Mailwatch(ed) Forum

mattomac wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 3:41 pm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8r2l352z2do

Wow....Hostile foriegn power plots arson attacks on head of government of Great Britain, assume Putin bootlickers will be out to condemn this?

That's strange. I was told this was the work of Ukrainian rent boys.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 8:04 pm

Arrested protesters devastated after appeal court rules ban on Palestine Action is lawful
Proscription of direct action group has led to more than 700 people being charged under Terrorism Act

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ban-lawful

Whether the proscription is proportionate or not, this sort of thing does my head in. That's what the law very much seemed to say, and there was no reason to support Palestine Action as you protested Israel's war crimes in Gaza. Lots of people break the law and are happy to take the consequence. To break the law on a vague hunch that the law can't mean you and anyway lawyers will get you out of it, seems a bit silly.

The law is really clear, it is illegal to support a terrorist organisation. If you attend a demonstration with a placard or a t-shirt declaring your support for a terrorist organisation you are going to be arrested because you are committing a crime. How difficult is that to understand?
So why the surprise when they get arrested? The far-right are surprised when they hear they're going to prison for hate crimes or rioting because they're too thick to understand actions have consequences - stupidity is a prerequisite for racism.
But these are not stupid people, some of them appear to be well educated, I can only conclude that it's sheer arrogance, "Oh surely the law doesn't apply to me, does it?"

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 8:04 pm

Arrested protesters devastated after appeal court rules ban on Palestine Action is lawful
Proscription of direct action group has led to more than 700 people being charged under Terrorism Act

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ban-lawful

Whether the proscription is proportionate or not, this sort of thing does my head in. That's what the law very much seemed to say, and there was no reason to support Palestine Action as you protested Israel's war crimes in Gaza. Lots of people break the law and are happy to take the consequence. To break the law on a vague hunch that the law can't mean you and anyway lawyers will get you out of it, seems a bit silly.

I'd imagine a lot of them thought Palestine Action was like Extinction Rebellion.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 12:50 am I'd imagine a lot of them thought Palestine Action was like Extinction Rebellion.

I wonder if there's a Venn diagram of supporters?

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 10:06 pm
That's strange. I was told this was the work of Ukrainian rent boys.

I unfortunately came across this dog shit some time ago.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 12:21 pm

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 10:06 pm
That's strange. I was told this was the work of Ukrainian rent boys.

I unfortunately came across this dog shit some time ago.

Tommy Robinson's still running with his "Starmer's gay" conspiracy theory.


For info, here's Phil Moorhouse's take on that story - note no mention of gay models.

I'd love Starmer to pick a couple of those twats at random and sue them into oblivion.

davidjay wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 1:57 pm I'd love Starmer to pick a couple of those twats at random and sue them into oblivion.

I know Prime Ministering's a busy job.

So often I see Starmer's passive response and think

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 2:41 pm

davidjay wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 1:57 pm I'd love Starmer to pick a couple of those twats at random and sue them into oblivion.

I know Prime Ministering's a busy job.

So often I see Starmer's passive response and think

That would be reported as "he doth protest too much, obviously touched a nerve".

Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 3:00 pm

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 2:41 pm

davidjay wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2026 1:57 pm I'd love Starmer to pick a couple of those twats at random and sue them into oblivion.

I know Prime Ministering's a busy job.

So often I see Starmer's passive response and think

That would be reported as "he doth protest too much, obviously touched a nerve".

Fuck 'em!
Let them twist themselves into pretzels explaining.

The whole fucking circus seems to be developing a kind of unstoppable momentum now, fueled by media coverage that seems continually to suggest that a successful leadership by Burnham and subsequent takeover of 10 Downing Street is simply inevitable. Well, maybe it is. Plenty are suggesting that everyone takes a breath over the weekend and comes back on Monday with a clear idea of how to proceed in something resembling an orderly manner. Harriet Harman was suggesting that Streeting, Burnham, and Starmer should all sit down with Lucy Powell and Jessica Morden (PLP chair) and just sort things out . Precisely how is unclear.

In the circumstances, I think Keir Starmer is to be applauded for reiterating again today that he will contest any challenge to his leadership. It's not quite the "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough", or as he put it, "put up or shut up" approach successfully adopted by John Major, but it's close.

Meanwhile, Burnham is talking vaguely about change. Plus ca change......

It's certainly a "time for a sit down" moment, if cool heads can prevail.

Let us hope...

Well, listening to the news just now, I hear the acolytes of The Cunt In The North and that treacherous weasel Streeting are calling for Starmer to step down in favour of Burnham, "to avoid a damaging leadership election".

WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOUR ACTIONS ARE DOING, YOU WANKERS?!

Jesus. I hope if there is a leadership election and Starmer wins, he rewards Streeting with the withdrawal of the whip.

That sounds like the Burnhamites aren't that certain their golden boy would win a leadership election.

Yug wrote: ↑Fri Jun 19, 2026 3:29 pm That sounds like the Burnhamites aren't that certain their golden boy would win a leadership election.

What's needed is unity but every time I hear Burnham speak he does the same speech about all the things he wants to do for the North. That's great if you're in the North but most Labour MPs, Labour members and the UK electorate aren't.
The North/South divide plays very well in Manchester (and other Northern English regions), not so much in the Midlands and the South - let alone Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Burnham needs to realise the interview panel for the new job he wants isn't the North West, it's the UK.

For too many people in London, "the north" is anywhere north of the M25. And there're plenty of people outside London aware of that.

I have plenty of problems with Burnham's actions right now, but after the Tories and the pyramid scheme that was the Northern Poorhouse, I don't think that stressing that he actually wants to help the North is a big one.

Reports indicate that Starmer will set out a timetable to stand down on Monday.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sat Jun 20, 2026 11:38 pm Reports indicate that Starmer will set out a timetable to stand down on Monday.

I'd say let them get on with it and destroy themselves if the alternatives weren't all so mindblowingly awful.

I think Starmer is a fairly decent bloke but a bit like Gordon Brown not cut out for politics in the age of social media. Things move very quickly and leaders need to be able to react to events extremely quickly.

Starmer has also been extremely unlucky as leader. Within days of being elected we had the murders in Southport which set the tone of his early months in office. Then after 4 months in office Trump got elected which has subsequently impacted on British politics in a bad way.

Burnham could well enjoy a lot better luck. The Iran war could now be over which will help to drive down fuel prices. Trump is now seeing his powers seeping away. The Iran war has weakened him and the mid-terms could weaken him further. If this is the case Burnham will not have to waste time sucking up to Trump. He could also benefit from Reform and Restore engaging in a prolonged period of squabbling with each other.

The other interesting dynamic would be if Burnham could get lots of British cities to start thriving in a similar way to Manchester. Could Labour cling onto power at the next election simply by doing well in all the major cities?

On the other hand "Press operation Monster" who focused on Rayner and others will swing toward Burnham.

I'm no media expert:

But if I were a newly coronated (ugh!) Burnham, I would:
* Dust off Johnson's multi million press room and start doing regular short broadcasts.
* Make myself fairly scarce to the BBC and print press.
* Grant interviews to relatively tame journalists.
* Seek to control the narrative through tight policy focus and short slogans.

i.e. Message like any Tory leader does while in power.

Let the Matthew Syeds and Allison Pearsons sharpen their poison pencils in the empty rom of irrelevance.