advertisement


Priti Patel: Undisclosed Meetings in Israel

Maybe, Joe, but the present shower have elements of all those, front and centre. It's certainly possible that we might lose the various parts of the UK; war with somebody or other seems never far away; we're sucking up to Trump, and have our own resurgent right wing aggressors; and as for corruption...

And that's without even mentioning Brexit, which seems likely to hasten some of those.
 
In terms of incompetent governments, take your pick from:

Lord North's government, which lost us the US colonies
Asquith's government, which sleepwalked us into WWI
Baldwin's government, which did nothing about Hitler's aggression

In terms of corruption, the field is even wider, Lloyd George is perhaps the most blatant example.

The present lot are admittedly a shambles, but they seem especially awful because we are so close to their antics.
The present lot have a very specific job to do re Brexit (outwith normal governance) and are apparently quite incapable of doing that job (and the normal bit) with any degree of competence.
 
Seeing this lot in action, one would hope the Conservative Party's vaunted reputation for competence is shot for a generation, but I'm not so sure.
 
Well, yes. Maybe I'm just whistling in the dark to keep my spirits up. One thing that baffles me is the 'May has to replace a Brexiteer with another Brexiteer to keep the Tory party behind her' mantra. Why not appoint the person best qualified to do the job whoever he or she may be? It's not as if they're not going to fall on her like a pack of feral dogs anyway.
 
One thing that baffles me is the 'May has to replace a Brexiteer with another Brexiteer to keep the Tory party behind her' mantra. Why not appoint the person best qualified to do the job whoever he or she may be?

Not her style, is it? Otherwise, Boris would have been out on his ear long since. Her appointments are made in the hope of keeping a lid on things, and for no other reason.
 
Seeing this lot in action, one would hope the Conservative Party's vaunted reputation for competence is shot for a generation, but I'm not so sure.

I guess much depends on how long this lot stagger on for. A General Election within the next couple of years would see them stomped, following which they'll spend a few years tearing each other apart. If they can cling on for three or more years, there's plenty of scope for Labour to revert to its own brand of in-fighting.
 
I'm starting to wonder if we wouldn't actually be better off without politicians at all. The model feels irredeemably broken at the moment. The Netherlands has managed without a government for a good part of a year, but the place still functions rather well, as far as I could tell. I rather think that if we'd been without a government since, say, 2010, we might be in a better place right now.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...fine-without-government-on-decade-high-growth
 
The Conservative Party is a broad church. We have a minister cutting deals with foreign governments off her own bat as though she was Minister in an equitorial tin pot regime and a low level new boy in Parliament who prefers refereeing football matches to turning up for debates ( as well as calling for "a crackdown on gypsies"). Bring back Sir Nicolas Fairbairn.
 
max.

i try to avoid articles like that because they seek to undermine my faith in our political systems, which, spite of problems here and there, are ultimately quite sound, democratic. and a force for good. i don't understand why people can't just accept that we have a pretty good thing going and refrain from criticizing at every opportunity?
Tony's new PFM has been hacked already.
 
max.

i try to avoid articles like that because they seek to undermine my faith in our political systems, which, spite of problems here and there, are ultimately quite sound, democratic. and a force for good. i don't understand why people can't just accept that we have a pretty good thing going and refrain from criticizing at every opportunity?
Vuk, I'm surprised to hear you say this and am wondering if you're being ironic..

If not, well my response is our political systems can't be much good if they allow criminals from foreign countries to bribe/manipulate our governments into barbaric wars that kill millions and destabilise regions, which they do.
 
The damn Zionists found a way to manipulate Good too, they made him create earthquake in Iran. How do they do this?

Arye
 
Max, you do realise that article you linked to is a pile of anti-Israeli propaganda, don't you? A mixture of truth, half-truth, lies, exaggerations, the lot clothed in biased adjectives and adverbs.

In any case, every nation on earth does what it can to further its own interests (even Ireland!) and exert its influence on politicians in other countries. So there is also a "France-lobby" a "UK-lobby" and an "Ireland-lobby." With the important difference that those three countries are not surrounded by blood-thirsty aggressiveness and chaos in countries that invariably turn on Israel as the cause of all their woes when they are not too busy murdering each other.
 
Max, you do realise that article you linked to is a pile of anti-Israeli propaganda, don't you? A mixture of truth, half-truth, lies, exaggerations, the lot clothed in biased adjectives and adverbs.

Paul, I've several more lined up to go later so hopefully you'll prefer one or two of them.

countries that invariably turn on Israel as the cause of all their woes when they are not too busy murdering each other.

Israel and only Israel pushed - via its immensely powerful lobby in the US and UK - pre and post 9/11 in the US - for the destruction of Iraq, and the director of AIPAC at the time listed as one of AIPAC's successes quietly convincing Congress to authorise the use of military force in Iraq.

This is demonstrably true; no other country, lobby, group etc was interested in destroying Iraq, only Israel.

Don't you think this caused some woes?
 
There comes a point where someone has to take a genuinely tough stance against Israel just as the world did with South Africa
 
Prince Charles said a US president had to gain the courage to stand up to the Israel lobby in 1986.

Imagime how much more powerful they are now!

Well, we don't need to; they tried to take down a few British ministers and were caught red handed, yet still the UK regime bows to them :rolleyes:
 
Max, you do realise that article you linked to is a pile of anti-Israeli propaganda, don't you? A mixture of truth, half-truth, lies, exaggerations, the lot clothed in biased adjectives and adverbs.

In any case, every nation on earth does what it can to further its own interests (even Ireland!) and exert its influence on politicians in other countries. So there is also a "France-lobby" a "UK-lobby" and an "Ireland-lobby." With the important difference that those three countries are not surrounded by blood-thirsty aggressiveness and chaos in countries that invariably turn on Israel as the cause of all their woes when they are not too busy murdering each other.
You make a sensible point: all countries lobby other governments. The question is then whether the Israel lobby is disproportionately active in other countries and, if it is, whether that may be justified because of Israel's position in the Middle East*. Then you spoil it with a crude reference to "blood-thirsty" Arab aggression as if that explains everything that's wrong in the ME. If I remember rightly, you once described Arabs as "blood-thirsty savages", which shocked me at the time as I had previously regarded you as a fair-minded individual.

*I don't know the answers to these questions. However, I'm suspicious that anti-Semitism in the Labour Party has become a *very* high-profile issue since Corbyn (pro-Palestine) became leader. Max also alludes to the Al-Jazeera documentary which clearly showed a Labour Party activist being falsely accused of anti-Semitism for putting a pro-Palestinian case to a Labour Friends of Israel stall at a conference.
 


advertisement


Back
Top