Rayvin

Not quite there yet on the right/left bit, but I think the battle of our time is between the establishment and everyone else. Broadly agree with the sentiment.

Hillary Benn is apparently going to vote for triggering Article 50.

Yes, that vote last week was deplorable. More evidence of Western meddling.

What's the main cause of the violence in Yemen? The usual Sunni/Shiite thing?

How would a Trump win be better for you personally, out of interest? That sounds like a rare point of policy in what has become a shambles of an election.

Shouldn't be passing it off as his own though... poor form that.

Owen Smith has suggested that we have a second referendum on the back of the Brexit terms. This could lead the way to soft Brexit, with any luck.

Angela Eagle said the same thing a while back. It seems to be the PLP's position as well.

This is certainly a cause. We could, arguably, solve all of our terrorism problems by turfing all Muslims out of Europe and locking the door. If, for some reason or another, that proves to be unfeasible, then I guess we're left to just look at which of our actions seem to make the problems worse (destabilising sovereign nations and creating power vacuums that nutjobs can fill, for instance) and try to reign them in a bit. Why is this logic so fucking hard for people. Neither HF or myself are saying that we hate the West. I love the West. I would argue we have the most advanced culture on the planet, based on my subjective interpretations. However, we're fucking terrible when it comes to meddling in other countries affairs. And we expect that this isn't going to somehow have an effect on us on the home front, like the two things are entirely unrelated? As if.

I'm starting to cross over into the 'this is more hilarious than worrying' side now. What the fuck are we on, as a country?

The Daily Mail has noted some key details about the judges who've asserted this: The judges who blocked Brexit: One founded a EUROPEAN law group, another charged the taxpayer millions for advice and the third is an openly gay ex-Olympic fencer

True, it has to be constitutional doesn't it? The Tories man, utter novices. I see the pound is on the up again...

It seems the backlash has started - The government has made clear it's going ahead anyway, with or without the courts apparently (wtf?), UKIP are up in arms calling for the judges to be sacked, the Brexiters are apoplectic... Labour incidentally has made clear previously (through the PLP rather than Corbyn, I hasten to add) that they wouldn't seek to prevent Brexit if Parliament was able to scrutinise it. Just to ensure the best possible deal.

I have to say, I feel a bit of a sellout for rooting for the Neoliberals on this one...

Fucking hell...

Yeah but you know, he'll have some stuff about holding people's feet to the fire and so on. And UKIP look rudderless without him. It's hard to call this though - you'd think all Labour MPs would vote for Remaining. The Lib Dems would and the SNP would. UKIP's one MP would vote for Brexit. So it's really down to the Tories - I could see BoJo voting Remain

Yeah but the frequency of CT flounces are increasing. Has it actually happened on this occasion just because of MF's (brilliant) caricaturing of him?

Wonder if Farage will use this as an excuse to return...

Never realised the Leazes issue was this divisive... I always had the impression the whole board rose up and smote him. I can't really comment though, other than to say that if someone were to draw up a history of this board, noting key events in a timeline, his banning would be a key event and the following period would be known as the post-Leazes era. It seemed a significant moment. I'd say we're now in the post-CT era though. I like naming time periods

I fully agree that this stuff is in the Qu'ran. To be honest, as I posted earlier, I'm no defender of Islam. It's hugely right wing, and not in the least bit aligned with modern Western secular democracies. While it will add to our overall culture to a degree, it certainly seems more like something we tolerate rather than embrace. I'm just keen that, as well as acknowledging this, we acknowledge that much of the strife we have in this respect comes from our own ridiculous decision making by *drum roll* an establishment that is more concerned about profits and ensuring its own power than it is about the actual lives of ordinary people. Yes, I did manage to shoehorn anti-establishment sentiments into this post

That seems to be what the press thinks but I reckon he'll get the Hull game. If he loses there, there's literally no point in keeping him.

Yeah, tribalism in politics might get them over the line anyway. It's a really interesting one and I'd actually like to see the MPs deal with it.

I don't see how calling it what it is, as you have done, and which I agree with, means we can't also look at the underlying causes though? Let's say they are deranged and brainwashed - because they are - how do people end up in that state? You can't just go up to a sane and well adjusted person and brainwash them. These people will be angry and hateful anyway. HF cited the Pentagon earlier for one thing, and they make points that support the idea that it's more complicated than just ideology. You'd think they'd know what they're talking about.