Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
....of your country....
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Boring, mostly.....of your country....
What do you reckon as to Labour's stance on the proposed undercover law?In the UK
Oblivion
Which country is that, you lucky person?Boring, mostly.
We'll never have politics as entertaining as the US. They really know how to create drama.
Germany. Our governments aren't really stellar but nowhere so bad that they incite strong opposition (and nowhere so good that they motivate much participation).Which country is that, you lucky person?
Boring, mostly.
We'll never have politics as entertaining as the US. They really know how to create drama.
Now then, in what direction is Britain going?
Tactical.What do you reckon as to Labour's stance on the proposed undercover law?
Every day you bring a little ray of sunshine into my life.To hell in a hand basket
Not good, don't understand the abstentionsWhat do you reckon as to Labour's stance on the proposed undercover law?
Tactical.
Bozo - or rather Rumpelstiltskin, more likely - is digging elephant traps all over the place for Starmer. The hope is to trap Starmer into espousing "leftie" views that can make him seem unacceptable to the new Red Wall constituency voters who are where Bozo' s new look Tory party sees its future. The idea is to recast British politics along US-stye "culture war" lines. This law, Patel's silly ideas about where to hold immigrants, parachuting ludicrously opinionated old rightwingers into the BBC and Ofcom...all of this stuff is a pattern, to make Starmer and Labour scream, so that they can be portrayed as extreme in some way. It's Trump-lite.
But Starmer is not playing. He is clearly determined not to be outmanoeuvred on these issues into a caricature "Leftie London Lawyer" position, because he is determined to win the Red Wall back again!
As it happens, I can perfectly well see the argument that undercover security agents may sometimes have to take part in certain sorts of illegality, in order to infiltrate criminal and terrorist groups. This has always been done in the past and in principle a new law that makes this explicit is an improvement on the current hypocritical practice of turning a blind eye and pretending it doesn't happen. Where I part from the government proposal is that I see no reason why certain sorts of extremes of criminal activity (murder, rape, torture etc) shouldn't be explicitly ruled out. I have not followed Labour's line on this but if that is what they are arguing for I think I would support it.
Cliff hangers and such. This is focused on Canada but applies. Think of the villain tying democracy to the tracks to be destroyed and the hero overcoming the villain in the nick of time while the horse gets democracy's thanks and you'll be close.Boring, mostly.
We'll never have politics as entertaining as the US. They really know how to create drama.