Bulletguy Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:44 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... FGS Dave, for once in your life just read!!! Read who it was who actually reported what Johnson said. You have here Nazir Afzal OBE, he is the former Chief Prosecutor for North West England within the CPS, and he is a practising Muslim. This is not the Independent speaking, it is the Independent quoting Nazir Afzal, quoting conversations that he had with Johnson in June 2016, during which he stressed the risks in releasing still radicalised terrorists. He was, if you would only see thorough that fog of party political bias that clouds your vision, arguing for stricter controls. How on earth does that translate into either the Independent, or Afzal, being terrorist sympathisers? You really do spout ignorant, half-baked, tripe. He doesn't even read the content of his own damn links he posts let alone anyone elses! The only form of 'answer' you will get to that question will be more nonsense amidst much deflection, blame shifting, and squirming. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 1:38 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:48 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 12:32 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:26 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... So try using that brain cell you share with Tweetie Pie and, instead of spouting tripe, explain what you think should have been done with Kahn following his conviction for terrorism. Clearly Kahn should not have been released until he had been de-radicalised (assuming that is, actually, possible to achieve) but, as you seem to see everything in party political terms, which party was in government when the indeterminate sentence rules were changed, which party was in government when Kahn's sentence was reviewed and reduced, which party was in government when he was released, which party was responsible for ensuring he was supervised after release, which party was responsible for authorising Kahn's attendance at the London conference, and which party was responsible for the security arrangements at that conference? So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes? Simple ... Hang him ... End of Penetrating! :-D But hang who, Johnson? (BTW, they actually shot him, so hanging seems a bit pointless.) But that is just the man, I asked about the process. You asked what should have been done with this Muslim terrorist following his conviction ... I answered and you don't like it ... Thinking about it actually hanging is too good , maybe public stoning to death as they do in the Islamic world might be better ... I'd pay some good money for that He wasn't a Muslim but an Islamist. Many articles explain the difference but here is one. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/muslims-vs.-islamists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-12-01 1:50 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 1:38 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:48 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 12:32 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:26 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... So try using that brain cell you share with Tweetie Pie and, instead of spouting tripe, explain what you think should have been done with Kahn following his conviction for terrorism. Clearly Kahn should not have been released until he had been de-radicalised (assuming that is, actually, possible to achieve) but, as you seem to see everything in party political terms, which party was in government when the indeterminate sentence rules were changed, which party was in government when Kahn's sentence was reviewed and reduced, which party was in government when he was released, which party was responsible for ensuring he was supervised after release, which party was responsible for authorising Kahn's attendance at the London conference, and which party was responsible for the security arrangements at that conference? So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes? Simple ... Hang him ... End of Penetrating! :-D But hang who, Johnson? (BTW, they actually shot him, so hanging seems a bit pointless.) But that is just the man, I asked about the process. You asked what should have been done with this Muslim terrorist following his conviction ... I answered and you don't like it ... Thinking about it actually hanging is too good , maybe public stoning to death as they do in the Islamic world might be better ... I'd pay some good money for that He wasn't a Muslim but an Islamist. Many articles explain the difference but here is one. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/muslims-vs.-islamists That short video explains it very well indeed. Everyone should watch that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Professor Ian Aitchison, former adviser to government on counter terrorism speaks out on "crazy" budget cuts...."we went far too far, far too fast, and we're now reaping what we sowed". Oh, and he's a Tory. ;-) 2pm news on R2 listen at 1:00:0 mark. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000bvb4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdbrain Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-12-01 1:50 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 1:38 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:48 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 12:32 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:26 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... So try using that brain cell you share with Tweetie Pie and, instead of spouting tripe, explain what you think should have been done with Kahn following his conviction for terrorism. Clearly Kahn should not have been released until he had been de-radicalised (assuming that is, actually, possible to achieve) but, as you seem to see everything in party political terms, which party was in government when the indeterminate sentence rules were changed, which party was in government when Kahn's sentence was reviewed and reduced, which party was in government when he was released, which party was responsible for ensuring he was supervised after release, which party was responsible for authorising Kahn's attendance at the London conference, and which party was responsible for the security arrangements at that conference? So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes? Simple ... Hang him ... End of Penetrating! :-D But hang who, Johnson? (BTW, they actually shot him, so hanging seems a bit pointless.) But that is just the man, I asked about the process. You asked what should have been done with this Muslim terrorist following his conviction ... I answered and you don't like it ... Thinking about it actually hanging is too good , maybe public stoning to death as they do in the Islamic world might be better ... I'd pay some good money for that He wasn't a Muslim but an Islamist. Many articles explain the difference but here is one. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/muslims-vs.-islamists He was a Muslim ... Your silly attempt at trying to distance Muslims from Islamic terrorism doesnt work princess ... Khan had on video stated he wasn't a terrorist , well obviously he was a terrorist wasn't he ??? ... Just like he was a Muslim ... Try again sweet cheeks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdbrain Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-12-01 4:07 PM Professor Ian Aitchison, former adviser to government on counter terrorism speaks out on "crazy" budget cuts...."we went far too far, far too fast, and we're now reaping what we sowed". Oh, and he's a Tory. ;-) 2pm news on R2 listen at 1:00:0 mark. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000bvb4 What have budget cuts got to do with those who wanna slit your throat for not believing in Allah ??? ... Poor Khan hadn't had his benefits cut had he ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-12-01 11:16 AM John52 - 2019-12-01 9:04 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html As the gap between rich and poor gets wider, crime increases, and prisons get more overcrowded so prisoners come out worse than they went in. The evidence is overwhelming. But this Government ignores it because it doesn't follow their mantra. They made the problem worse by cutting prison funding to pay for baling out their chums in the banks. Experienced prison officers made redundant at vast expense. Finally realising their mistake they are recruiting more now - at more vast expense. But they are inexperienced, the cons know it,and take advantage.. Rubbish :-| ......... The UK has just endured 10 years of austerity because AS PER USUAL Labour F*cked up the economy *-) ....... Deregulation of the financial sector started with Thatcher's 'Big Bang' and led to the financial crisis. George Osborne (a devotee of Margaret Thatcher) had been calling for even more deregulation so would have been even worse if the Tories had been in power. Tory 'Austerity' has 'F*cked up the economy' - paying experienced Prison Officers off with early retirement, leading to a prisons crisis even the Tories couldn't ignore. So they back-tracked and started recruiting and training more prison officers - at more extra expense. But they aren't experienced as the experienced officers who could have trained them have left. The cons take advantage of the new prison officers inexperience. Over £500 million spent on making the prisons worse. The person responsible for this disaster Chris Grayling has been moved - but the damage has been done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast Pat Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 John52 - 2019-12-01 10:14 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 11:16 AM John52 - 2019-12-01 9:04 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html As the gap between rich and poor gets wider, crime increases, and prisons get more overcrowded so prisoners come out worse than they went in. The evidence is overwhelming. But this Government ignores it because it doesn't follow their mantra. They made the problem worse by cutting prison funding to pay for baling out their chums in the banks. Experienced prison officers made redundant at vast expense. Finally realising their mistake they are recruiting more now - at more vast expense. But they are inexperienced, the cons know it,and take advantage.. Rubbish :-| ......... The UK has just endured 10 years of austerity because AS PER USUAL Labour F*cked up the economy *-) ....... Deregulation of the financial sector started with Thatcher's 'Big Bang' and led to the financial crisis. George Osborne (a devotee of Margaret Thatcher) had been calling for even more deregulation so would have been even worse if the Tories had been in power. . So why didn't LABOUR reintroduce regulations during the 13 years they were in power? >:-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 10 :D ............ 10 days to go 8-) ....... 10 point gap for Nasty Grandpa to close ;-) ........ Will the Labour Lemmings save him? :-| ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast Pat Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Imagine being a Republican US President so unpopular abroad the conservative candidate in one of your closest allies hides rather than risk your endorsement. Also, imagine being the kind of candidate such a President might endorse. https://www.ft.com/content/8277af5c-144f-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Fast Pat - 2019-12-02 12:30 AM From the father of one of the victims, Jack Merritt, aimed right at the two vile rag trash papers of hate. Don’t use my son’s death, and his and his colleague’s photos - to promote your vile propaganda. Jack stood against everything you stand for - hatred, division, ignorance. Well said Mr David Merritt. Also friends who had worked with Jack; https://twitter.com/jake_thorold/status/1200862757077291008 And his girlfriend Holly; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Fast Pat - 2019-12-02 8:56 AM Imagine being a Republican US President so unpopular abroad the conservative candidate in one of your closest allies hides rather than risk your endorsement. Also, imagine being the kind of candidate such a President might endorse. https://www.ft.com/content/8277af5c-144f-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385 Two loose cannons together eh? I bet they are s**tting themselves over what Trump might say this time. I bet he has been warned not to mention the NHS again like he did last time when he let slip that it was on the table. Maybe the led by Donkeys team should project that video of Johnson calling him unfit for office and out of his mind on the side of the houses of parliament. (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-12-02 10:18 AM Fast Pat - 2019-12-02 12:30 AM From the father of one of the victims, Jack Merritt, aimed right at the two vile rag trash papers of hate. Don’t use my son’s death, and his and his colleague’s photos - to promote your vile propaganda. Jack stood against everything you stand for - hatred, division, ignorance. Well said Mr David Merritt. Also friends who had worked with Jack; https://twitter.com/jake_thorold/status/1200862757077291008 And his girlfriend Holly; It always puzzle me why the Liberal brigade refuse to accept reality :-| ......... Boris didn't kill Jack Merritt........a Islamic extremist did *-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast Pat Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Boris Johnson gave a wide-ranging interview to the BBC's Andrew Marr programme, focusing on security but also covering Brexit, and the NHS, as well as the plans of the Labour Party. Here are his most eye-catching claims fact-checked. Claim 1: The government is putting extra money into counter-terrorist policing Discussing measures to tackle terrorism in the wake of Friday's London Bridge attacks, Mr Johnson said: "We've obviously invested a great deal in counter-terrorism in the Spending Review. We put another £160m into counter-terrorism." In September, Boris Johnson's government announced its spending plans for 2020-21. These only included increasing funding for counter-terrorism in line with inflation. Those plans also include a pledge to continue for another year "the additional £160m announced at Budget 2018." In fact, Budget 2018 only increased counter-terrorism funding by £59m or 8% on the previous year, as this written answer in the House of Commons shows. The £160m is the difference between spending plans announced in 2015 and the figure eventually spent in 2019-20. Claim 2: "Jeremy Corbyn has said he would disband MI5" BBC News has asked the Conservatives for the evidence behind this claim, and is still awaiting a response. Labour has denied that Jeremy Corbyn wants to disband MI5. The claim may relate to a campaign in 2015, run by a group called Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory, which issued a statement with a number of demands including "disband MI5". Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell is still listed as a signatory on that website. He did admit to signing it according to press reports, though he claimed to have done so in error, and did not support disbanding MI5. Claim 3: "We have a Queen's Speech that was blocked by Parliament." In fact the Queen's Speech was passed by 16 votes on 24 October. Claim 4: The government was already moving to stop automatic early release Mr Johnson said: "I also said in August that we would no longer allow the automatic early release of serious and violent offenders. And what we are doing now, is there is a bill that was in the Queen's Speech to prevent automatic early release." The Queen's Speech included a Sentencing Bill, which would change "the automatic release point from halfway to the two-thirds point for adult offenders serving sentences of four years or more for serious violent or sexual offences". Offenders considered "dangerous" already receive an Extended Determinate Sentence, of which around 250 were imposed last year. They are not considered for release until they have served two-thirds of their sentences. Claim 5: The largest NHS investments in modern memory Boris Johnson said: "...we are so determined to make huge investments in the NHS. The largest in modern memory. £34bn." The Conservatives' plans do involve increasing funding for the NHS in England in cash terms by £34bn. However, accounting for inflation, the real increase would be £20.5bn by 2023-24. At a 3.2% annual increase, it is less than the 6% average achieved by Labour governments between 1997 and 2010, according to the Health Foundation. And most of that extra spending was already announced by the government before the election. The Conservative manifesto only pledges to increase health spending in 2023-24 by £2.9bn - just a third of one per centage point more than was already planned, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Fast Pat - 2019-12-02 11:44 AM Claim 2: "Jeremy Corbyn has said he would disband MI5" I accept Boris got that wrong ;-) ........ It was LABOUR'S Diane Abbott >:-) .......... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10459260/diane-abbott-called-for-the-abolition-of-mi5-labour-cant-handle-our-security-and-counter-terrorism/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 1:38 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:48 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 12:32 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:26 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... So try using that brain cell you share with Tweetie Pie and, instead of spouting tripe, explain what you think should have been done with Kahn following his conviction for terrorism. Clearly Kahn should not have been released until he had been de-radicalised (assuming that is, actually, possible to achieve) but, as you seem to see everything in party political terms, which party was in government when the indeterminate sentence rules were changed, which party was in government when Kahn's sentence was reviewed and reduced, which party was in government when he was released, which party was responsible for ensuring he was supervised after release, which party was responsible for authorising Kahn's attendance at the London conference, and which party was responsible for the security arrangements at that conference? So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes? Simple ... Hang him ... End of Penetrating! :-D But hang who, Johnson? (BTW, they actually shot him, so hanging seems a bit pointless.) But that is just the man, I asked about the process. You asked what should have been done with this Muslim terrorist following his conviction ... I answered and you don't like it ... Thinking about it actually hanging is too good , maybe public stoning to death as they do in the Islamic world might be better ... I'd pay some good money for that If you read what I wrote (faint hope of that, I suspect!) you will see that I did not say what should have been done differently to him, but what should have been done differently to rectify all those multiple failings. I was attempting to get some semblance of an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of de-radicalisation, imprisonment, legislation, early release, supervision of tagged prisoners on licence, and security surrounding such individuals. Shouldn't really have bothered, but thanks for your insightful contribution. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 4:50 PM Bulletguy - 2019-12-01 1:50 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 1:38 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:48 PM Birdbrain - 2019-12-01 12:32 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-01 12:26 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 8:52 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html Well well.......The Terrorist Sympathizers favourite rag blames the lack of money and not the TERRORIST *-) ........ You Terrorist excuse merchants are really quite shameless aren't you >:-( ......... So try using that brain cell you share with Tweetie Pie and, instead of spouting tripe, explain what you think should have been done with Kahn following his conviction for terrorism. Clearly Kahn should not have been released until he had been de-radicalised (assuming that is, actually, possible to achieve) but, as you seem to see everything in party political terms, which party was in government when the indeterminate sentence rules were changed, which party was in government when Kahn's sentence was reviewed and reduced, which party was in government when he was released, which party was responsible for ensuring he was supervised after release, which party was responsible for authorising Kahn's attendance at the London conference, and which party was responsible for the security arrangements at that conference? So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes? Simple ... Hang him ... End of Penetrating! :-D But hang who, Johnson? (BTW, they actually shot him, so hanging seems a bit pointless.) But that is just the man, I asked about the process. You asked what should have been done with this Muslim terrorist following his conviction ... I answered and you don't like it ... Thinking about it actually hanging is too good , maybe public stoning to death as they do in the Islamic world might be better ... I'd pay some good money for that He wasn't a Muslim but an Islamist. Many articles explain the difference but here is one. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/muslims-vs.-islamists He was a Muslim ... Your silly attempt at trying to distance Muslims from Islamic terrorism doesnt work princess ... Khan had on video stated he wasn't a terrorist , well obviously he was a terrorist wasn't he ??? ... Just like he was a Muslim ... Try again sweet cheeks Really? So you think there are 1.9 billion terrorists in the world as a whole? Are you quite sure that is what you "think"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 3:51 PM I was attempting to get some semblance of an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of de-radicalisation, imprisonment, legislation, early release, supervision of tagged prisoners on licence, and security surrounding such individuals. Shouldn't really have bothered, but thanks for your insightful contribution. :-| Nope.......You were attempting to gain the moral high ground by being all superiour again *-) ....... Just a thought Brian ;-) .......... Perhaps you should try converting us non criminals to liberalism before you start on the Terrorists? :-| ...... It'll deffo be safer........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-12-02 8:50 AM John52 - 2019-12-01 10:14 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-01 11:16 AM John52 - 2019-12-01 9:04 AM Fast Pat - 2019-11-30 10:37 PM https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html As the gap between rich and poor gets wider, crime increases, and prisons get more overcrowded so prisoners come out worse than they went in. The evidence is overwhelming. But this Government ignores it because it doesn't follow their mantra. They made the problem worse by cutting prison funding to pay for baling out their chums in the banks. Experienced prison officers made redundant at vast expense. Finally realising their mistake they are recruiting more now - at more vast expense. But they are inexperienced, the cons know it,and take advantage.. Rubbish :-| ......... The UK has just endured 10 years of austerity because AS PER USUAL Labour F*cked up the economy *-) ....... Deregulation of the financial sector started with Thatcher's 'Big Bang' and led to the financial crisis. George Osborne (a devotee of Margaret Thatcher) had been calling for even more deregulation so would have been even worse if the Tories had been in power. . So why didn't LABOUR reintroduce regulations during the 13 years they were in power? >:-) ........ Because they were benefiting politically from the economic growth it brought. For the same reason the Tories weren't lining the rooftops screaming for greater controls. While the party is bringing wealth and happiness, no-one wants to be the party pooper. But, it wasn't Labour or the Conservatives who messed up the economy, it was Wall Street. It was the famous Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs) that were sold as securities between banks and investment companies that allowed the illusion of a money tree to flourish - until someone actually asked what was, actually, in the CDOs, and discovered that many were stuffed with low cost, low start, mortgages that had been sold to NINJA (no incomes, no jobs, no assets) borrowers, making their mortgages very high risk, and then "hidden" in CDOs alongside sound loans. The ratings agencies didn't tart looking until I was too late, awarding the securities A, AA, or AAA ratings on which the institutions relied for their provenance. Brown happened to be the Chancellor at the time, so the mess landed on his plate. He was, in fact, given much credit at the time for acting quickly to mobilise the rest of the major economies to bail out the banks, so preventing the melt-down of the world's financial system. One might argue that he could have acted earlier to rein in the wild excesses that were taking place in the UK markets, but in the absence of evidence of what, beyond the usual cyclical nature of financial markets, was driving that excessive bull market, he appears to have been reassured by the fact that all other markets around the world were behaving in much the sae way at the same time. It is notable that HM opposition at the time were silent on the subject, not clamouring for action to dampen it down. No why would that be, I wonder? Those are the bare facts. Shame you didn't check them before making yet another ill informed comment, isn't it? Just goes to show what excessive party political bias does to a brain, doesn't it? :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 4:34 PM But, it wasn't Labour or the Conservatives who messed up the economy, it was Wall Street. So Labour emptying the UK bank account didn't contribute to the financial sh*t fest the Tories had to sort out? *-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-12-02 4:17 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 3:51 PM I was attempting to get some semblance of an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of de-radicalisation, imprisonment, legislation, early release, supervision of tagged prisoners on licence, and security surrounding such individuals. Shouldn't really have bothered, but thanks for your insightful contribution. :-| Nope.......You were attempting to gain the moral high ground by being all superiour again *-) ....... Just a thought Brian ;-) .......... Perhaps you should try converting us non criminals to liberalism before you start on the Terrorists? :-| ...... It'll deffo be safer........ The question, addressed to you, was "So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes?" Moral high ground? Superior? Spherical and plural! :-D Laughable. It is a straight question that you let Tweetie have first go at answering - until he dropped the ball - and now up you bob, tail end Charlie, claiming superiority as my motive for asking. Ever asked yourself why you use that defence? Eh? Pathetic! Now, wanna have a go at answering the question, instead of hiding behind your inferiority complex? I dare you. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 4:54 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-02 4:17 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 3:51 PM I was attempting to get some semblance of an intelligent discussion on the pros and cons of de-radicalisation, imprisonment, legislation, early release, supervision of tagged prisoners on licence, and security surrounding such individuals. Shouldn't really have bothered, but thanks for your insightful contribution. :-| Nope.......You were attempting to gain the moral high ground by being all superiour again *-) ....... Just a thought Brian ;-) .......... Perhaps you should try converting us non criminals to liberalism before you start on the Terrorists? :-| ...... It'll deffo be safer........ The question, addressed to you, was "So come on, what should have been done differently and, taking account of the above multiple failures, which party should instead have had charge of those processes?" Moral high ground? Superior? Spherical and plural! :-D Laughable. It is a straight question that you let Tweetie have first go at answering - until he dropped the ball - and now up you bob, tail end Charlie, claiming superiority as my motive for asking. Ever asked yourself why you use that defence? Eh? Pathetic! Now, wanna have a go at answering the question, instead of hiding behind your inferiority complex? I dare you. :-D The answers are simple ;-) ........ Lock them up and throw away the key :-| ....... Or give them a suspended sentence from a bit of Chatham Hemp >:-) ....... But both of those answers will offend your Loony liberal mind wont they Brian? *-) ........ That's the difference between us init Brian........as dog lover I'd put a mad dog down....... Where as you folk will let it stab you to death 8-) ......... And I'm supposed to be the Mad Hatter? :-S ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-12-02 4:51 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 4:34 PM But, it wasn't Labour or the Conservatives who messed up the economy, it was Wall Street. So Labour emptying the UK bank account didn't contribute to the financial sh*t fest the Tories had to sort out? *-) ......... This reading stuff really is a problem for you, isn't it? Read again what I wrote above. Brown (followed when Brown became PM by Darling), led the moves to prop up the banks, by propping up most of the UK banks, which is where most of the money (about 850 billion) went. Here's a primer for you https://tinyurl.com/t5vv3vk Read that (properly! :-)) - and don't come back until you have finished it all and fully understood it! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 5:06 PM pelmetman - 2019-12-02 4:51 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-12-02 4:34 PM But, it wasn't Labour or the Conservatives who messed up the economy, it was Wall Street. So Labour emptying the UK bank account didn't contribute to the financial sh*t fest the Tories had to sort out? *-) ......... This reading stuff really is a problem for you, isn't it? Read again what I wrote above. Brown (followed when Brown became PM by Darling), led the moves to prop up the banks, by propping up most of the UK banks, which is where most of the money (about 850 billion) went. Here's a primer for you https://tinyurl.com/t5vv3vk Read that (properly! :-)) - and don't come back until you have finished it all and fully understood it! :-D I like you Brian have been around long enough to know that Sh*t Happens ;-) ...... We have also been around long enough to know that Labour are incompetent when it comes to making stuff add up 8-) .......... If you don't believe me .......ask Diane Abbott a maths question (lol) (lol) (lol) ........ BTW who do you think will pay for Corbyn's nationalization of the railways the water the electric etc etc? 8-)......... It wont be my sprogs.........I don't have any B-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.