To ask for a summary on the Tory v Labour stance on what to do about terrorism?

[Bearbehind]

This is looking like being the most critical issue of our times at the moment despite my thoughts that Brexit was the crux of this election.

Can anyone cut through the waffle and tell us what the 2 main parties are offering to do about extremists and terrorism?

Because they were reporting on s massive terrorist attack!!

The prime ministers speech would obviously take priority.

Conservatives will do everything wrong, encourage terrorism, support the rich etc etc etc

Labour will do everything right, talk to the terrorists and get them to understand the error of their ways and everything will be lovely etc etc etc
Rvat

Wow.

You can almost smell the Tory party's desperation can't you?

Some real selective reading and mental acrobatics going on all of a sudden this morning.

Corbyn's amazing speech last night has certainly kicked the smear campaign up a few notches. I'm going to take that as a great sign.

Also I agree with above, you are spouting exactly the same stuff as the daily mail and the sun. I'd worry if that's who was agreeing with me.

Oh, not the Fail and the Scum thing again! I've never read either in my whole life. Most people I know don't read them either - in fact, you can't even buy one of those rags where I live cos it's basically banned.

It isn't 'mental gymnastics' to point out the gaping holes in what Corbyn said or to think there's no reason to trust him given the overwhelming evidence.

It kind of is when the gaping holes in this 'overwhelming evidence' have already been explained up thread.

Whether you read them or not, that is who you views align with. I'd be worried.

Although interestingly the daily mail has turned on May this morning.

No they haven't, cakeahoy. How, when yesterday was the first time Corbyn said he would shoot to kill? It was cynical politicking.

I suspect I'm being thick here but would regulating the internet help with terrorism?

Not really Bearbehind, they've tried and the terrorise just move deeper 'underground'. There will always be a way around any restrictions we put in the internet.

While YouTube videos etc are a problem that could be solved by YouTube without the need to curtail the civil liberties of any of us.

Also many of these young men have visited extremist mosques, while terrorises do use the internet to recruit many more are recruited through personal and family contacts.

Sorry, that should have said how would regulating the internet help with terrorism?

I just don't get what difference it would make?

Can I just ask, have you read about the BBC reporter having to retract her misrepresentation.

Do you understand what a 'general' shoot to kill policy is, and how it differs from the police having the power to shoot to kill proportionately?

Corbyn had all this after the Paris attacks, where he said he fully supported the cations of the Paris police.

Sometimes lethal force is necessary. Corbyn is against it being used when it isn't, but when it is.

And I only see right wing frothers getting upset about that.

*The Open Rights Group, which campaigns for privacy and free speech online, warned that politicians risked pushing terrorists' "vile networks" into the "darker corners of the web" by more regulation.

"The internet and companies like Facebook are not the cause of hate and violence, but tools that can be abused.

"While governments and companies should take sensible measures to stop abuse, attempts to control the internet is not the simple solution that Theresa May is claiming," Open Rights said.

Professor Peter Neumann, director of the International Centre For The Study Of Radicalisation at King's College London, was also critical of Mrs May.

He wrote on Twitter: "Big social media platforms have cracked down on jihadist accounts, with result that most jihadists are now using end-to-end encrypted messenger platforms e.g. Telegram.

"This has not solved problem, just made it different... moreover, few people (are) radicalised exclusively online. Blaming social media platforms is politically convenient but intellectually lazy*

That is from this article:

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/40149649

Most people that have spent a lot of time thinking about this agree.

Sometimes lethal force is necessary. Corbyn is against it being used when it isn't, but NOT when it is

Sorry that should have had a not in it

cake

With the greatest respect when you get to a certain age you grow out of hero worshipping pop stars and politiciNs.

Corbyn has performed pretty well during the campaign but he's not the second coming. I thought Blaire was when I was probably your age so I get you but really hold hard s bit and look st the policies and past actions of all the candidates.

Also it's quite ok to have different opinions on here and in RL but you do need yo stop with the daily mail comments as it makes you sound very childish.

Omg.

What waitforitdear said

With humongous bells on.

How old do you think I am exactly and why?

I am very interested, I didn't realise you could tell someone's age from their posts.

Or are you talking twaddle dear?

And I stand by what I said. The daily mail and the sun are parodies of themselves. I imagine anyone of any age that can fact check knows that

*Wow.

You can almost smell the Tory party's desperation can't you?*

*Some real selective reading and mental acrobatics going on all of a sudden this morning.

Corbyn's amazing speech last night has certainly kicked the smear campaign up a few notches. I'm going to take that as a great sign.

Also I agree with above, you are spouting exactly the same stuff as the daily mail and the sun. I'd worry if that's who was agreeing with me.*

It speaks volumes about the critical thinking levels & abilities of Corbyn fan-girls when any disagreement of him or his words/actions are instantly perceived as:

Desperation
Mental acrobatics
Smear campaign
Daily Mail/Sun reader

It's like conversing with Justin Bieber fans and saying you think he's a bit shit & a bit of a twat.

Thank God we'll only have to put up with him for a few more days.

Yes, because all of you are are totally weighing up all of the candidates with no bias at all.

I'm in my thirties and think Justin Bieber is too young for me, if anyone is interested

And I'm a long term Labour Party member who seriously considered resigning when Corbyn became leader, and again when he was re elected.

I have rarely been more surprised than I have been by the way this campaign has gone.

I sssuned you were far younger by your idealistic posts and general hero worshipping of a politician.

I can't imagine anyone hero worshipping any politician from any side to be honest and I find the cult of personality quite frightening actually. Like the screaming teenage girls at the Hitler rallies.

It's very dangerous to put any politician on a pedestal and see no wrong in them it really is dear.

Where is the hero worshipping?

Bertrand

Agree he's run a good campaign and TM a frankly dreadful one. I don't trust either of them as far as I could throw them though as seen it all before with Thatcher and Blaire.

'Corbyn will increase the police force and emergency services and also talk to the different communities where radicalisation is a problem'

Yes he'll wave that magic wand of his and fix everything . Or, in the real world he'll make a bigger financial mess than the last labour government and be very busy organising chats to radicals instead of arresting and deporting them, which yes doesn't happen yet but lets hope May's 'enough is enough' will be the start. At least she doesn't want to chat to them.

Poor poor right wingers extra frothy this morning I see