• The leading opposition political party in UK is declared a threat to national security.
    78 replies, posted
[url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-win-conservative-party-warning-that-new-labour-leader-is-threat-to-national-security-mocked-on-twitter-10499317.html[/url] [quote=article]The Conservative Party is facing ridicule after it responded to Jeremy Corbyn’s landslide Labour leadership victory by warning that he is a “threat to national security”.[/quote] [quote=cameron]The Labour Party is now a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family's security.[/quote] [t]http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article10499327.ece/binary/original/cameron.jpg[/t] Hands up if you're a twat I'm not sure what to say really. Seems amusing what Cameron will do to smear his rivals name, the papers are all jumping on the band wagon also. I wonder if this sets the precedent for UK politics from now on. Kind of scary all things considered, historically the political assholes generally tend to ban opposition after making similar statements. I think the tweet is ill advised and Cameron should know better.
Saw something at work earlier about journos chasing Corbyn asking why his shadow cabinet is all men. Even if Corbyn doesn't get to be PM he ought to shit everyone up.
[QUOTE=spekter;48681724]Saw something at work earlier about journos chasing Corbyn asking why his shadow cabinet is all men. Even if Corbyn doesn't get to be PM he ought to shit everyone up.[/QUOTE] The media has done a good job of obfuscating the facts as usual. Roughly half of the cabinet are women. I don't blame you for being wrong about it though, all of the richest and most influential men are rallying against corbyn and spreading their slanderous lies. The media is purposefully trying to mislead people.
[url]https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/642984909980725248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/642765041708740608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Anna_Soubry/status/642653496211316736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/ben4ipswich/status/642663282906660865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/GavinBarwellMP/status/642672274491998208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] security security security security security security beep boop security security
[QUOTE=benzi2k7;48681797][url]https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/642984909980725248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/642765041708740608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Anna_Soubry/status/642653496211316736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/ben4ipswich/status/642663282906660865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/GavinBarwellMP/status/642672274491998208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] security security security security security security beep boop security security[/QUOTE] Its pretty insulting to our intelligence if they think the we will buy it.
Corbyn's only a risk to the security of the rest of the upperclass shits that Cameron protects. He's the first bit of good news we've had in a while and trust David "Just like you washing dishing in the kitchen" Cameron to start smearing him off the bat. They've got all of the out of touch tories blasting him for wanting Bin Laden to have been put on trial, god forbid we'd stick to our principles and values and maintain due process.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;48681815]Its pretty insulting to our intelligence if they think the we will buy it.[/QUOTE]There's probably going to be quite a lot of people who will.
[QUOTE=benzi2k7;48681797][url]https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/642984909980725248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/642765041708740608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/Anna_Soubry/status/642653496211316736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/ben4ipswich/status/642663282906660865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] [url]https://twitter.com/GavinBarwellMP/status/642672274491998208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw[/url] security security security security security security beep boop security security[/QUOTE] More like pr pr pr pr pr.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;48681815]Its pretty insulting to our intelligence if they think the we will buy it.[/QUOTE] I think you need to remember what country you live in.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;48681815]Its pretty insulting to our intelligence if they think the we will buy it.[/QUOTE] Well, that is if one has enough intelligence to be insulted by it in the first place. I think they are more relying on the people who lack intelligence to the point that they will be persuaded by clearly alarmist rhetoric. With that said outright declaring somebody to be a threat to national security is a low, [I]low[/I] blow. Slinging that kind of rhetoric against a fellow elected official should be grounds for impeachment, it's amazing that kind of shit is passable behavior.
Remember that social media means jack shit in terms of the electorate. People gobble up Murdoch's propaganda like starving dogs being given a bowl of food.
Meanwhile the Conservatives are threatening our security of our human rights, sparking the UN to investigate. [url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/un-to-investigate-uk-over-human-rights-abuses-against-disabled-people-caused-by-welfare-reform-10478536.html[/url]
To be fair, both the leader and the opposition and his shadow chancellor do have a fairly good record of praising our enemies... [URL]https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/alex-massie/2015/09/the-labour-party-is-now-led-by-people-who-wanted-the-ira-to-win/[/URL] [URL]https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/isabel-hardman/2015/09/meet-your-shadow-chancellor-john-mcdonnells-greatest-hits/[/URL] [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11863351/Argentina-Jeremy-Corbyn-is-one-of-ours-when-it-comes-to-Falkland-Islands-dispute.html"]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11863351/Argentina-Jeremy-Corbyn-is-one-of-ours-when-it-comes-to-Falkland-Islands-dispute.html [/URL] I mean the Conservatives attack lines were fairly ham-fisted but they were essentially correct.
[QUOTE=Dr.Fragg;48681821]Corbyn's only a risk to the security of the rest of the upperclass shits that Cameron protects. He's the first bit of good news we've had in a while and trust David "Just like you washing dishing in the kitchen" Cameron to start smearing him off the bat. They've got all of the out of touch tories blasting him for wanting Bin Laden to have been put on trial, god forbid we'd stick to our principles and values and maintain due process.[/QUOTE] This "conservatives only protect the upper class elite!" shit got real fuckin old a really long time ago, it's on the same tier of childish kneejerking as "labour let in all the foreigners", the UK's economy has been in the healthiest rate of growth [url=http://data.worldbank.org/country/united-kingdom]since 2007 (2.6%)[/url], I doubt Cameron is in office exclusively to jack off his m8s, since clearly he's doing [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2659485/Britains-booming-tech-industry-beats-Silicon-Valley-London-digital-powerhouse-help-pump-12billion-economy-ten-years.html]good things for Britain's industry[/url]
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;48681747]The media has done a good job of obfuscating the facts as usual. Roughly half of the cabinet are women. I don't blame you for being wrong about it though, all of the richest and most influential men are rallying against corbyn and spreading their slanderous lies. The media is purposefully trying to mislead people.[/QUOTE] only the tory press could spin the most inclusive shadow cabinet in history into the least inclusive shadow cabinet in history
[QUOTE=Cabbage;48682037]This "conservatives only protect the upper class elite!" shit got real fuckin old a really long time ago, it's on the same tier of childish kneejerking as "labour let in all the foreigners", the UK's economy has been in the healthiest rate of growth [URL="http://data.worldbank.org/country/united-kingdom"]since 2007 (2.6%)[/URL], I doubt Cameron is in office exclusively to jack off his m8s, since clearly he's doing [URL="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2659485/Britains-booming-tech-industry-beats-Silicon-Valley-London-digital-powerhouse-help-pump-12billion-economy-ten-years.html"]good things for Britain's industry[/URL][/QUOTE]the richest 10% in the uk have increased their wealth from 52% of all wealth to 54.1% since cameron came into power lol, it's the only G7 country that has a higher inequality than they did in 2000
[img]http://i.imgur.com/ONbxW1N.png[/img] Russian embassy should be tried for war crimes because this is some fucking napalm bombing.
You know it's embarrassing when [I]Russia[/I] has a point about your government's fear of opposition.
[QUOTE=Cabbage;48682037]This "conservatives only protect the upper class elite!" shit got real fuckin old a really long time ago, it's on the same tier of childish kneejerking as "labour let in all the foreigners", the UK's economy has been in the healthiest rate of growth [url=http://data.worldbank.org/country/united-kingdom]since 2007 (2.6%)[/url], I doubt Cameron is in office exclusively to jack off his m8s, since clearly he's doing [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2659485/Britains-booming-tech-industry-beats-Silicon-Valley-London-digital-powerhouse-help-pump-12billion-economy-ten-years.html]good things for Britain's industry[/url][/QUOTE] The criticism is that, whilst there's been economic growth, it's been at the cost of working people, with the decimation of public services, and welfare, literally leading to people (in more extreme cases) dying because they're being forced to work when they physically can't, meanwhile the government's policies have benefitted the rich and powerful. They've increased the minimum wage, by shit all, but people on that minimum wage are way worse off because of the reductions to in work benefits which were a must. They've sold off RBS and the Royal Mail to their mates at a loss to the taxpayer, they've not closed corporate tax loopholes, and they've decreased income tax disproportionately, whilst increasing VAT which hits poor people harder than rich people. Don't you think it's a bit of a weird paradox that they're "balancing the books" by reducing public spending, but then simultaneously decreasing income tax and not doing the many things they could be doing to increase the money going in? Not to mention they're shitting all over the unions. A huge load of their recent policies can be traced to vested interests from people running corporations who are literally friends to the higher up conservatives. Growing the economy hasn't translated to a benefit for working while more people are working, they're working shittier jobs and wealth inequality is rising. Saying it's the healthiest growth since 2007 is basically meaningless anyway, since that's the year we got a global financial meltdown, you'd have to really fuck up for us not to be in some form of recovery by now. Obviously it's not as simple and reductive as 'torys are evil' but there's an argument to be had that they're representing corporations at the expense of working class people, and there's a vested interest behind a shed load of their policy. I'm sure some of them actually do think neo-liberalism works. [editline]14th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48682124][img]http://i.imgur.com/ONbxW1N.png[/img] Russian embassy should be tried for war crimes because this is some fucking napalm bombing.[/QUOTE] Russia no, what are you doing, the medical science just isn't there yet to treat burns like that.
corbyn -is- a threat to national security (if he gets in, which he won't) He wants to leave NATO and end Trident. How is that not a threat to national security?
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48682648]corbyn -is- a threat to national security (if he gets in, which he won't) He wants to leave NATO and end Trident. How is that not a threat to national security?[/QUOTE] Maybe by not being dragged into costly wars, the world won't hate us and are less likely to kill us. IMO it might just be beneficial to national security.
trident is a really [URL="https://wikileaks.org/trident-safety/"]safe[/URL] and totally [URL="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/raf-cuts-nimrod-patrols-allows-russians-spy-trident-submarines-warn-experts-1503626"]reliable[/URL] system that will 100% [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/11_november/15/newsnight.shtml"]ensure our continued safety[/URL] but don't tell anybody about [URL="http://www.rethinktrident.org.uk/the-cost-of-trident-replacement/"]how much it costs[/URL]. forget about that. corbyn is the real threat here!
We don't live in a secure world. We live in a world with Putin and a collapsing European Union. Do I think it's likely that we'll actually have to defend ourselves? Probably not. But we need something to do so, and NATO and Trident, though not perfect, are good at providing that.
scaremongers
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48682648]He wants to leave NATO and end Trident. How is that not a threat to national security?[/QUOTE] Being made to conditionally participate in war on foreign soil, and housing an old-ass and borderline useless ballistic missile system could also both be considered jeopardizing national security. It all depends on your foreign affairs priorities. Canada and Australia share sea borders with Russia and China and neither feel the need to have nuclear arms in order to have national security. Leaving NATO is a pretty odd, I'll give it that, but again, doesn't jeopardize national security, as neither Sweden, Australia or Finland are member states and are still doing fine. One can cooperate with NATO on mutual matters without needing to be a member that has to participate in foreign invasions.
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48682760]We don't live in a secure world. We live in a world with Putin and a collapsing European Union. Do I think it's likely that we'll actually have to defend ourselves? Probably not. But we need something to do so, and NATO and Trident, though not perfect, are good at providing that.[/QUOTE] arming the population, investing in anti-missile defenses would probably be a far more effective deterrent than a few nuclear submarines whose missiles are either too slow to be fired or will be shot down before they go anywhere. though i'll think you'll be happy to read [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-already-at-odds-with-deputy-tom-watson-over-trident-nato-and-the-eu-10499194.html"]this;[/URL] [quote]One of Mr Corbyn’s key allies, Diane Abbott, moved to reassure his internal party critics that he would not seek Britain’s exit from Nato or the EU. But she made clear he favoured scrapping the proposed replacement for Trident.[/quote] its all fearmongering from the tory media pack, here to remind us of things corbyn has said in the past; as though a human being can't change their opinions.
It's embarrassing, we're supposed to be courteous, if Cameron was a true gentleperson he'd shake Corbyn's hand and congratulate him on winning. This is politics, with grown, highly educated men and women not the primary school playground.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;48682783]Being made to conditionally participate in war on foreign soil, and housing an old-ass and borderline useless ballistic missile system could also both be considered jeopardizing national security. It all depends on your foreign affairs priorities. Canada and Australia share sea borders with Russia and China and neither feel the need to have nuclear arms in order to have national security. Leaving NATO is a pretty odd, I'll give it that, but again, doesn't jeopardize national security, as neither Sweden, Australia or Finland are member states and are still doing fine. One can cooperate with NATO on mutual matters without needing to be a member that has to participate in foreign invasions.[/QUOTE] Finland and Sweden have been regretting this decision lately. You also fail to see that the entire of NATO collapses without British support because we're the only country not being wholly subsidised by the US for our defence. NATO ultimately protects countries from foreign aggression, and so even if you do not believe we will be personally protected by NATO, we should remain in it as part of our duty to protect the world, especially Eastern Europe, from Russian aggression. The nuclear issue is more of a personal thing, but I think nuclear weapons firstly bring global prestige to the country in question, whether you like it or not. But more importantly, I believe that although MAD is hardly reassuring, I'd rather have some opportunity at retaliation if missiles are fired at us, and some kind of deterrent from people doing so. The situation is probably unlikely to arise, but, as I previously mentioned, we are not living in a secure world, and anything can happen. [editline]14th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Bobie;48682792]arming the population, investing in anti-missile defenses would probably be a far more effective deterrent than a few nuclear submarines whose missiles are either too slow to be fired or will be shot down before they go anywhere. though i'll think you'll be happy to read [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-already-at-odds-with-deputy-tom-watson-over-trident-nato-and-the-eu-10499194.html"]this;[/URL] its all fearmongering from the tory media pack, here to remind us of things corbyn has said in the past; as though a human being can't change their opinions.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of Watson's statement. Labour may well back away from Corbyn's positions, but he still will ultimately hold them, which is dangerous for a Prime Minister of the country. [editline]14th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Rossy167;48682829]It's embarrassing, we're supposed to be courteous, if Cameron was a true gentleperson he'd shake Corbyn's hand and congratulate him on winning. This is politics, with grown, highly educated men and women not the primary school playground.[/QUOTE] Politics hasn't ever really been like that, especially so when it is so polarised. Keep in mind that he just selected a man as shadow chancellor who said he would like to assassinate, if he could go back in time, Thatcher, openly, who remains a Tory hero for many. It's not hard to see where the animosity comes from.
[video=youtube;_hgJokgNJHo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo[/video]
[QUOTE=Jelman;48682863][video=youtube;_hgJokgNJHo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo[/video][/QUOTE] Oh god the out of context fear mongering is real. Is there some sort of libel or slander lawsuit that can be done here, because if so it's necessary?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.