I'm beginning to worry about that woman - no, not that one, the other one!

There was never much to worry about with the original 'that woman' but I am becoming increasingly uneasy over her current successor.  As I mentioned before, Mrs. May was a 'do nothing, say nothing' Home Secretary which, given her most famous speech in which she described her own party as "the nasty party", was perhaps "A Good Thing!"

Today she is reported to have laid into the American government in general, and the ineffable John Kerry in particular, for its sudden volte face towards Israel.  However, she has maintained the feeble stance of her own government by supporting the malignant proposition before the Security Council.  Presumably she thought she could hide behind the American veto but when it was suddenly withdrawn by the childish Obama she was left exposed and looking like the prize humbug she apparently is.

The Telegraph reports:

“We do not… believe that the way to negotiate peace is by focusing on only one issue, in this case the construction of settlements, when clearly the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is so deeply complex,” Mrs May’s spokesman said.

“And we do not believe that it is appropriate to attack the composition of the democratically elected government of an ally. The Government believes that negotiations will only succeed when they are conducted between the two parties, supported by the international community.”

Well, Prime Minister, if you really believe that "focusing on one issue" is wrong, why did you vote for it?  Also, we would dearly like to know what you will do when every vicious little anti-Semite and Islamist extremist in Britain begin their campaign of arraigning travelling Israelis who pass through London on the grounds that they are guilty of breaking international law as laid down by the United Nations?

 

Comments

[Loz]

She's just oiling herself up for her NBFB: "The Don".

When "The Don" demands privatisation of the NHS, state schools, and social services, and their replacement by VOUCHERS and competitive access to those FREE MARKETS by US operators, in exchange for an FTA agreement with the US, she'll have the perfect excuse to get on with it! The Tories will cheer, and Labour are in the wilderness, so there'll be an opportunity to get it done. Mrs T's unfinished business. The unions will kick off a bit, but everyone hates them now, so it's doable.

Her knickers will slip off before you can say "Strike"!

SoD

[AussieD]

Just what exactly has St.Theresa of May done since she became PM?

Rhetorical question I guess as it seems the answer is SFA. A bit like our own useless PM.

Our Foreign Minister [who I wouldn't trust under any circumstances] gave NZ a serve for their supporting this iniquitous resolution. I'm not sure she would not have supported it either had we had a vote in it.

Personally I would like to see "the Donald" serve an eviction notice on the mob in that big riverside building in NY and for Israel to tell the UN to go f--k itself.

[mike fowle]

There's an episode in Yes, Prime Minister, where Jim Hacker wishes to vote against a motion condemning Israel but finds the Foreign Office had voted in favour. Just wonder....

[backofanenvelope]

The main characteristic of the British establishment is inertia. So, assuming we actually issue the Art 50 letter on 1st April (date carefully chosen), we will have spent 9 months doing nothing about anything. We will then have 2 years of farting about, after which parliament will vote down the agreement. Luckily, Art 50 says that in the event of no agreement, we just leave. So, as long as we issue Art 50 we are going to leave. And as we know, leave means leave. No single market, no money and no laws. And no migrants.

[Loz]

"Art 50 says that in the event of no agreement, we just leave."

Not necessarily.

It doesn't say what happens if the leaving state decides to change its mind and stop the process. Perhaps merely to stall the process if the talks were not concluded ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-article-50-revoked-once-triggered-senior-academics-claim-a7393661.html

There would have to be a ruling from the ECJ on whether Article 50 is stoppable. Given that most Liberal institutions defer to giving choice if no rule or precedent has been set, it would probably judge that article 50 is stoppable by the leaving state.

In which case, May could simply rescind article 50 on 31st March 2019 if the agreement is not concluded or not to everyone's liking. Then she simply issues a fresh, new, article 50 evocation to get another two years.

SoD

[Whitewall]

I first put this under the wrong link...dammit.

When it comes to the UN, defund and dismiss should be the immediate policy of the Trump administration. Dismiss at bayonet (kidon) point if need be. Vacate and get out of the US fast as if your life depends on it. Set up their den of jackals somewhere else...like the third world.

[TheBigHenry]

I have sensed all along and said so many times, but it bears repeating: 0bama is anti-American; a Muslim lover; a Jew hater (though he panders for their votes and their money); a vindictive little pussy; a total c*nt. Other than that, he's a very nice guy.

[Loz]

Good call Gaffer, served days before Charles Moore's article ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/30/does-theresa-may-think-backing-obamas-denunciation-israel-un/

Perhaps she should have applied a bit more oil. "The Don" likes 'em wet-soap-bar slippy. Or maybe she's teasing him, to make him work a little for the Full Monty, and not assume her gifts are a done deal.

Or maybe she just fumbled it.

And where tf is BoJo?

SoD