SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
For the first time in 10 years, the Prime Minister said the terror threat had been raised to the highest possible level, from severe to critical, meaning an attack is "expected imminently".
[...] Mrs May also announced that troops would replace police officers at set-piece events including sports venues and concerts.
It will be the first time since 2003 – when the Government reacted to a plot to bring down an airliner – that troops are deployed on the streets.
[...] It is the first time Britain has been on maximum terrorist alert since 2007, when a blazing car loaded with gas canisters was driven into Glasgow Airport.
Source: The Telegraph
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Soldiers Deployed in UK as Threat Level Raised to Critical
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 209 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
To avoid suffocation, keep away from children.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday May 24 2017, @04:35PM (4 children)
In the U.S. we have this thing where politicians don't get to decide when to hold elections to benefit them the most; we have them on a set fucking schedule.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Wednesday May 24 2017, @05:25PM (2 children)
That's not entirely true, where I live the school board routinely has levy votes that are purposely scheduled on a day when most people will not show up. Of course the schools are closed during voting b/c a lot of schools are where you go to vote. If you work for the schools and like that levy money, it's pretty nice to have off that day.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday May 24 2017, @06:07PM (1 child)
Okay, on an individual community level there are probably exceptions. It would be news to me if anybody was doing it state-level and above.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday May 25 2017, @04:18PM
Yep. It's only local elections where they have any variance; state and national elections are always on Election Day in November. There sometimes are special elections at the state level, but they're rare.
From Wikipedia:
"Many state and local government offices are also elected on Election Day as a matter of convenience and cost saving, although a handful of states hold elections for state offices (such as governor) during odd-numbered "off years", or during other even-numbered "midterm years", and may hold special elections for offices that have become vacant."
(Score: 2) by quacking duck on Wednesday May 24 2017, @07:35PM
The significant downside to set election dates is that electioneering starts months if not more than a year before the actual election day. I knew this would happen when Canada went the same way in 2009; the last federal election in 2015 was 11 weeks, far longer and more tiring in terms of wasted airwaves and brain matter than the previously normal 5 or so weeks, which was just short enough that it didn't dull or kill voter interest entirely. On the other hand, the longer period meant world events tipped public sentiment against the Conservatives who'd ruled for a decade.
Also: a set schedule doesn't mean the party in power can't use it to their benefit. They just hold off their key promises until the year of, or before, the election. This has worked for Ontario's provincial elections where the Liberals have maintained power since 2003, after passing a mandate for fixed election dates in 2005.
So, while I like some parts of set election dates, I still prefer the flexible election dates.