Off Topic Great Britain General Election May 7th 2015.

Folks you are well and truly ****ed for another 4 years at least, more war, more austerity more corporate handouts more tax breaks for the wealthy and cuts cuts cuts and charges for you, but it's cool, they will tell you the economy is recovering when in fact their friends are getting richer while everyone else gets poorer

please log in to view this image

 

I dunno if you work in the arms industry (or the prosthetic arms industry) the outlook must be pretty chipper.

ISIS better watch out. once the mericans elect a republican the tanks will roll.

 

LMAO MITO you're funny, where do you think ISIS got their current weapons Withut NATO there could be no ISIS. Armed by Britain, US France Saudis and other gulf states, ISIL are ISIS ffs, ISIL were grown and armed in Turkey and Syria. ISIL joins up with Al Nusra(Al Qaeda shootoff) to form ISIS, ISIS started in Syria, right under NATO's nose.

If you wish to go on pretending NATO is arming "moderates" in syria then go ahead mate. I have posted pictures here of John McCain "the republican" and the leader of ISIS two years before ISIS appeared.

John McCain appeared before the sniper killings in Ukraine too, just like he appeared in Syria before the sniper killings in homs in 2011 too.

Where ever the neocon minions turn up, people will start dying soon after. Plus, it takes NATO several million £ per ISIS member killed, there you have it, tax payer millions spent on weapons, a Neocon\Prince Charles\BAE systems and every other manufacturer's wet dream. FFS Israel is openly supporting them in Syria. Turkey helped them attack the Kurds FFS, I guess BBC missed that bit

 

Disagree. Labour is either a crusade or it is nothing. I thought the feeling on Friday morning was bad enough, but on Sunday morning I saw that serpent Mandelsohn and his new apprentice, Chuck Upyerdinna (or whatever) and all that oily ****e about 'aspiration' (selfishness) and 'inclusion' ('we accept everything and stand for nothing'). Murdoch's flying monkeys, both of them. And then who pops up on the news right now? Brother David, Rupert's anointed one that the Labour Party had the temerity to reject for someone who, as Owen Jones rightly points out, was only fractionally less right wing than David but dared to defy the Dark Lord from Oz.

So Labour's going for the Toty-lite approach again - we'll be out for another 15 years, than spend the next 15 acting like Tories and bashing the unions, felating the heirs of Murdoch and kow-towing to the bankers and the markets.

This is no country for old men, for sure. You checked out at the right time Dave, bless you.

 

Relected Tory asked about cuts
"Homelessness is up 700% in #RdgUK during previous coalition. Wonder what the #Conservative cuts will do to address this @RobWilson_RDG?"

Cos it's after the elections his reply.
"Don't be a bad loser"

This is the sort of sports fan rivalry politics has become


#Tory

 

Lord Sugar Quits 'Anti-Enterprise' Labour

please log in to view this image

Sky News – 16 hours ago

• please log in to view this image
  
  View Photo
  Sky News - Lord Sugar Quits 'Anti-Enterprise' Labour

Lord Sugar has announced he has quit the Labour party because of its "negative business policies and the general anti-enterprise concepts".
The Apprentice star said he had lost confidence in the party over the last year and that it had been "aware of my disillusionment for some time".
Lord Sugar said he informed the party of his decision on Friday and kept his intentions quiet during the election campaign rather than use them to "possibly damage" Labour's election chances.
He was appointed a peer by the previous Labour administration in 2009, but attacked the vision outlined during Ed Miliband's tenure.
In a statement, Lord Sugar said: "In the past year I found myself losing confidence in the party due to their negative business policies and the general anti-enterprise concepts they were considering if they were to be elected.
"I expressed this to the most senior figures in the party several times."
He continued: "I was originally brought into the party by Gordon Brown during an era where true enterprise was being supported by the party.
"I signed on to New Labour in 1997 but more recently, particularly in relation to business, I sensed a policy shift moving back towards what Old Labour stood for.
"By the start of this year, I had made my decision to resign from the party whatever the outcome of the General Election.
"However, I am a loyal person and rather than use my decision to possibly damage the party's chances in the election, I decided, as a relatively high-profile individual, to keep my intentions quiet for the duration of the campaign."
During his maiden speech in the Lords, the businessman made reference to his successful BBC show The Apprentice.
He faced criticism after being appointed an "enterprise champion" by Mr Brown's government, but told peers in 2009: "I am the new boy on the block. In your Lordships' House I am certainly the apprentice."
Mr Miliband, who stood down as party leader after the election, was pictured arriving for a holiday in Ibiza as Lord Sugar made his announcement.

 

Only one thing to say to that; give a ****!

 

had it read, Lord Sugar steps into giant blender, I might have given it a few mins of my time

 

he is a blend

 

It all well being idealistic and keeping to principles. But all this will lead to nothing without the power to govern and bring new laws and affect the economy. So winning elctions is what it is all about. This is what Blair for all his faults (yes, he was right wing) recognised very early. Whether people like it or not, Labour simply NEED the middle class to win a general election otherwise they'll remain in opposition. The name of the game is to be the government and to be able to pass the laws.

 

true, it is unfortunately true.

 

Don't start him off

 

ah go o.. let me kick it off...

 

That Murdoch tells them to pass. No point being in power if we just act like Tories in red hats.

 

New laws to target radicalisation

• From the section UK Politics

please log in to view this image

David Cameron is to set out a string of new powers to tackle radicalisation, saying the UK has been a "passively tolerant society" for too long.
The PM will tell the National Security Council a counter-extremism bill will be in the Queen's Speech on 27 May.
The bill will include new immigration rules, powers to close down premises used by extremists and "extremism disruption orders".
Mr Cameron will say a "poisonous" extremist ideology must be confronted.
The proposals were first set out by Home Secretary Theresa May before the general election.
But the Conservatives were unable to secure the backing of their then Liberal Democrat coalition partners for the measures.
There is likely to be some opposition in the new Parliament on the grounds that some of the plans could infringe people's right to free speech, BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said.
Court review
The measures are also expected to introduce banning orders for extremist organisations who use hate speech in public places, but whose activities fall short of it being proscribed as a terror group.
According to details given by Mrs May at last year's Conservative Party conference, such orders would apply if ministers "reasonably believe" a group intended to incite religious or racial hatred, to threaten democracy, or if there was a pressing need to protect the public from harm, either from a risk of violence, public disorder, harassment or other criminal acts.
The granting of a ban, which would be subject to immediate review by the High Court, would make membership or funding of the organisation concerned a criminal offence.
The extreme disruption orders could be imposed on individuals, using the same criteria.

please log in to view this image

Analysis

please log in to view this image

BBC home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani
Policymakers have debated the definition of extremism ever since Tony Blair's government looked at new laws after the 7/7 Tube and bus attacks in London a decade ago.
There are, potentially, two key challenges for the government in creating anti-extremism laws and tools.
First, can a definition of extremism that leads to someone facing restrictions, such as a ban on using social media, withstand legal challenges - particularly on human rights grounds?
Secondly can such bans work in practical terms without tying up the resources of the security services.
MI5, for instance, already has triage-like systems to prioritise watching the most dangerous people: it can't monitor everyone with dangerous views.
That aside, this package of measures is part of a potentially significant shift in focus.
Ministers want tools to marginalise, restrict and silence these voices because disrupting their influence may buy time to intervene and bring someone back from the edge before it's too late.

please log in to view this image

Under the government's plans, the Charity Commission will be given more power to "root out charities who misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism", and broadcast regulator Ofcom will be able to take action against channels broadcasting extremist content.
The terror threat level was raised from substantial to severe last August in response to the conflict in Syria and Iraq.
'Extremism and grievance'
Ministers responded by introducing new orders that can block British fighters from returning to the UK and give police the power to seize the passports of people suspected of plotting to join the fighting abroad.
Mrs May will tell the National Security Council - which meets weekly and is chaired by the prime minister - that the government will empower institutions to "challenge bigotry and ignorance".

please log in to view this image

Home Secretary Theresa May kept her job in the post-election reshuffle
Mr Cameron will say the new powers will make it harder for people to promote extremist views.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'," he will say.
"It's often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And that's helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance."
The Conservative government will "conclusively turn the page on this failed approach," he will add, saying the UK must confront "head-on the poisonous Islamist extremist ideology".

 

Iron fist that's what needed

 

They must not get away with murder !.

 

who the tories or isis/black hoodie wearing thugs?

 

Time to call Sturgeon's bluff, Cameron urged: Senior Tories tell PM to give Scotland complete financial independence

• Cabinet sources say PM should hand SNP full control of tax and spending
• They believe only way to save Union is to give party what it claims to want
• But Nicola Sturgeon seemed taken aback by plans for 'full fiscal autonomy'

By JAMES CHAPMAN and GERRI PEEV FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 23:55, 12 May 2015 | UPDATED: 08:13, 13 May 2015

Senior Conservatives are urging David Cameron to ‘call the SNP’s bluff’ by giving Scotland complete financial independence.

Cabinet sources say the newly re-elected Prime Minister should hand Nicola Sturgeon the full control of tax and spending that she insists she wants.

Miss Sturgeon, whose party won a landslide victory north of the border, appeared to be taken aback in a TV interview at the weekend when it was suggested Scotland might rapidly be handed ‘full fiscal autonomy’.

Scroll down for video

please log in to view this image

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon takes a selfie with a group of nurses during a visit to Edinburgh Royal Infirmary where she praised staff as A&E performance figures improved to their best level since first being published

please log in to view this image

Miss Sturgeon and Cabinet Secretary for Health Shona Robison met with staff at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary

The SNP says it backs the idea, but wants it to be implemented over several years.

Under the plan, Westminster would remain in charge of foreign affairs and defence but the Scottish Parliament would be responsible for raising all of its own funding through taxation and all public spending.

The so-called Barnett Formula, which gives Scots an annual subsidy of around £1,600 per head, would end and some experts have warned that fiscal autonomy could leave an immediate £8 billion-a-year black hole in Scotland’s finances.

 

I think they should do exactly that but take money out of scotland to pay for all the stuff they benefit from like defence and such.

call it protection money.

Let the SNP run the **** hole into the ground.