Category: UK
Iran fulfills all nuclear deal commitments, subject to world’s most robust verification – IAEA
| October 13, 2017 | 9:09 pm | China, Donald Trump, France, Germany, IAEA, Iran, JCPOA, Russia, UK | No comments

https://www.rt.com/newsline/406636-iran-nuclear-deal-iaea/

Iran fulfills all nuclear deal commitments, subject to world’s most robust verification – IAEA

The international atomic watchdog has confirmed that Iran is fully implementing all of its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). “As I have reported to the Board of Governors, the nuclear-related commitments undertaken by Iran under the JCPOA are being implemented,” the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Yukiya Amano, said Friday. The head of the agency also stressed that Iran is subject to the “world’s most robust nuclear verification regime” and that so far the IAEA has “had access to all locations it needed to visit.” Earlier, US President Donald Trump announced that his administration will not re-certify Iran’s compliance with the 2015 JCPOA nuclear agreement. Signed in July 2015 between Tehran and the P5+1 ( China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany) the deal was designed to gradually lift sanctions against Tehran in exchange for limiting Iran’s nuclear program.

Was Theresa May’s Speech Her Political Epitaph?
| October 5, 2017 | 8:04 pm | Analysis, political struggle, UK | No comments

https://sputniknews.com/military/201710061057990865-north-korean-nukes-could-kill-millions/

A member of the audience hands a P45 form (termination of employment tax form) to Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May as she addresses the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, October 4, 2017.

Was Theresa May’s Speech Her Political Epitaph?

© REUTERS/ Phil Noble
Columnists

Get short URL
Neil Clark
182491

Before this week’s Conservative Party conference in Manchester it looked likely that Prime Minister Theresa May would stay in her job until at least 2019. But after a calamitous speech to the party faithful, in which just about everything that could go wrong, did, May’s days at Number Ten now appear to be numbered.

May’s big message was ‘The British Dream’ but sadly for her, her address turned into a ruddy nightmare.

Her delivery was nervous. Struggling with a cold all week, she had coughing fits and her voice was weak and croaky throughout. She had to  stop several times to drink water and at one point was given a lozenge. She got her words mixed up- at one point saying that Labour was preparing for a ‘a run on the ground’ instead of ‘a ‘run on the pound- conjuring up images of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell in jogging pants.

It didn’t help that a comedy prankster interrupted her speech to hand her a P45 (the traditional form given to employees leaving their jobs) which he said he’d been asked to do by Boris Johnson. If that wasn’t embarrassing enough, unbeknown to May, letters began to fall off from the backdrop- so that in the end the message behind her read ‘Building a country that works or everyon’.

May’s speech  was- literally- a case of ‘F off’- and ‘dropping ‘E’. Piers Morgan called it ‘the biggest speech fiasco in political history’- and  he probably wasn’t exaggerating.

How relieved May must have been to get off the podium at the end.  You didn’t have to be a supporter to feel sorry for her. Anyone who engages in regular public speaking will dread days like this. To her credit, May did battle on and finish her address. Conservative Minister Penny Morduant had a point when she tweeted
Quite unintentionally the PM is demonstrating that she’s got the balls, stamina, SOH & warmth for the task ahead. Speech not needed!

But politics is a dirty old game and the Tories have historically been ruthless in getting rid of leaders who they believe are past their sell-by date. Margaret Thatcher won three elections in a row but was still ditched when it looked like she might lose the fourth. Iain Duncan Smith didn’t even get the chance of fighting one general election- he was given his P45 just a few weeks after his excruciating ‘The Quiet Man is here to stay and he’s turning up the volume’ speech at the party  conference in 2003.

What’s been holding the Tories back from moving against May up to now is the fact that a new leader would be expected to go to the country — within a reasonable timeframe — to get a democratic mandate.

And with Labour showing a consistent lead in the polls that would be fraught with danger.

Even so, after Manchester, May looks to be fatally wounded. Like predators stalking a wounded beast, her ambitious rivals will now be moving in for the kill. They’re probably ready to take the risk that they could be Prime Minister for just a few months — and hope that in an election campaign — and with the majority of the mainstream media behind them,  they’d be able to get the better of Jeremy Corbyn.Boris Johnson’s odds of becoming the next PM have shortened from 9-2 to 4-1. David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, is second favourite at 13-2, while Philip Hammond, Amber Rudd and Jacob Rees-Mogg are all 8-1. Ruth Davidson (at 14-1) has support from some influential people. And don’t rule out Priti Patel, currently a 20-1 shot.

How things have changed from April! Back then Theresa May’s position looked absolutely secure- and it was Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn who looked threatened. But now May is 1-12 to be the first leader to resign, while Jezza, whose position has never been stronger, is 6-1. It’s because of Corbyn’s advance that May has had to shift ‘left’ and adopt some Labour policies. She pledged to an energy bills price cap today- a policy that was derided as being ‘Marxist’ and ‘hard-left’ when ‘Red Ed’ Miliband put it forward in 2013. And —breaking from Thatcherism still further- she also announced plans for a ‘rebirth’ of council house building.

In the end though, unfortunately for Mrs May, it probably won’t be the policies announced in her speech for which it will be remembered.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Follow Neil Clark on Twitter 

‘Clear & present danger’: Hammond warns ‘Marxist’ Corbyn will turn Britain into Venezuela (VIDEO)
| October 2, 2017 | 8:24 pm | Jeremy Corbyn, UK | No comments

https://www.rt.com/uk/405443-hammond-tory-speech-corbyn/

‘Clear & present danger’: Hammond warns ‘Marxist’ Corbyn will turn Britain into Venezuela (VIDEO)

‘Clear & present danger’: Hammond warns ‘Marxist’ Corbyn will turn Britain into Venezuela (VIDEO)
Tory Chancellor Philip Hammond used his speech at the Conservative Party Conference to attack Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his “Marxist” policies.

Despite party members – and the rest of the nation – hoping to hear about the financial state of Britain, and whether the well-worn Tory ax of austerity will finally be shelved, Hammond instead focused his address on Labour.

Opposition leader Corbyn was mentioned at least a dozen times.

Alongside Corbyn warnings, Hammond talked about the leadership of North Korea, Zimbabwe and Venezuela – not subjects often found in the chancellor’s red box.

The ‘Remain’ supporter – known as ‘Spreadsheet Phil’ – used his keynote speech in Manchester to attack the opposition, despite Tory members hoping to get some news on the autumn budget.

Brexit was of course mentioned – four times – in the 35-minute speech.

Attacking the opposition, Hammond said Corbyn and Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell ought to be “treated almost as museum pieces, dinosaurs, worth preserving for the sake of historical curiosity.”

Speaking of history, Hammond also talked about Labour’s record in the late 1970s, more times than he mentioned Britain’s looming break from the EU, or perhaps the chaos tearing apart Theresa May’s cabinet.

“It’s a wicked and cynical business offering superficially simple solutions to complex challenges,” Hammond said.

As the Tories attempt to win over younger voters with policies on tuition fees and Help To Buy schemes, Hammond warned young people are not being given facts by Labour.

“A new generation is being tempted down a dangerous path,” he told the conference.

“We have to explain why and how the market economy works and the role of competition as the consumer’s friend.

“I think we owe it to the next generation to show how Corbyn’s Marxist policies will inevitably lead us back to where Britain was in the late 1970s.”

Hammond mocked the Labour leader and his party conference speech in Brighton, again insisting Corbyn is more regressive than he is progressive.

“He is a clear and present danger to our prosperity damaging our economy, even in opposition his loose talk already deterring the entrepreneurs and the investors we need for our future success.”

Hammond did however offer an apology for the Tory party’s poor performance in the June election.

Yet he managed even then to make it about the Labour leader, who according to a new poll enjoys a four point lead ahead of the government after his Brighton speech.

“I want to thank our financial supporters as well – we need your support more than ever as the union barons mobilize their power behind Corbyn,” he said

“Whether it was time or money, I know you all invested a great deal in the 2017 election and I am sorry we were not able to deliver the result we all hoped for.”

How UK, France, Poland Unleashed Hitler and Paved the Way for WWII

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201709291057809731-munich-agreement-uk-france-italy-nazi/

How UK, France, Poland Unleashed Hitler and Paved the Way for WWII

Neville Chamberlain holding the paper containing the resolution to commit to peaceful methods signed by both Hitler and himself on his return from Munich. He is showing the piece of paper to a crowd at Heston Aerodrome on 30 September 1938

How UK, France, Poland Unleashed Hitler and Paved the Way for WWII

CC0 / Ministry of Information / Munich Agreement
Opinion

Get short URL
Ekaterina Blinova
375328769

The Munich pact of September 29, 1938, paved the way for Nazi Germany’s dominance in Europe and its march eastward, Canadian professor Michael Jabara Carley told Sputnik. Present day efforts to re-write the history of WWII in the West is an attempt to justify grave mistakes committed by European states and pin all the blame on Russia.

The Munich Agreement signed 79 years ago by Nazi Germany, Great Britain, France and Italy wrecked efforts to create an anti-Nazi coalition and opened the door to Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Europe and the nightmare of the Second World War, Michael Jabara Carley, a professor of history at the Université de Montréal and the author of “Silent Conflict: A Hidden History of Early Soviet-Western Relations,” told Sputnik.

“Munich was indeed a betrayal,” Carley underscored. “The loss of the Czechoslovak position in central Europe was thus an important step in Hitler’s plan for German domination of Europe.”

The Munich Pact as the Beginning of the Nazi Crusade

The Munich Agreement permitted Nazi Germany’s annexation of the so-called “Sudetenland” — the regions of northern and western Czechoslovakia inhabited by ethnic Germans, which subsequently led to the occupation of the whole country in March 1939. Naturally, the Czechoslovak government was not invited to the conference.

“Czechoslovakia was a functioning ‘liberal’ democratic state on Germany’s southern frontier. It possessed a well-motivated, well-trained army of approximately 40 divisions. It had a formal alliance with France dating to the 1920s and a mutual assistance pact with the USSR, conditional however on French military intervention on behalf of Czechoslovakia before Soviet commitments were engaged,” the Canadian professor pointed out.

“Hitler had to eliminate the 40 Czechoslovak divisions before his armed forces could take further action to the east and west,” Carley highlighted.However, the British government led by Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain took efforts to remove this obstacle in Nazi Germany’s way, believing “that ‘Herr Hitler’ was a rational interlocutor with whom one could deal and come to agreement,” the academic noted, adding that “Chamberlain’s calculations were quickly disproved by events.”

The Canadian academic emphasized, “Western elites were not of one mind about the dangers of Nazi Germany to European security.” While Chamberlain and his followers deluded themselves into believing that “Herr Hitler” was “a reasonable man,” the political opposition in Britain and France viewed the “fuhrer” as menace to European peace and security.

“It was only in March 1939 after the disappearance of rump Czechoslovakia that Chamberlain’s position was weakened,” the academic said.

However, “for the Anglo-French elites, uncertain of their own force and masculinity, fascism was both intimidating and inspiring. For them, the danger of communist revolution was greater than any danger of Hitlerite Germany,” he added.

It was one of the reasons why the Soviet Union’s repeated attempts to create a defensive alliance against Nazi Germany had failed, according to the academic.

The USSR Made Every Effort to Form Anti-Nazi Coalition

Carley noted that the Soviet Union had pushed ahead with the plan to create an anti-Nazi coalition since December 1933.

“For nearly six years the Soviet government worked tirelessly to promote collective security in Europe,” the Canadian professor highlighted. “Soviet policy was in effect a proposal to recreate the anti-German Entente of World War I, including fascist Italy.”

However, Soviet offers of cooperation were spurned in France, Britain, Romania and Poland. The promising rapprochement between the USSR and the US after meetings between President Franklin Roosevelt and the commissar for foreign affairs, Maxim M. Litvinov, in the autumn of 1933 “was sabotaged by the Sovietophobe Department of State.”

Carley refuted the assumption that it was “the Stalinist purges” that “undermined Anglo-French confidence in Soviet proposals for collective security”: Moscow’s key attempts to create an anti-Nazi alliance preceded “the first Stalinist show trial in the late summer of 1936.”

Soviet diplomat Maxim Litvinov
© Sputnik/ Khalip
Soviet diplomat Maxim Litvinov

Poland as ‘Spoiler and Saboteur’ of Efforts to Create Anti-Hitler Alliance

The Canadian professor outlined the role of Poland in ruining efforts to form a defensive alliance against Hitlerite Germany.

“Poland never showed any genuine interest in Soviet proposals for collective security against Nazi Germany”… furthermore it was “the spoiler of ‘collective security’ in Europe during the 1930s,” Carley underscored.

“Time after time the Polish government, and most notably the Polish foreign minister, Józef Beck, intervened to block Soviet efforts to build an anti-Nazi alliance,” he highlighted.

On January 26, 1934, Warsaw signed a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany, while “in 1938 Poland was Hitler’s accomplice in dismembering Czechoslovakia before becoming Hitler’s victim in 1939,” the professor pointed out referring to Poland’s occupation of Zaolzie in October 1938.

“The Polish elite always considered Russia to be the greater menace, no matter who governed it,” the Canadian academic remarked. “Beck was so complacent that he approved the Polish ambassador in Moscow’s annual leave as the European crisis was reaching its height in the summer of 1939.”

“Poland acted as the spoiler and saboteur right up until August 1939…. One can only conclude that the Polish government brought defeat and ruin upon itself… and far more importantly on the Polish people,” the professor suggested.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact: Last on the List

Despite Poland having been the first to conclude a non-aggression agreement with Nazi Germany, it used the most insulting language while addressing the conclusion of the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the professor noted.

The German-Soviet non-aggression treaty struck on August 23, 1939, has repeatedly come under heavy criticism from Western historians who denounced it as an example of “Soviet-Nazi” collusion. However, the Soviet Union was the last to ink such an agreement among other European states.The first on the list is Poland (1934), next came Great Britain, who concluded the Anglo-German Naval Pact in 1935 and inked the Munich Agreement with Berlin in 1938 together with Paris and Rome.

The German-Romanian deal for economic cooperation was signed on March 23, 1939. About two months later, in May, Denmark struck its non-aggression pact with Hitler. The same month Rome and Berlin inked their “Pact of Steel” while in June Nazi Germany signed non-aggression agreements with Estonia and Latvia.

However, the “chronology of the various non-aggression pacts is not the key issue,” according to the Canadian professor: The key issue is that “the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact was [in fact] the result of the failure of Anglo-Franco-Soviet negotiations for an alliance against Nazi Germany.”

When Stalin later observed the Anglo-French hesitance to go to Warsaw’s aid when Nazi Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, “he could only have concluded that his putative ‘allies’ would have left the Soviet Union in similar straits,” Carley stressed.

History Rewritten

When Word War II was over the question arose as to whom to blame for the catastrophe. Incredible as it may seem, the Western powers pointed the finger of blame at the USSR, the very country that contributed the most to the victory over Nazi Germany and which lost 27 million people during the war.”When the United States and Britain resumed the Cold War after May 1945 (the Cold War having in fact begun in November 1917), the shameful conduct of the French and British governments and the despicable behavior of the Polish government during the 1930s had to be covered up or ‘justified,'” Carley said. “Likewise, the predominate role of the Red Army in destroying the Wehrmacht had to be erased from people’s memories.”

According to the historian present day western hostility toward the Russian Federation and its president are fed by this bogus American and European “history.” However, one should keep in mind that the outcome of WWII was defined not by the Normandy invasion in June 1944, but by the Soviet victory in the battle for Stalingrad in February 1943, the Canadian academic stressed.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Jeremy Corbyn – Britain’s Prime Minister in All But Name
| September 28, 2017 | 7:43 pm | Jeremy Corbyn, UK | No comments

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201709281057783191-age-of-nationalism-catalonia-scotland-kurdistan/

Britain's opposition Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn delivers his keynote speech at the Labour Party Conference in Brighton, Britain, September 27, 2017.

Jeremy Corbyn – Britain’s Prime Minister in All But Name

© REUTERS/ Toby Melville
Columnists

Get short URL
Neil Clark
1915100

Jeremy Corbyn’s inspirational speech at this week’s Labour Party conference, in which he pledged to develop “a new model of economic management to replace the failed dogmas of neo-liberalism,” was arguably the best address by a Labour leader to the party faithful since Harold Wilson’s in 1975.

Back then, the four-times general election winner warned delegates about the dangers of Thatcherism.

Sadly, Wilson’s predictions that the ever-narrowing gap between rich and poor would be reversed, came true.

On Wednesday, September 27, Corbyn made it clear that if he does become Prime Minister, the era of Thatcherism — and its faux-progressive variant, Blairism, will be at an end.

The financial crash of 2008, brought about by the greed of the banksters and the reckless deregulation of the financial services sector ought to have seen neoliberalism consigned to the dustbin of history. Instead it led only to an even more extreme version of crony capitalism — one in which the burden of paying for the bankers’ bailout was placed on the shoulders of ordinary people. The result — as Corbyn stated in Brighton — has been the “longest fall in people’s pay since records began.”

In 2016, figures showed that UK wages had dropped around 10% since the financial crisis — the worst in anywhere in Europe except Greece

At the same time, it was reported that the richest 1% now owned 24% of the nation’s entire wealth. You don’t have to be a 21st century Che Guevara or Rosa Luxemburg to acknowledge that the situation was grossly unfair and that radical change was needed.

Yet, incredibly, until Corbyn came along — to take the Labour leadership as a 500-1 shot in 2015 — there had been no serious challenge to the ruling neoliberal orthodoxies from the leading parties. Ed Miliband, the Labour leader from 2010-15, did edge away from Blairism, but it was too cautious a move to persuade enough voters to return to the Labour fold. The party could have won the 2015 election with a bolder program, but Labour’s share of the vote only went up 1.4% from its poor showing in 2010 under Gordon Brown.

Contrast this with what’s happened under Corbyn, the man who Establishment pundits assured us was leading Labour off a cliff. Labour party membership has surged from just over 200,000 at the time of the 2015 general election, to over 550,000 today. In this year’s general election, Labour received 40% of the vote, recording its biggest increase in vote share since 1945.

Because it’s ignored the advice of the know-it-all “moderates” — embedded in the neocon media — and adopted populist anti-neoliberal policies, its bucked the trend we’ve seen across the continent. Labour’s fortunes are in stark contrast with those of the German SPD, who only this week slumped to their lowest share of the vote since World War Two.

ln his conference speech, Corbyn quite correctly stated that Labour was now the political mainstream and occupied the genuine center-ground of public opinion — a point I made in a recent Sputnik column.

While those hostile to Corbyn call Labour under his leadership “hard-left” or “revolutionary,” the truth is that the party is simply putting forward sensible, practical solutions to the countries biggest problems — and advocating policies that were accepted by all the main parties as being common sense in the post-war era.

Take public ownership. Corbyn’s support for this is presented by his critics as evidence that he is a dangerous, wild-eyed extremist hell-bent on turning Britain into North Korea. In fact, public ownership of the utilities was the norm in Britain until Thatcherism and was supported by post-war Tories too. The same goes for rent controls, which were introduced in the First World War and only abolished in full in 1988.

Corbyn’s foreign policy also marks a break with the neocon extremism of the past thirty years. In his Thursday speech, the former Chair of Stop the War declared, “We should stand firm for peaceful solutions to international crises.”

He quite correctly linked the increase in terrorism to neocon/liberal interventionist foreign policies.

“We also know that terrorism is thriving in a world our governments have helped to shape, with its failed states, military interventions and occupations where millions are forced to flee conflict or hunger. We have to do better and swap the knee-jerk response of another bombing campaign for long-term help to solve conflicts rather than fuel them,” he told conference.

It’s fair to say that Corbyn’s speech brought the house down.

Labour activists present left the conference on a real high and with a renewed sense of purpose. I certainly can’t recall any address by a Labour leader that’s been as moving, or as thought-provoking, for over forty years. But of course not everyone is happy. Obviously Conservatives are going to attack Corbyn — that’s their job. Corbyn’s bitterest enemies though are the faux-left who are angry that Labour has ditched Blairism and gained votes for doing so.

These pro-war “progressives” initially said they were against Corbyn because he was leading the party to electoral oblivion.

Now they accuse him of leading a “cult.”

It’s clear that most of them would rather the Tories win than have a Labour party come to power on a program offering the prospect of real change.

Corbyn — make no mistake — is on a roll, but ironically it’s his popularity which could delay his entry to Downing Street. Opinion polls since the election have shown a consistent lead for Labour as the party has built on the support they received in June.

The Conservatives know that to go to the country now would be suicidal. And even if the polls turned round and showed the Tories consistently ahead — could they really risk an election knowing what happened to them in June — when they were around 20 points ahead when the election was called?

That said, parliamentary maths means that it’s going to be hard to see the Tories lasting the full five years. And if Theresa May is replaced by Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Ruth Davidson or anyone else, the pressures to seek democratic legitimacy via a general election will be great.

Jeremy Corbyn may have to wait a while before he gets the keys to Number Ten, but in one sense, he’s there already. Even without being PM he’s already had a major impact on government policy. As he said in Brighton:

“Conference, your efforts in the election campaign stopped the Tories in their tracks. The election result has already delivered one Tory U-turn after another over some of their most damaging policies. The cruel dementia tax was scrapped within three days of being announced. Plans to bring back grammar schools have been ditched. The threat to the pensions’ triple lock abandoned. Withdrawal of Winter Fuel payments dumped. The pledge to bring back fox hunting dropped. And their plan to end free school meals in primary schools has been binned… It is Labour that is now setting the agenda and winning the arguments for a new common sense about the direction our country should take.”

Before Corbyn made his speech I was invited by the BBC to give my assessment of Labour under his leadership. I tweeted:

To which I received the reply from Roy Pearce:

Yesterday, Corbyn didn’t sound like a Prime Minister in waiting. He sounded like the man who’s already there.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Follow @NeilClark66 on Twitter

Support his Anti-Stalker Crowd Fund

First they laughed, then he was dangerous… now Jeremy Corbyn is ‘favorite for PM’
| September 27, 2017 | 8:23 pm | Jeremy Corbyn, political struggle, UK | No comments

https://www.rt.com/uk/404734-jeremy-corbyn-labour-conference/

First they laughed, then he was dangerous… now Jeremy Corbyn is ‘favorite for PM’

First they laughed, then he was dangerous... now Jeremy Corbyn is ‘favorite for PM’
Jeremy Corbyn has a spring in his step at this year’s Labour Party Conference. He’s gone from fighting for his political survival to preparing to walk into Downing Street. At least that’s what his former critics are saying.

In six months the Labour leader has gone from being outrageous outsider to prime minister-in-waiting.

Corbyn will address party delegates in Brighton this week to launch his battle for Downing Street, as tottering Tory Theresa May fends off leadership challenges from within her own cabinet.

And while Brexit goes badly, Labour has every opportunity to seize power.

“Six months ago the opposition was in a battle for survival. Now it is preparing for government,” the latest edition of the Economist crows.

Just six months ago, the exact same publication deemed Corbyn unfit to even oppose the PM in an election.

The Economist, an influential weekly magazine, said Corbyn was a “danger” who would take Britain, and Labour, “to the loony left.”

Headlines slated Corbyn, calling him an outsider who “will badly disappoint his young supporters.”

Then, a week before June’s snap election, the same publication accused Corbyn of oppression.

“No economic liberal, Mr. Corbyn does not much value personal freedom either,” the Economist said.

“An avowed human-rights campaigner, he has embraced left-wing tyrants such as Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro (a ‘champion of social justice’), who locked up opponents and muzzled the press.

“Mr. Corbyn has spent a career claiming to stand for the oppressed while backing oppressors.”

But the tune has changed significantly.

Days ago, the Economist reported the bookies are now backing Corbyn.

“NOT even Jeremy Corbyn could quite picture himself as leader … Bookmakers have him as favourite to be Britain’s next prime minister,” it reported.

In June, Corbyn’s odds of becoming Britain’s next Prime Minister were at 9-4. Now they have been cut to 4-1 with UK bookmakers like Paddy Power.

Meanwhile, May’s address in Florence appears to have had little effect in Brussels.

It came a week after the PM saw off a challenge from her foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, who had his own vision for Brexit printed in a British newspaper.

That move alone propelled Corbyn’s crusade for Number 10, a senior source told the Telegraph.

“A lot of the party is fine with what [Boris] has done with Brexit but not if we end up with Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister,” the source said.

“It [The Tory government] could fall in six months.”

‘I’ll chain myself to door of Number 10’ to stop ‘Nazi’ Trump state visit, says Labour MP
| September 27, 2017 | 8:19 pm | struggle against fascism, UK | No comments

https://www.rt.com/uk/404736-lammy-trump-state-visit/

‘I’ll chain myself to door of Number 10’ to stop ‘Nazi’ Trump state visit, says Labour MP

‘I’ll chain myself to door of Number 10’ to stop ‘Nazi’ Trump state visit, says Labour MP
Donald Trump is a “racist Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathizer,” Labour MP David Lammy said as he protested plans to welcome the US President to Britain on a state visit.

Lammy, a former higher education minister, said he is willing to “chain myself to the door of Number 10” if plans for Trump to come to the UK next year materialize.

“If Trump comes to the UK I will be out protesting on the streets.

“He is a racist KKK and Nazi sympathizer,” he tweeted.

Lammy, who ran in the London mayoral contest in 2015, made similar remarks at a fringe debate during the annual Labour Party Conference in Brighton on Monday, where he called on the public to protest against the Republican leader’s visit.

“We need to martial our efforts to fight. I will be on the streets when eventually they cave in and let Donald Trump into this country,” Lammy told the audience.

“The man is a racist. The man has Ku Klux members in his inner team. The man thinks it is OK to have protesting Nazis on the streets.

“Of course I will campaign against it. If I have to chain myself to the door of Number 10, this black man will do it.”

Prime Minister Theresa May invited Trump when she visited him at the White House in January soon after he was sworn in as the 45th US president.

It stirred public outcry amid claims it would be “an embarrassment to Her Majesty the Queen,” with a petition opposing the visit garnering more than 1.8 million signatures.

Lammy’s comments mirror those of Nick Dearden, the director of Global Justice Now, which is part of the UK Stop Trump coalition.

He said Trump should be denied the privilege of a state visit especially after failing to outright condemn far-right groups following the Charlottesville violence in August.

“Theresa May’s decision to invite Donald Trump for a state visit to the UK has always been highly controversial, but now that the President is nakedly sympathizing with neo-Nazis, there has never been a more obvious time that that invitation must be rescinded immediately,” he said, the Independent reports.

Warning that similar clashes could happen in the UK, Dearden said, “What message is it sending to the people of UK if there is an open invitation to the most high-profile fascist-sympathizer of modern times?”