What's in the news?

[Guest MattP]

9 minutes ago, davieG said:

A Labour MP is facing a vote of no confidence from local party members who accuse her of "continuously criticising" Jeremy Corbyn.

Luciana Berger has spoken out over the party's handling of anti-Semitism and its stance on Brexit.

She has been backed by former Labour leader Ed Miliband.

But shadow chancellor John McDonnell said she should reject claims she supported a "breakaway party" to show members she was "sticking with Labour".

Ms Berger said she would be not be "distracted from fighting for the interests of my constituents".

An extraordinary meeting has been called in the Liverpool Wavertree constituency next week to discuss two no confidence motions.

Such votes carry no official force within the Labour Party but local activists could hold a "trigger ballot", where sitting Labour MPs can be forced to compete for selection as a candidate against all-comers, ahead of the next general election.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47169929

 

 

Why do I get the feeling that the Labour Party are getting more like the McCarthyism?

Probably because it is.

 

The antisemitic abuse Berger has received from the mob in her party has been beyond the pale to be honest, some of the stuff you see on Twitter is far worse than is thrown at any other MP.

 

But what will this current crop of moderates do? Again, complain, watch nothing be done, then respond by still going out and pounding the door for Corbyn and McDonnell.

[Strokes]

5 minutes ago, Toddybad said:

The banking system worldwide was affected. Gordon Brown was credited with leading the world's response. 

Iraq and gold are irrelevant today. 

Its like me talking about Thatcher massively increasing unemployment as evidence against Teresa May's government. 

 

Well don’t worry then, this will be irrelevant in 15 years too....

[Guest MattP]

Imagine being so shit less than one in five think you are a better alternative than Theresa May.

 

[Guest MattP]

11 hours ago, MattP said:

Other news tonight, councillor wins election in election he was arrested for bribing the electorate in?

 

Good night for democracy. 

Although hardly surprising given its Tower Hamlets.

 

[Kopfkino]

16 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

France recalls ambassador to Italy in diplomatic row: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47161500

 

"A diplomatic row between France and Italy has deepened, with France complaining of "unfounded attacks and outlandish claims" by Italian leaders. France recalled its ambassador to Italy for talks on Thursday, saying the situation was "unprecedented" since the end of World War Two. It comes after Italian Deputy PM Luigi Di Maio met French "yellow-vest" protesters near Paris on Tuesday. France warned him not to interfere in the country's politics. Relations between the two countries - both founding members of the EU - have been tense since Italy's populist Five Star Movement and right-wing League party formed a coalition government in June 2018. The two governments have clashed over a range of issues, including immigration".

It is quite an incredible step for France to take. 

 

With French-German relations also becoming icy, all is not well on the continent. In fact its interesting to think what the UK's role would be in Europe and the world rn under a Brexitless Cameron government. 

[Alf Bentley]

On 10/12/2018 at 14:29, MattP said:

Boris would probably be a shocking PM - but it's worth appointing him as leader just to clear out all the yellow Tories like Soubry and Morgan. 

 

On 09/01/2019 at 17:01, MattP said:

 

When this is all over and the membership have picked the new leader him, the ones like him Soubry, Allen etc who have voted against government on almost every single piece of legislation should all be having the whip withdrawn.

 

 

46 minutes ago, davieG said:

 

Why do I get the feeling that the Labour Party are getting more like the McCarthyism?

 

 

34 minutes ago, MattP said:

Probably because it is.

 

 

 

 

On the serious point, if any Labour Party members are identified as having indulged in anti-semitic abuse on Twitter or anywhere else, they should be disciplined or expelled. Likewise, any other form of racism or abuse within the Labour Party, the Tory Party or any other organisation. I'm not on Twitter so am under-informed about this, but I'm aware that a lot of idiots use Twitter to launch abuse - doubtless some of them Labour members, some Tory members, many random idiots with no formal affiliation.

 

As for McCarthyism in the Labour Party, a bit of exaggeration don't you think, Davie? As far as I'm aware, the only Labour MPs expelled or deselected so far have been the likes of Fiona Onasanya, who was jailed for perverting the course of justice, plus the odd cases of alleged sexual abuse etc.

 

As I understand it, the action being taken against Berger is a no-confidence vote, not a deselection - on the grounds that she's been publicly criticising party/leadership decisions and has declined to deny rumours that she's planning to join others in establishing a breakaway party. That seems like reasonable grounds for a confidence debate. If she's not planning to set up a breakaway party (a move widely rumoured to be in the offing by credible journalists), she can deny it - and she can defend her record at the confidence vote. This sort of political manoeuvring goes on in all parties - including the Tory Party: 

 

 https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/101042/defiant-tory-mp-nick-boles-tells-local-deselection

"A top Tory MP facing a deselection threat over Brexit has told his local party bosses: “I won’t be bullied.” Ex-minister Nick Boles issued the defiant message after his constituency association chair made a thinly-veiled warning that he could be kicked out of his Grantham and Stamford seat. Philip Sagar urged the MP to address local party members as he revealed that dozens had called for him to be replaced over his defiance on Brexit".

 

I wouldn't want Labour (or any other party) to become too narrow and intolerant in the range of candidates it fields, but these sort of political power struggles are inevitable.

 

Mind you, if we had a saner electoral system, both main parties could divide - to the benefit of us all - allowing there to be parties of the Hard Left and Centre-Left, Hard Right and Centre-Right.

[Alf Bentley]

32 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

It is quite an incredible step for France to take. 

 

With French-German relations also becoming icy, all is not well on the continent. In fact its interesting to think what the UK's role would be in Europe and the world rn under a Brexitless Cameron government. 

 

I've taken out a special-offer subscription to the New Statesman this year and just received the latest issue through the door....all about "Broken Europe" being "on a path to self-destruction". Looks an interesting read....

[davieG]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

As for McCarthyism in the Labour Party, a bit of exaggeration don't you think, Davie?

That's why I said 'feeling' and 'like' not 'is'.

 

Certainly seems like you have to watch your words.

[Toddybad]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Your handy Brexit schedule: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/countdown-to-brexit-key-dates-uk-eu-exit-approaches

 

With 50 days remaining until Britain is scheduled to leave the EU on 29 March, the two sides have agreed to continue exploring possible tweaks to the Brexit deal that might get it over the line in the House of Commons, while still respecting the EU27’s guidelines.So far, neither looks set to budge. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking for Westminster, Brussels and businesses. Here are some of the key dates and deadlines as Brexit finally gets real.

8 February: possible export problems. From this week, freighters setting sail from UK ports with cargo for far-flung destinations such as Australia and New Zealand, a journey of about 50 days, risk arriving after Brexit day with – in the event of a no-deal Brexit – no idea of the trade rules that will be in place.

14 February: Brexit debate in the Commons: This is most likely to be a general debate following a prime ministerial statement, because Theresa May will almost certainly not have a revised deal by then. But amendments to the motion could lead to “indicative votes” on Brexit options or an extension of the two-year article 50 process, possibly via a relaunched Yvette Cooper-Nick Boles amendment setting a deadline for MPs to back the agreement.

14 February: first statutory instrument deadline. According to the Institute for Government, this is the final day on which about half the secondary legislation needed to import EU laws can be introduced, because parliament must be given 40 sitting days to object to it. EU-related SIs can be passed more quickly in “urgent circumstances”, but still need to be approved by both houses within a 28-day window.

17 February: more trade woes. From this date, ships setting sail for Japan from the UK and vice versa could arrive to find themselves in the middle of no-deal tariff mayhem.

20 February: international treaty ratification deadline. About 80 of roughly 100 international treaties with other countries remain to be ratified by parliament, a process that – barring “exceptional cases” – requires 21 sitting days.

28 February: self-imposed deadline agreed by May and the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, to discuss progress made by the two sides towards a revised deal the prime minister can bring back to the Commons.

Early-mid March: second “meaningful vote”. The European Union(Withdrawal) Act 2018 obliges the British parliament to hold a vote on the withdrawal agreement before the European parliament has its say.

21-22 March: article 50 extension request? With barely a week to go before Brexit day, EU leaders gather for their annual spring summit. This is when some EU officials think the UK might ask for more time to conclude Brexit by requesting an extension to article 50. This would need to be agreed unanimously by the EU27 and there is no time limit for it to do so – it could happen very late.

By 28 March: UK ratification of extension? If Britain has asked for an extension and the EU27 has granted it, both houses of parliament must vote to allow the legally binding exit date of 29 March to be changed.

Mid-late March: UK ratification of deal. If MPs eventually back May’s deal without an article 50 extension, the government still has to get the bill through both houses. Primary legislation of this sort can be rushed through quickly, perhaps with controversial elements stripped out. But an avalanche of amendments could still make the 29 March departure date unattainable.

25-28 March: EU ratification. If there has been no extension, the European parliament’s second Strasbourg meeting would be the last chance for MEPs to vote through the withdrawal agreement to get it agreed before Brexit day. EU ambassadors would then have a few dozen hours to rubber-stamp the final deal.

29 March: Brexit day? Without an extension, the UK will formally leave the EU on 29 March at 11pm UK time (midnight in Brussels). EU officials think a last-minute plea for more time by the UK would be unlikely, as by this late hour, events would have their own momentum. Equally unlikely, they believe, is the possibility of Britain cancelling Brexit – although the European court of justice set no notice period when it ruled the UK could unilaterally revoke article 50, so in theory, the government could still make a U-turn even at this stage.

15-18 April: EU ratification following an extension. If the UK has been granted a short technical extension to complete the Brexit process, MEPs’ monthly plenary meeting in Strasbourg would be the final opportunity for the European parliament to ratify the agreement before European elections.

23-26 May: European elections. If the UK sought and obtained an extension to article 50 that went beyond 2 July – the first day of the new parliament – it would have to take part in those elections, EU officials have said.

Just to add there have supposedly been talks about the UK MEPs simply being appointed if it got to May. 

 

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

Well you can only borrow money for so long until you have to pay it back and most people didn't want to keep borrowing and screw over their children even more in 20 years time after another 2 decades of borrowing. That's why austerity has won the last 3 elections despite most people voting for it through gritted teeth.

 

Keynesian economics failed because it didn't recognise stagflation and didn't consider it possible that while it's universally accepted that when you borrow and invest inflation naturally goes up at a higher rate, that economic growth eventually stagnates amd unemployment rises.

 

Jon the hat is right though. Generally, a cycle of a generation of borrowing and investing, followed by a cycle of a generation of austerity and paying it back is how it works best. After the financial crisis, a Tory government for a generation was naturally voted for. Whether that needs to come to an end or not remains to be seen. However, Labour's insistence on having a front bench novelty candidate who seem to glorify Latin American banana republics rather than having a serious candidate who offers sensible investment rhetoric rather than "Castro and Chavez were great men" mean the electorate don't really have that alternative to vote for.

I actually think you might have a point here. 

 

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Probably because we see the model current Labour have championed and it's a place where political opposition has been imprisoned, millions have fled the country, people are breaking into zoos to eat food, humanitarian aid is having to be delivered and inflation is at 1,000,000%.

 

Maybe just think about that for a little bit.

Whereas this is ridiculous nonsense. 

[Alf Bentley]

10 minutes ago, davieG said:

That's why I said 'feeling' and 'like' not 'is'.

 

Certainly seems like you have to watch your words.

 

For several years, it has certainly felt like a time of major ideological division within the Labour Party - and within the Tory Party for that matter.

 

Obviously, any anti-semitic persecution must be stamped out. But wouldn't it be legitimate for you to ask questions if you were running an organisation and a member of that organisation was publicly criticising your decisions and was rumoured to be setting up a rival body?

 

I don't think that feels like McCarthyism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

"During the McCarthy era, hundreds of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers; they became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private industry panels, committees and agencies. [...] Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed by a person's real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs was sometimes exaggerated. Many people suffered loss of employment or destruction of their careers; some were imprisoned. Most of these punishments came about through trial verdicts that were later overturned, laws that were later declared unconstitutional, dismissals for reasons later declared illegal or actionable, or extra-legal procedures, such as informal blacklists, that would come into general disrepute".

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Toddybad said:

The tories have taken our country to a place where life expectancy is falling, virtually every public service is in crisis, banks have already moved trillions in assets out of the UK, business investment has dropped like a stone and the totality of our trade and economy is hanging by a thread, and yet still people laughably claim it could be worse if we invested under labour. 

It's diabolical but even worse is that Labour have decided to commit electoral suicide by choosing to be led by a group that are non-representative of the people's wishes.

 

Why are the Lib Dems not changing their own leadership to benefit from the vacuum in the UK?

 

At this rate we'll see the unwanted sight of people voting for extremists parties in the UK (like they do in barbarian European countries) at the next election because they don't feel the mainstream parties are in contact with them.

[SouthStandUpperTier]

2 hours ago, Nalis said:

'We are into Brexit overtime here, can Theresa May slam dunk her deal before 29 March?'

 

 

[Nalis]

For a second I thought the left hand side of the screen said worldstarhippo.com

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

On the serious point, if any Labour Party members are identified as having indulged in anti-semitic abuse on Twitter or anywhere else, they should be disciplined or expelled. Likewise, any other form of racism or abuse within the Labour Party, the Tory Party or any other organisation. I'm not on Twitter so am under-informed about this, but I'm aware that a lot of idiots use Twitter to launch abuse - doubtless some of them Labour members, some Tory members, many random idiots with no formal affiliation.

 

As for McCarthyism in the Labour Party, a bit of exaggeration don't you think, Davie? As far as I'm aware, the only Labour MPs expelled or deselected so far have been the likes of Fiona Onasanya, who was jailed for perverting the course of justice, plus the odd cases of alleged sexual abuse etc.

 

As I understand it, the action being taken against Berger is a no-confidence vote, not a deselection - on the grounds that she's been publicly criticising party/leadership decisions and has declined to deny rumours that she's planning to join others in establishing a breakaway party. That seems like reasonable grounds for a confidence debate. If she's not planning to set up a breakaway party (a move widely rumoured to be in the offing by credible journalists), she can deny it - and she can defend her record at the confidence vote. This sort of political manoeuvring goes on in all parties - including the Tory Party: 

 

 https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/101042/defiant-tory-mp-nick-boles-tells-local-deselection

Well if that's enough then I don't really see the problem wanting Soubry out who has actually gone as record as saying she would think about joining a new party, which is a stage further than Berger - https://www.businessinsider.com/anna-soubry-new-centre-party-brexit-2017-3?r=US&IR=T

For what it's worth I think the two are totally different, Soubry has consistenly voted against the main policy her government stood for election on, Berger seems to be being harrassed for very different reasons.

 

On antisemitism though, how do you think the Labour party are handling it? - A few days ago MP's again called on them to do more https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47123328

Quote

MPs wanted specific details about how many people were being investigated, how many letters had been written to those accused telling to them to desist and what punishments had been given, our correspondent said.

Writing in Jewish News ahead of the meeting, MP Catherine McKinnell said she had put forward the motion to the parliamentary group as "far too many cases of anti-Semitism remain unsolved".

She also called for "radical transparency" about how complaints were being dealt with.

The MP said: "Despite the warm words and promises of action, far too many cases of anti-Semitism remain unresolved, whilst often serious complaints are apparently being concluded with letters simply 'reminding' perpetrators of what is appropriate behaviour with no further sanction beyond that."

After the meeting, Labour MP Luciana Berger said "no answers were given".

"If we're serious of contending with the stain of anti-Semitism within the Labour party then we must get a proper response to all of these questions," she said.

Dame Margaret Hodge said Ms Formby "wasn't prepared to give us the information that's required".

"If you want to get rid of the cancer of anti-Semitism in the Labour party, you need complete transparency, and she's refusing to do that," she said.

Labour MP Wes Streeting said the meeting had been "far from acceptable".

"In not giving us data she's (Ms Formby) ruled out any sort of possibility of Jewish members and Jewish constituents having confidence in the Labour party going to tackle it," he said.

 

This was an interesting comment from Formby herself -  it is “impossible to eradicate anti-Semitism” from the Labour Party   ( https://www.newstatesman.com/labour-anti-semitism-jennie-formby-jeremy-corbyn-vote
 

I just can't ever envisage another senior Labour official saying something like that about racism in general or any other specific BAME group, from the outside looking in it appears either the Labour leadership isn't capable of dealing with the issue or they just simply don't care enough about it to want to do so.

Edited 8 February 2019 by MattP

[Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I've taken out a special-offer subscription to the New Statesman this year and just received the latest issue through the door....all about "Broken Europe" being "on a path to self-destruction". Looks an interesting read....

 

Just checked it out, a good read, particularly the weaving of history into it but also a bit disappointing that it was so heavily Brexit focused and it lacked much else from Europe. The UK media, besides the occasional piece gloating at how bad Europe is, does a pretty poor job of actually looking at what is going on in Europe. European politics coverage isnt great and its made worse now with it often being looked through a Brexit lens in some way.

 

And there's also little (there's some but not enough imo) beyond tiresome platitudes and rhetoric about what the UK's departure from the EU does to the EU, how costly it could be, and the shifting of balance. Just this week with the Siemens-Alstom deal being refused there's now a lot of calls to alter state aid and competition rules. The UK would have been a big barrier to that. 

 

David Goodhart's piece on England and criticism of Fintan O'Toole is a good read. His Road to Somewhere book is pretty good too - a good framework to understand modern voters rather than rely on the daft classic tropes. 

Edited 8 February 2019 by Kopfkino

[Alf Bentley]

36 minutes ago, MattP said:

Well if that's enough then I don't really see the problem wanting Soubry out who has actually gone as record as saying she would think about joining a new party, which is a stage further than Berger - https://www.businessinsider.com/anna-soubry-new-centre-party-brexit-2017-3?r=US&IR=T

For what it's worth I think the two are totally different, Soubry has consistenly voted against the main policy her government stood for election on, Berger seems to be being harrassed for very different reasons.

 

On antisemitism though, how do you think the Labour party are handling it? - A few days ago MP's again called on them to do more https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47123328

This was an interesting comment from Formby herself -  it is “impossible to eradicate anti-Semitism” from the Labour Party   ( https://www.newstatesman.com/labour-anti-semitism-jennie-formby-jeremy-corbyn-vote
 

I just can't ever envisage another senior Labour official saying something like that about racism in general or any other specific BAME group, from the outside looking in it appears either the Labour leadership isn't capable of dealing with the issue or they just simply don't care enough about it to want to do so.

 

My point was to highlight your hypocrisy in wanting to "clear out yellow Tories like Soubry and Morgan", yet seeing it as McCarthyism when a local Labour branch tables a confidence vote against Berger for similar perceived disloyalty.

 

I don't see a problem with Tories wanting action taken against Soubry for those comments - although Berger only faces a confidence vote, whereas you seem to want Soubry expelled. Soubry did make her Brexit views clear in her election literature, though, I believe - and was surprisingly re-elected in a Midlands marginal? Nor do I see a problem with local Tories wanting to replace Boles with someone of Hard Right views, or local Labourites wanting to replace Berger with someone of Hard Left views.

 

I'd prefer Labour to encompass candidates with a wide range of views compatible with the party's general beliefs. But trying to get candidates whose ideas you like is quite normal.

I don't know enough about Berger individually or about her local party to have an opinion on her specific case. If you have evidence to support your belief that she "seems to be being harassed for very different reasons", please do share.

 

I haven't followed the Labour anti-semitism inquest in detail, but what I have read doesn't sound good. It sounds as if they are following an instinct to reveal as little as possible - when they should be revealing as much as possible.

If they were more transparent, it would be possible to properly assess accusations that they are not taking the problem seriously enough. In the absence of such transparency, I'm inclined to think there's something in the accusations, even if some of those making them have an axe to grind against Corbyn.

 

That was a stupid comment by Formby. Technically, it might be true. However much any organisation combats prejudice, people are flawed, so some are always likely to have dodgy instincts on one level or another. The aim has got to be to minimise, challenge and eliminate that on an ongoing basis. But her comment gives an impression of complacency, as if the party isn't trying hard enough - not a good look when combined with an instinct to avoid transparency.

 

 

[davieG]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

For several years, it has certainly felt like a time of major ideological division within the Labour Party - and within the Tory Party for that matter.

 

Obviously, any anti-semitic persecution must be stamped out. But wouldn't it be legitimate for you to ask questions if you were running an organisation and a member of that organisation was publicly criticising your decisions and was rumoured to be setting up a rival body?

 

I don't think that feels like McCarthyism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

"During the McCarthy era, hundreds of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers; they became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private industry panels, committees and agencies. [...] Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive or questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed by a person's real or supposed leftist associations or beliefs was sometimes exaggerated. Many people suffered loss of employment or destruction of their careers; some were imprisoned. Most of these punishments came about through trial verdicts that were later overturned, laws that were later declared unconstitutional, dismissals for reasons later declared illegal or actionable, or extra-legal procedures, such as informal blacklists, that would come into general disrepute".

Yes I know how bad McCarthyism got but it had to start somewhere and I'm not suggesting this will in any way. It's just that when I read the article that's what popped into my head.

 

As for criticising the leader(s) isn't that happening all the time around Brexit, are those people being asked to justify and defend their views, if they are then again I say it looks like it's becoming a very closed party.

 

I'm sure all political parties have this problem that's why I'll never vote for a party aligned candidate as they don't have a free will.

[Guest MattP]

She ended up getting naked on R4 today. 

 

Thought Humpreys handled it pretty well.

 

[Alf Bentley]

10 minutes ago, davieG said:

Yes I know how bad McCarthyism got but it had to start somewhere and I'm not suggesting this will in any way. It's just that when I read the article that's what popped into my head.

 

As for criticising the leader(s) isn't that happening all the time around Brexit, are those people being identified for deselection, if they then again I say it looks like it's becoming a very closed party.

 

I'm sure all political parties have this problem that's why I'll never vote for a party aligned candidate as they don't have a free will.

 

Fair dos. Similarly, I have fears that in future Brexit could lead to the rise of Far Right nationalism and racist violence. But if I said "I feel like Brexit is getting more like Far Right racist nationalism", I'd expect to be challenged - and rightly so.

(And I assume most Brexit supporters - certainly including you - would loathe that outcome as much as me).

 

I certainly wouldn't rule out the prospect of McCarthyite shenanigans in the Labour Party as some of the Hard Left had such instincts back in the 80s when I was active. Indeed, some of the same types (even the same people) could be playing a part in the Berger row as she's an MP in Liverpool, where the Militant Tendency were strong and that tradition still has roots. I'm just saying that the odd case like this doesn't constitute McCarthyism - and there's nothing necessarily wrong with the odd deselection, even deselection purely on the grounds of political beliefs and not incompetence or whatever. Wholesale deselection and takeover of the party by a particular faction would be quite different.

 

I think that I'm right in saying that not a single Labour MP has yet been deselected on political grounds, despite Corbyn having been leader for several years now....and deselection is a decision taken by the local party branch, usually.

If Berger isn't planning to leave the party and join a rival group, it would be helpful if she made that clear.

 

I'd prefer to stick with the party system, for all its risks and flaws. At least you're dealing with a system comprising lots of different, potentially flawed individuals, who can compensate one another and weed out absolute rogues. If you place your trust in a single individual, what happens if they turn out to be an absolute rogue and use their free will to commit evil?  

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

She ended up getting naked on R4 today. 

 

Thought Humpreys handled it pretty well.

 

People will stop inviting her places if she keeps taking her kit off at the drop of a hat

[Alf Bentley]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

She ended up getting naked on R4 today. 

 

Thought Humpreys handled it pretty well.

 

 

 

Might've been better if he'd not handled it at all, surely? 

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

People will stop inviting her places if she keeps taking her kit off at the drop of a hat

We need to see more of her to be honest if that's possible

 

Does anyone remember the Question Time streaker in the mid 90's?

[MC Prussian]

4 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

It is quite an incredible step for France to take. 

 

With French-German relations also becoming icy, all is not well on the continent. In fact its interesting to think what the UK's role would be in Europe and the world rn under a Brexitless Cameron government. 

The European Union is facing a major, major crisis right now, half of the Eastern European countries (Poland and Hungary at the forefront) are pulling away, poverty and unemployment in the South, the Brexit conundrum, questions regarding the stance on immigration, job security, etc. etc.

It could well crumble under the weight.

 

It was so easier when it was simply a monetary union, and not an attempt at creating a pan-European political molokh.

[urban.spaceman]

 

[MC Prussian]

14 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

People will stop inviting her places if she keeps taking her kit off at the drop of a hat

Basically, she's an exhibitionist, with the "political" message merely being a coy.

 

Women's bodies are "one big battleground"? Sheesh, talking about illusions of grandeur. Who is she to talk as if she's representing all women?

No wonder I can't take women like her serious, it's more about style than substance. She's had her 15 seconds of fame, thank you.