Photo by Hannah McKay /Reuters
The attack on London Bridge yesterday and on a market nearby has immediately raised a number of questions, the most immediate one being, will this affect the outcome of the British general election? Well, it’s unlikely to affect the outcome in Fermanagh/South Tyrone or in North Belfast, but it could have an impact in England, and maybe Scotland and Wales as well.
When faced with a security threat, the British people tend to turn to those they believe are strongest and most reliable in this area – to wit, the Conservatives. In this case, the mind turns to the image of Theresa May, and the case looks rather less convincing. Maybe she’d make a fine PM and deal with security threats firmly and effectively, but she doesn’t look as if she would. Not just in terms of her ungraceful body language but in terms of her lack of consistency – over social welfare, over holding a general election, over tax, over the benefits or otherwise of Brexit.
The alternative is Jeremy Corbyn, at which point the British population tend to emit a collective groan. Corbyn’s political career has been marked by efforts to minimize threats of violence rather than deal directly with violent actions. In the recent debate his weakest moments, according to many commentators, was when he refused to say he’d initiate a nuclear attack on another country.
There’s no doubt that the British people are becoming more and more alarmed over terrorist threats to the population, last night’s being just the most recent. Chances are, that’ll benefit May more than Corbyn.
Which goes to show you how truly stupid a security system based on the massively expensive Trident nuclear programme is. Corbyn has exposed this obscene thick-headedness by reminding people that pressing the red button would result in millions being killed. People who repeatedly condemn the IRA for the killings it was involved in appear to see no contradiction in becoming angry because a potential British prime minister won’t agree to the idea of slaughtering millions of innocent people.
But if we come back to where we started – on London Bridge and environs last night – we see how the Trident nuclear programme is an act, not just of financial castration but of military castration as well. Pressing the red nuclear button first or second or eleventh would all be equally self-destructive. The money devoted to Trident’s construction – some £100 billion – could transform Britain’s schools, hospitals, infrastructure. But here’s the key question: how useful would a nuclear submarine have been in responding to the terrorist attack in London yesterday, or the one in Manchester last month?
Indeed, Victoria: a bowlful of blancmange would have been more effective.
That’s a photo of Tower Bridge, not London Bridge. Apart from that pretty much spot on.
Thanks, Brian. I’m afraid I’m not on as intimate terms with the,um, capital as I should be…
At risk of sounding dreadfully cynical but, day’s before the last attack in London they had staged an exercise, yards from the ultimate scene, highlighting how prepared their security services were.
On foot of the attack in Manchester, armed brit’s are deployed to the streets of britain, although something tells me they will not be harassing young folk as they go about their daily lives in their own communities, nor shooting wee lassies whose crime is going out to get a pint of milk.
On the crux of the article, Corbyn was persistently being put down by brit media, since his election but, in particular since the calling of the election. Curiously this week polls appear to show that he is seen, by the brit public, as more competent, than the incumbent. Our own national broadcaster, as usual, is sending out mixed messages vis the brit election. On my way home on Thur. I heard the news, it was clearly reported Jeremy Corbyn was not fit to lead a government, later though, ‘experts’, aka, other journalists, were heaping raise on the leader of her magesties opposition/potential prime minister.
Is the attack on London, last night, simply the same MI5 who worked hard against Harold Wilson, and Michael Foot, just coming out to protect their own best interests?
It is obvious now the odious role played, within military/paramilitary groups in Ireland, the impact of brit military intelligence, are they using what they learned here, and other places, to control peoples minds and direct their potential free expression at the ballot box?
Mark, don’t be silly. Our intelligence agencies wouldn’t involve themselves in such dastardly deeds. Okay okay, granted, some of their colleagues were involved in dastardly deeds in Ireland but that was only after they went ‘rogue’ or had ‘left’ their original job, but at no stage were our fine intelligence agencies ever officially involved in dastardly terror……….’officially’ that is, nudge nudge wink wink. Please stick to the official narrative I.e our fine intelligence agencies are here to protect us. Lmfao!
Oops
lets all have a candlelight vigil that will fix them.
I’ve just become more concerned about polling data than I would usually be. I am a firm believer in the idea that, rather than vote for whichever candidate we identify most closely with, we ought instead to vote for whichever opinion poll we identify most closely with.
The latest You Gov poll shows an increase (projected) in Labour seats and corresponding fall in Tort seats.
Why I think this is concerning, especially in light of what I wrote above, and Jude’s article is, the Tories (remind me someone what that is an Gaeilge for) would see their seats drop to 310 leaving them well clear of an overall majority, Labour could form a coalition with the, slightly increased Lib Dem’s and Scots Nationalists, this would of course be rocky given whom the Labour leader is v. the weasel who leads the Lib Dem’s, to all intents the SDLP would side with Labour but if not, the Tories could take power with a majority of one, with the assistance of the DUP.
Would this be sufficient to make elements in britain use influence to make more young muslim men go out and commit murder in their capital? Sorry, far fetched perhaps but…
May (not Theresa) God have mercy upon us if this were true
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39856354
Mark
Hopefully you will produce some evidence to back up your far fetched theory.
Otherwise some people (not me of course!) will think it is just a pile of shite.
Gio, I’m not sure what it is you need evidence of. The YouGov poll, through BBC is available through the link, my guess, and if correct Dail Breachnact would closely resemble Dail Éireann, is that the scramble for influence could see the DUP as potential king makers (assuming they don’t get their asses whipped in certain constituencies)
As to my final paragraph, I used the word ‘Would’ for a particular reason.
If it’s something else please advise and I shall try to clear it up, after I stop kicking the picture of Ciaran McGeeney..
Mark
I guess you used the word ‘would’ because you have no idea if there is any substance to the possibility you ask about.
So is there any evidence that elements in Britain actually had anything to do with this attack?
Gio, based upon what we know from here, Palestine, Cyprus, Aden etc. I should say yes, but there again, this is not the question you think I posed.
Billy, candle lit vigil, that’s at Easter.
Mark
So to your knowledge is there any actual evidence that elements in Britain were involved in this attack?
I won’t hold my breath.
Supra.
For the past year or so we have been told how Vladimir Putin has been influencing the American general election, and then the French election, and there were those in the British government adamant that he would not be successful in changing the result of their election.
But, after the Manchester, and now the London terror attacks, it seems ISIS are more likely to be the culprits in influencing the democratic outcome.
And we are told that ISIS originated in Saudi Arabia, that great friend of the UK, and that Hillary Clinton, in her former US government role, had put a lot of US$ into that project.
Surely Britain’s great friends would never do anything to harm her, or interfere in her democracy!
But then, such terrorist actions will have the effect of voters rushing to support the ‘law and order’ Tories, and as the polls are putting Labour almost equal, maybe some people of influence think the voters need such a violent nudge!
Thanks, Brian. I’m afraid I’m not on as intimate terms with the,um, capital as I should be…
I’m not sure why you have illustrated a report about London Bridge with a picture of Tower Bridge. Is that because England is a place of unpleasant mystery to you?
Good to see your concern about the victims. Presumably, as ‘Brits’, they’re as worthy of sympathy as those killed by the Provos (or rather, those whose deaths the republican movement ‘was involved in’ to use your curious euphemism).
Not sure what Trident has to do with this; its role is to deter conventional state attackers. Nobody pretends that it is useful against any enemy. I would have thought that the ‘Brits’ will do what they did against the Provos – play a long game of intelligence penetration, surveillance, the odd bit of ruthless interdiction in which the bad boys are killed in Loughgall-type successes which will boost public morale, and reliance on the fact that the majority of the population do not support the men of violence.
Whilst, regrettably, some bombers and other suicidally-minded young hotheads will always get through, this was true of the Provos up to the ceasefire, but the resilience of the population and the state was such that they never got what they wanted. Of course, the Jihadists’ actual goals are more existential than the Provos’, but that makes it even harder to give them any sort of compromise things like ministerial posts in devolved government.
I do agree that it might benefit May more than Corbyn, though, so well done on your penetrating analysis of this strange foreign land.
Interesting post Knox. Not sure what point you are trying to make, but I suppose it is rather surprising that the Brits, who were, according to you, so successful and the victors of the 30 year war in the North, had to finally admit defeat and sit down at the negotiating table. That must have really hurt your sensibilities.
I agree James. The Brits, according to Knox, were the victors over the Provos but yet they released them from prison, gave many of them Pardons and sit around the table with them going back decades, even Thatcher had an open channel to the Hunger Strikers all whilst she was saying she would never talk to them. A very strange victory, especially given the Provo’s political wing are Jointly controlling this statelet and have a major say on every single agreement, along with the Irish Government.
Of course we haven’t even touched on then secret Government/Military files saying the IRA/Provo’s could never be defeated and urging a political settlement.
I don’t know the purpose of Knox’s post exactly but I think we can all guess a lot of people need to get stuff off their chests and social media is used as a vent. The Blood does boil around this time of year, remember.
Hmmm, so concerned are you about the victims of the attacks, you use your post to fixate on the Provos. Slow hand clap. Well done you.
Loughall did nothing to dampen the spirit of resistance, if anything it strengthened it. Sadly the securocrats are as deluded as Knox who can’t see that if you shit in someone’s garden they may shit in yours.
IRA activity in the area increased after Loughall.
England is a foreign land and what devolved government are you referring to?
meanwhile abdul khann the lord mayor of london has repeated his (its part of living in big towns and cities bollox)the english people may hope the likes of these lefties never see power.the problem could be sorted very quickly with a proper leader,thresa may isnt it.
How is a nuclear weapon suppose to protect a country anyhow? I mean, if the UK got nuked tomorrow, how is nuking the other country protecting the UK? its just a revenge attack basically, resulting in the destruction of millions of innocent people by both sides.
Now, if the technology existed which stopped nukes or provided some sort of shield to protect the UK from launched Nuclear Weapons that cost £100 billion then you can see the logic of the argument. But no such Independence Day (1996) Alien shield exists.
There is quite a lot of hypocrisy in hearing people squeal about the IRA but yet demand their leaders destroy millions of innocent people. But there again, that’s basically been British politics for the past 500 or more years.
Why isn’t it simply in order to express some sympathy and show some basic respect for the dead?
My first instinct was when this happened was- this is too close to the election and will only benifit the Tory scum who have proven many times over what they are capable of, plus they managed to eliminate the perpetrators! In record time! Did they know where they were?? Who they were?? Being from Dublin and remembering Dublin/Monaghan I know what these bastards are capable of!
So, no respect for the dead, then?