the antics of the PLP who as lawmakers should recognise the idea of due process above that of the mob hysteria that has forced this second suspension. I think I can support Corbyn better outside of the Labour Party, being locally in a constituency with a massive Tory majority and distribute my subscription in other ways.
As for May’s posturing today, I noted that the meeting took place with only interpreters and the report about her challenging Putin re Skripal came from one of her spokespersons before the meeting took place. So we don’t actually know what she might have said or what Putin replied – probably along the lines of “not this old chestnut again”. It was just another example of media management to show how “British” we are. LOL.
@ Crispa June 28, 2019 at 22:18
The rot started soon after the Labour Party became powerful. In 1929, the Prince of Wales (later King Edward VII, mentioned in ‘Hidden History’ above) suggested setting up a Masonic Lodge for Labour Party MP’s, and ‘New Welcome Lodge’ was duly set up.
It still exists.
Tom, the media antics are intended to disorientate and demoralise, your not meant to be convinced of anything.
Tom, the antics in the media are intended to disorientate and demoralise, your not meant to be convinced of anything.
Maybe it’s just a reflection of my own escalating paranoia, but I’m beginning to wonder whether the charge for the Brexit door might have been egged on from behind, so to speak. With ‘friends’ on both sides of the house, it perhaps doesn’t matter too much to certain sponsors who sits where following a general election. Party leadership and direction however is another question altogether, as the constant ‘sniping’ at Jeremy Corbyn amply demonstrates.
Once upon a time there were murmurings of Tony Blair looking toward presidency of the European Council. It didn’t happen. Perhaps it’s no more than mere fantasy on my part, but a small nation-state which has the Middle-East in its cross-hairs and the USA by the short ones might be more than a little interested in ensuring unanimity of purpose across the pond, not to mention a favourable change in its trading relationships (see: https://www.jpost.com/In-Jerusalem/Israel-after-Brexit-553472 and https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5102325,00.html or just ‘google’ ‘Brexit Israel Option’)
That’s not paranoia it’s an interesting avenue for inquiring minds.
My view it’s obvious from what Obama and Clinton said about Brexit the US establishment i.e., the DNC and the State Department etc. probably would prefer the UK to stay in the EU as it gives them clout in European capitals, clout that through the UK, they may lose when we leave. I’d imagine the UK intel agencies want May’s deal because it ensures ongoing security cooperation( agreed and written in the text) and avoids difficult questions/issues over spying etc. issues that were we to clean break via no-deal as Boris is promoting in wanting just a very basic free trade deal, could easily become diplomatic incidents eg.Belgacom.
As for the other point.
I wonder about how the EU vetted candidates for key positions: President of the European Council ; President of the European Commission? Obviously hugely powerful, important positions to all member states.
I know they’ve empowered the European parliament to question in hearings, but they just have the rather blunt option of veto -rejecting someone who’s been already chosen. I kind of understand the need for an EU version of the (CIA or MI6) to prevent external interference especially as ‘influence agents’ of both Russia and the US varieties, that have been revealed by WikiLeaks, operating in the highest echelons of European govts.
It seems like the US has some influence, when UK, Australia, Italy and Ukraine spied on, and sought to influence, the 2016 US election. This is all coming out, an open secret.
Shen-hannigans. as it were. Plenty of US leverage.
I too have long supposed the UK’s EU membership to be advantageous to its special relationship partner in terms of facilitating access and influence. That much is strategically obvious. But the presidents of yesteryear no longer have their hands on the rudder (it could reasonably be argued that ‘GW”s hands weren’t on it even during his presidency, or if they were then his weren’t the only hands). The drift of my thoughts, however, is toward a different motivator entirely from the ultimate fate of (or control over) Europe – money!
It is my understanding the EU were working toward legislation that would close off a certain tax loophole offshore funds in particular have been exploiting for years. That’s just for starters. Exploring a few ‘links’ earlier this evening I discovered that trading relations between the EU and Israel have become somewhat awkward. EU rules regarding product origination and labelling require the de facto recognition of Palestine – something which Israel is not at all keen on. Then there is the conspicuous upsurge in Israel’s trade with the UK of late. Post-Brexit it is likely to become frenetic. In short Brexit promises to be rather lucrative as far as Israel is concerned.
An apparent obstacle to this conjecture exists in the shape of George Soros, a Hungarian Jew and supporter of the Best for Britain campaign for the UK’s continued EU membership. Soros has also been on the receiving end of vehemently anti-Semitic remarks by Arron Banks, founding father of the Leave.EU campaign. Taken together these considerations would appear to mitigate against any Israeli sponsorship of the Brexit initiative. Until one discovers that not only is Soros a Pariah as far as Israel is concerned, but that ‘Bibi’ and his acolytes are actually behind certain anti-Semitic campaigns, specifically one aimed at George Soros!
The perfect cover. Of course things might have been altogether different had Tony Blair succeeded in ascending the high altar.
Perhaps the US, since about 2016, has wanted the break up of the EU so as to prevent it from becoming a Russian trading partner (see Nord Stream 2 ).
@ Doodlebug June 28, 2019 at 21:05
One could almost suspect this small Rogue Apartheid Regime in the ME of fielding an army of 5th Columnists……paid for by Muggings US Taxpayers. These Taxpayers ought to ‘Remember The Liberty’, if nothing more recent.
Strike ‘almost’.
Some of us set up a petition against Blair’s bid for the European presidency. From memory, it attracted just 7,000 signatures.
In regard to Blair and his war, with Bush, on the Iraqi people, it is sad to record the death of Justin Raimondo, who set up Antiwar.com. RIP Justin.
‘WASHINGTON — Justin Raimondo—author, activist and consummate critic of the U.S. war machine–passed away at the age of 67 on Thursday. While many of you might know him as the co-founder and prolific columnist at Antiwar.com, he was once branded a “unpatriotic conservative” at the start of the Iraq War, and a potential “threat to national security” a year later.
For Raimondo, being called names while in the service of trying to end U.S. wars of choice was like rocket fuel. Particularly when neoconservative David Frum launched his “unpatriotic” broadside at National Review on March 24, 2003, five days after the U.S. launched what would be the most disastrous invasion of another country since Vietnam. Being accused of “appeasing the enemy” could only mean they were getting under the warmongers’ skin at a time when the rest of Washington was mobilized like lemmings for battle.’
/..
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-justin-raimondo-made-me-a-braver-writer/
‘‘To Learn Who Rules Over You’: Viral Voltaire Quote Probably Originated with White Supremacist’:
https://www.mediaite.com/online/to-learn-who-rules-over-you-viral-voltaire-quote-probably-originated-with-white-supremacist/
Great controversy, but who gives a toss? It wouldn’t matter if King Kong stated it, it certainly rings true.
It certainly is strange that one can mercilessly calumniate the Prime Minister, or even the Royal Family, without the MSM Juggernaut doing what they are doing over obvious weaponised ALLEGED smears against a small minority of the UK population.
Perhaps some of the accusers have got too big for their boots?
And I do mean ‘some of them’, because many (and I suspect most) know damn well the whole thing is a scam, and many have said as much.
Within 3 mins of visiting a Lady friend.. with ITV news on There were three Propaganda lies..
1 Skripal’s
2 Interfering ( Russia ) with other countries Elections – Zero proof Whilst the USA Openly boast of the same ALL OVER THE WORLD
3 Corbyn Anti-Semitism…Bullshit
All this within three Mins.
Trump / Clinton – May – Boris Johnson / Hunt / Monsters the Lot of them..
I was trying not to look at the Picture of the dead infant clinging to dead dad’s neck..in some river near the US Border .. Chunky mark put an end to that.
..
When I just started reading this blog, I was interested in the Skripal case and didn’t know much about politics in general. So, there were a lot of discussions incomprehensible to me.
I asked once “why do you talk so much about Brexit, what is it?” I was told “Tatiana, Britain leaves the European Union on March 29.”
I looked through the news on this and learned the most telling facts: ordinary people are concerned about the freedom of movement; ‘big money’ is concerned about the loss of the global financial centre status; the UK voted back in 2016 and still is in the EU.
As an outside observer, it seems to me that you will not leave the EU for long. At least until all the fat cats are ready for the change.
Have you been persuaded to vote again yet? Nowadays, when the results of a referendum are not satisfactory for
the establishmentsome powers, then people are asked to please kindly vote again 🙂tatyana
got it in one!
When Mr.Erdogan was not happy with how the Mayor vote went in Istanbul, he ordered it to be run again.
This time 800000 people more voted for a party different from Erdogan.
Extrapolate that to Brexit, last time we voted on Brexit 1300000 more people voted for Brexit than voted Remain, if we are forced to voted again because the Elite did not like the peoples choice, how do you think it would pan out.
My guess would be three million more would vote for Brexit
than vote for the Elites choice of Remain.
Mr. Murray once commented that the Crimeans should better vote again, so that this time no one had any doubt that the referendum is held according to the rules.
What’s funny, no one doubts that the Crimeans clearly expressed their will. But there is always something to complain about.
I have an old joke for you 🙂
USSR, time of total deficit in shops. There are no goods, but sellers are forbidden to refuse buyers. A man comes into the department store and a smiling salesman greets him:
– Hello, we are glad to see you. What would you like?
– I’d like a pair of gloves.
– Oh, could you kindly go to the next department.
In the next department the man says:
– Hello, I’d like to buy a pair of gloves.
– Would you prefer leather or textile?
– Leather, please.
– I’m sorry, leather gloves are in the department over there.
In the next department the man says:
– Hello, I need leather gloves.
– With or without fur?
– With fur.
– The next department, please.
In the next department the man says:
– I need leather gloves with fur.
– Extend your hand, spread your fingers, please.
– Are you making fun of me?! Give me the gloves and I’ll go.
– We just want to sell you exactly what you want. Your size is in the next department.
The man visits some more departments, each time specifying that the gloves are needed to the coat and not to the cloak, that he prefers gloves with Velcro and not with the button etc etc
At this moment the entrance doors open, another man comes into the store, with a toilet in his outstretched hands, obviously torn out of its place, with some pieces of tile still remeining along the edges. The newcomer comes to the counter and shouts:
“Here is my toilet, here is my tile, you’ve already seen my ass, so give me toilet paper at last!!!!”
My loss of freedom of movement and European citizenship is absolutely what concerns me. This will be the biggest loss of freedoms, rights and standards of living ever for the people of the UK. We’re basically being screwed by some highly wealthy and powerful individuals under the pretence of upholding an ill-thought out badly worded referendum. No matter what happens no one will get the result they want apart from these wealthy bastards.
“It’s the rich what get the gravy. It’s the poor what get the blame.”
Brexiteers do not care about your right to roam in Europe, get used to it or leave the Kingdom.
The smaller the area, the fewer opportunities.
The area of Scotland is approximately equal to the area of my Krasnodar region. If I had to rely only on the resources of my region, I could only pursue a career in agriculture or maybe transportation.