Come on, you know full well that people of relatively limited means would be bonkers to go to court even if they thought others had defamed them. After all, the PB Tories would be landed with a writ almost every day if we were all as litigious as lawyers wished we were.
Anyone care to bet on UKIP either getting 10% of vote, or even their first elected member in Scotland?
Looks like the SNP's EU Parliament support is eroding.
"...in Scotland, only one in 10 of those surveyed said they would be voting Ukip, compared with the 33% who plan to vote SNP and the 31% who said they would back Labour. Scottish support for the Tories in the European elections was put at 12%, while for the Liberal Democrats it was 7%."
countryboylife @countryboylife 45m @Sun_Politics@seanpphillips Sun’s Political Editor Tom Newton Dunn, is the son of Bill Newton Dunn, the Lib-Dem MEP who may lose his seat
Ooh, it's almost a plot worthy of Tapestry.
In future, Helmer should wear a Tin Foil Hat to block the mind warping beams projected by the Gays.
“It’s OK to have personal preferences” -> “It’s OK to despise gay people”
Bit of a leap !
Let's see.. it's under four weeks till the May elections and the CCHQ phones are no doubt ringing off the hook to the tory friendly papers and editors. Just like last May. So not really that big of a leap. Sadly for the Cameroons however it's likely to be just as pointless and counterproductive as last time. Amusing nonetheless to the see the Sun speak thusly.
Think I've made my mind up how I'll vote now. Not for Dave at any rate.
The burden of proof in libel cases is to show that the defamatory statement has been made. Once proved, the newspaper has to justify the defamatory statement..
I realise lawyers are adept at creating obfuscation out of simplicity, but isn't this about as simple as these things ever get? The Sun claims that Helmer said it's fine to detest gay people. It seems to me that that is a simple enough question of fact to determine: either he did say it, or he didn't.
I understand that and agree that it was a long time ago and she has shown remorse and there is a big difference etc
But I still think that if it were a UKIP councillor, with the same caveats you describe, it would be front page news, and on national tv
So I am not saying she should be hauled over coals, just that, if it were UKIP rather than Labour, that she would be
I don't think, and obviously I accept I could be wrong, that I've ever seen a UKIP councillor or whatever express such complete repudiation of, and regret for, such former views.
That, I think, is the difference.
And the holding of those views was a long, long time ago.
UKIP councillors cease to be UKIP councillors once the views are revealed
There is another difference. This 'lady' in Milton Keynes (and I'm not sure that lady is the correct term) is standing for election. She has put her past out there on the record. It is up to the good people in the constituency to vote for her or not. As I said below, she has repudiated her past.
If the people elect her knowing that, fair enough. It's different when something comes out and you're already holding a position.
No no
If UKIP stood a person who they knew had previously held those views/served time/racially abused black people, it would be all over the National papers, rightly or wrongly.
...and I have no doubt the people defending Labour for putting her up for council, would be making snide remarks about UKIP if they did the same
Double standards
Well, I'd like to think that I wouldn't make snidey remarks if a UKIP candidate was in the same position. And I'm not defending Labour: I'm defending someone's right to stand for election in this situation. If anything, the local Labour party have probably been courageous in this (that's not quite the word I'm looking for, but you know what I mean), They haven;t taken an easy option.
You're starting to sound a little paranoid. We're not all out to get you.
"Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you" - Kurt Cobain
countryboylife @countryboylife 45m @Sun_Politics@seanpphillips Sun’s Political Editor Tom Newton Dunn, is the son of Bill Newton Dunn, the Lib-Dem MEP who may lose his seat
Shoot that messenger - now the Kippers are claiming the Sun are a LD shill ? Guffaw.
Signs of the apocalypse: when you see a Sun editorial you agree with and think, 'I'm glad they said that': pic.twitter.com/9tHOWcHidi
"William "Bill" Newton Dunn (born 3 October 1941 in Greywell, Hampshire) is a British politician. He is a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands for the Liberal Democrats.
He is married with two children, living in Navenby and West London. His son is Tom Newton Dunn, an award-winning journalist for The Sun newspaper. His daughter is Daisy Newton Dunn, a TV producer for the BBC."
Oh I know all about Newton Dunn, but thanks all the same. I fear you mistake my supply of the piece for ignorance of the motives behind it and laughable nature of it given we are talking about the Sun and it's 'outrage' over supposed homophobia.
countryboylife @countryboylife 45m @Sun_Politics@seanpphillips Sun’s Political Editor Tom Newton Dunn, is the son of Bill Newton Dunn, the Lib-Dem MEP who may lose his seat
Ooh, it's almost a plot worthy of Tapestry.
In future, Helmer should wear a Tin Foil Hat to block the mind warping beams projected by the Gays.
His dad is standing against Helmer in the same seat! You think it's not related?!
I understand that and agree that it was a long time ago and she has shown remorse and there is a big difference etc
But I still think that if it were a UKIP councillor, with the same caveats you describe, it would be front page news, and on national tv
So I am not saying she should be hauled over coals, just that, if it were UKIP rather than Labour, that she would be
I don't think, and obviously I accept I could be wrong, that I've ever seen a UKIP councillor or whatever express such complete repudiation of, and regret for, such former views.
That, I think, is the difference.
And the holding of those views was a long, long time ago.
UKIP councillors cease to be UKIP councillors once the views are revealed
There is another difference. This 'lady' in Milton Keynes (and I'm not sure that lady is the correct term) is standing for election. She has put her past out there on the record. It is up to the good people in the constituency to vote for her or not. As I said below, she has repudiated her past.
If the people elect her knowing that, fair enough. It's different when something comes out and you're already holding a position.
No no
If UKIP stood a person who they knew had previously held those views/served time/racially abused black people, it would be all over the National papers, rightly or wrongly.
...and I have no doubt the people defending Labour for putting her up for council, would be making snide remarks about UKIP if they did the same
Double standards
Well, I'd like to think that I wouldn't make snidey remarks if a UKIP candidate was in the same position. And I'm not defending Labour: I'm defending someone's right to stand for election in this situation. If anything, the local Labour party have probably been courageous in this (that's not quite the word I'm looking for, but you know what I mean), They haven;t taken an easy option.
You're starting to sound a little paranoid. We're not all out to get you.
There is more joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth …….. or something. Trouble is, UKIP (party and individuals) tend to give the impression that they've been caught out, rather than as in this very unusual case, making a clean breast of things.
I understand that and agree that it was a long time ago and she has shown remorse and there is a big difference etc
But I still think that if it were a UKIP councillor, with the same caveats you describe, it would be front page news, and on national tv
So I am not saying she should be hauled over coals, just that, if it were UKIP rather than Labour, that she would be
I don't think, and obviously I accept I could be wrong, that I've ever seen a UKIP councillor or whatever express such complete repudiation of, and regret for, such former views.
That, I think, is the difference.
And the holding of those views was a long, long time ago.
UKIP councillors cease to be UKIP councillors once the views are revealed
There is another difference. This 'lady' in Milton Keynes (and I'm not sure that lady is the correct term) is standing for election. She has put her past out there on the record. It is up to the good people in the constituency to vote for her or not. As I said below, she has repudiated her past.
If the people elect her knowing that, fair enough. It's different when something comes out and you're already holding a position.
No no
If UKIP stood a person who they knew had previously held those views/served time/racially abused black people, it would be all over the National papers, rightly or wrongly.
...and I have no doubt the people defending Labour for putting her up for council, would be making snide remarks about UKIP if they did the same
Double standards
Well, I'd like to think that I wouldn't make snidey remarks if a UKIP candidate was in the same position. And I'm not defending Labour: I'm defending someone's right to stand for election in this situation. If anything, the local Labour party have probably been courageous in this (that's not quite the word I'm looking for, but you know what I mean), They haven;t taken an easy option.
You're starting to sound a little paranoid. We're not all out to get you.
"Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you" - Kurt Cobain
Yes, but it also doesn't mean that they are.
And I'm not sure using Kurt Cobain for wisdom on anything's a particularly good idea ...
Why won't Cameron debate head-to-head with Miliband if Ed is supposed to be such a walk-over? If he doesn't accept Dave will look "frit" because he knows he would be floored.Has working with the LibDems turned Cameron "yellow"?
There appears to be a substantial discrepancy on the facts of what Helmer actually said. If the Sun recorded the conversation it would be helpful if they published it verbatim. Otherwise...Sun reporter vs UKIP politician - hmm...
There appears to be a substantial discrepancy on the facts of what Helmer actually said. If the Sun recorded the conversation it would be helpful if they published it verbatim. Otherwise...Sun reporter vs UKIP politician - hmm...
UKIP MEP for East Midlands standing against Sun Political Editor's Dad, MEP for East Midlands
There appears to be a substantial discrepancy on the facts of what Helmer actually said. If the Sun recorded the conversation it would be helpful if they published it verbatim. Otherwise...Sun reporter vs UKIP politician - hmm...
UKIP MEP for East Midlands standing against Sun Political Editor's Dad, MEP for East Midlands
The burden of proof in libel cases is to show that the defamatory statement has been made. Once proved, the newspaper has to justify the defamatory statement..
I realise lawyers are adept at creating obfuscation out of simplicity, but isn't this about as simple as these things ever get? The Sun claims that Helmer said it's fine to detest gay people. It seems to me that that is a simple enough question of fact to determine: either he did say it, or he didn't.
I think the burden is on the Sun to prove he said he 'detests gays'.
That's not true at all. The burden of proof is on the the plaintiff so there's no guarantee he'd win even if he had a case. As my lawyer uncle says: never go to court.
An absence of a writ does not equate to an absence of libel, as you should know, being a lawyer.
The burden of proof in libel cases is to show that the defamatory statement has been made. Once proved, the newspaper has to justify the defamatory statement.
It's Mr Helmer who has used the word "defamatory". If he's going to use such words, he's going to have to follow through on them.
Though your lawyer uncle is spot on in his advice.
Unless I were falsely accused of a very serious crime, I would never dream of bringing a defamation action against a media outlet. Every bit of mud that could be flung against me would be.
But in all seriousness, I remember saying on here that I had my doubts about doing this cruise along the Kimberley. Yet it's turned out to be one of the peak travel experiences of my life. It is like nowhere else on earth. THE last great coastal wilderness on God's green earth. And the only real way to see it all is by boat. Hopefully with free bubbly.
It should be on everyone's bucket list.
It does look wonderful Sean. Went to the Whitsundays 25 years ago. My wife still regards it as our best trip ever and I hesitate to disagree with her. New Zealand had it's moments, but the Whitsundays ….
The burden of proof in libel cases is to show that the defamatory statement has been made. Once proved, the newspaper has to justify the defamatory statement..
I realise lawyers are adept at creating obfuscation out of simplicity, but isn't this about as simple as these things ever get? The Sun claims that Helmer said it's fine to detest gay people. It seems to me that that is a simple enough question of fact to determine: either he did say it, or he didn't.
True. But for a libel action to be more than a costly battle of principle, the damages suffered and awarded have to be more than the cost of litigation when quantified financially.
Which means the loss of reputation needs to result in third parties (say the man on the Clapham Omnibus) changing their actions as a result of the libel.
I somewhat doubt that any more people would 'shun and avoid' Roger Helmer than did prior to the Sun's publication. I also estimate that Helmer may be one of those defamed whose reputation was so low in the first place that it could not suffer from further tellings of untruth.
The burden of proof in libel cases is to show that the defamatory statement has been made. Once proved, the newspaper has to justify the defamatory statement..
I realise lawyers are adept at creating obfuscation out of simplicity, but isn't this about as simple as these things ever get? The Sun claims that Helmer said it's fine to detest gay people. It seems to me that that is a simple enough question of fact to determine: either he did say it, or he didn't.
I think the burden is on the Sun to prove he said he 'detests gays'.
His point, as I read it, was that people are entitled to think what they like
Cameron has said that he would not be PM in a Coalition that did not agree to hold his 2017 referendum on EU membership. Assuming we take him at his word, has anyone asked him what he would be prepared to offer the Lib Dems in return for agreeing to this?
Given the importance he [claims] to attach to this, one assumes he would be willing to pay quite a high price. How high?
Not seen any markets yet on seat wins.If we take your 50 and my 500 forecast the mid point is 275.Prepared to have a straight £20 bet the winner being the nearest to the mid point.
But in all seriousness, I remember saying on here that I had my doubts about doing this cruise along the Kimberley. Yet it's turned out to be one of the peak travel experiences of my life. It is like nowhere else on earth. THE last great coastal wilderness on God's green earth. And the only real way to see it all is by boat. Hopefully with free bubbly.
It should be on everyone's bucket list.
Yes, Kimberley's pretty nice. Here's some more pictures:
I also estimate that Helmer may be one of those defamed whose reputation was so low in the first place that it could not suffer from further tellings of untruth.
Can't ever remember that being noted by a court - iirc I remember convicted criminals have won libel/defamatory cases so it certainly wouldn't apply in Helmer's case.
“It’s OK to have personal preferences” -> “It’s OK to despise gay people”
Bit of a leap !
Let's see.. it's under four weeks till the May elections and the CCHQ phones are no doubt ringing off the hook to the tory friendly papers and editors. Just like last May. So not really that big of a leap. Sadly for the Cameroons however it's likely to be just as pointless and counterproductive as last time. Amusing nonetheless to the see the Sun speak thusly.
Think I've made my mind up how I'll vote now. Not for Dave at any rate.
Surely yet another Cast Iron Guarantee will do the trick? No?
Perhaps the most telling thing about the Cameroon reaction to the inevitable isn't yet another Cast Iron pledge but the rote repetition of a vote for Farge is a vote for Miliband. (which I guarantee you will be seeing far more of in the weeks and indeed months ahead.)
What makes that so amusing isn't just that it reinforces the sense of entitlement the exudes from the chumocracy 'those are out votes, how dare you vote for someone else etc.' but that this is almost all a problem of Cammie's own making.
The notable points being Cammies Veto flounce, Osbrowne's omnishambles, the Cast Iron IN/OUT refrendum pledge and the inexorable rise of the kipper vote while all that occurred. It certainly had zero to do with little Ed. While the Cameroons can indeed point to the fear and anger from unhappy tory Eurosceptics as reasons for Cammie's EU posturing, the fact remains that this is almost entirely a problem of their own making. Tory Euroscepticism didn't just magically pop up after 2010. Nor did Farage even have to do very much other than just sit back and enjoy the fallout as Cammie seemed intent on feeding the kipper fire on issues such as the EU and immigration.
Cameron has said that he would not be PM in a Coalition that did not agree to hold his 2017 referendum on EU membership. Assuming we take him at his word, has anyone asked him what he would be prepared to offer the Lib Dems in return for agreeing to this?
Given the importance he [claims] to attach to this one assumes he would be willing to pay quite a high price. How high?
It's the other way round. If the LibDems want to be in coalition government with the Conservatives, they will have to agree to this. If not, no coalition. It's not a question of 'price', it's a question of political reality - after all, anyone who knows anything about the Conservative Party will know that this is absolutely non-negotiable; the party simply will not accept anything other than a referendum by the end of 2017. It's frankly been difficult enough holding the line on the current compromise position of 2017, given the number of MPs and party members who want an earlier referendum.
In any case, I'm not so sure that the LibDems will be particularly fussed by it. It's been their own policy in the past, so why should they put their feet down this time? Even now they make vaguely supportive noises sometimes. And are they really going to stomp out in order to support the principle of denying people a choice?
Cameron has said that he would not be PM in a Coalition that did not agree to hold his 2017 referendum on EU membership. Assuming we take him at his word, has anyone asked him what he would be prepared to offer the Lib Dems in return for agreeing to this?
Given the importance he [claims] to attach to this, one assumes he would be willing to pay quite a high price. How high?
Free school meals for electric cars ? Who can predict what Clegg would want.
The MSM are attacking so many UKIP members, so tenuously, with such regularity, that soon if it were to emerge that Farage was BNP member, no one would take any notice
FutbolBible @FutbolBible 13h Balotelli just uploaded this picture on his Instagram with the caption "We are all monkeys". #SayNoToRacism pic.twitter.com/XS0azNRWef
Anyone care to bet on UKIP either getting 10% of vote, or even their first elected member in Scotland?
Looks like the SNP's EU Parliament support is eroding.
While UKIP is stagnant? Or it's all MOE froth?
Happy to offer you evens on UKIP not breaking 10 % in Scotland. If you think that 18% on a 160 Scottish sub sample has any veracity, also happy to give you a price against UKIP winning a Scottish EU seat.
"In the interview, Connolly also addressed the subject of Scottish independence, saying: “You must remember that the Union saved Scotland. Scotland was bankrupt and the English opened us up to their American and Canadian markets, from which we just flowered.
“And I dislike patriots. I’m deeply suspicious of patriotism. It’s paved with fools.”"
Desperate Flashy resorting to lies now.
'He said: “I don’t have great belief in the Union of England and Scotland. But I have a great belief in the union of the human race.”
On the referendum, he said: “I’m not gonna say. It’s too important for people like me to put in their tuppenceworth.”
He added: “I’m really tired of people saying England won the war and calling Britain England. I think that does more harm… But you must remember that the Union saved Scotland. Scotland was bankrupt and the English opened us up to their American and Canadian markets, from which we just flowered.
“And I dislike patriots. I’m deeply suspicious of patriotism. People following the band, you know? I don’t want to be part of it… It’s paved with fools.”'
Still, there's hope for you yet if you have to misquote a Celtic supporter and agree that British patriots are fools.
Connolly, probably the most popular Scotsman in the world,has stated very clearly that he despises bandwagon followers and "patriots" like you. You must be gutted.
The most popular Scotsman in the world?
Johnnie Walker.
(Owned by the English, of course).
True, true. Though arguably ineligible anyway, as not a real person.
There's Robbie Coltrane as well, but I am not sure he's actually Scottish. I suspect he is English and putting it on under an assumed name, in the same way I didn't think Harry Enfield's Stavros was actually Greek.
This is a drawback in trying to identify any popular Scot. The "real" ones are indistinguishable from what a parody would be like. Sean Connery is perhaps the most entertaining example.
@HurtsLlama - "Fair enough, Mr. Observer. Lets us accept your argument for the moment. What policies do you think HMG could introduce that would achieve those aims?"
I am not sure what more the government can do in the space of a year. It's up to the people who run businesses to come up to the plate. There is a lot of money sitting in corporate accounts that is not being spent. In the short term their actins are more likely to deliver the Tories an election win than anything George or Dave do.
FutbolBible @FutbolBible 13h Balotelli just uploaded this picture on his Instagram with the caption "We are all monkeys". #SayNoToRacism pic.twitter.com/XS0azNRWef
I also estimate that Helmer may be one of those defamed whose reputation was so low in the first place that it could not suffer from further tellings of untruth.
Can't ever remember that being noted by a court - iirc I remember convicted criminals have won libel/defamatory cases so it certainly wouldn't apply in Helmer's case.
There are a number of cases where the award of damages has been "one penny" (I have even found a 19th century case where the damages were a ha'penny).
The Carter Ruck website sets out practice:
If a claimant is successful in a claim what might be recovered?
Compensation for damage caused by the defamatory publication and to vindicate reputation, an apology (often in agreed terms) and an undertaking not to repeat the defamatory allegations are the main remedies usually sought by a libel claimant. However, it should be noted that the court cannot usually force a defendant to apologise, although if a court finds in the claimant's favour this will inevitably have a vindicatory effect on the claimant's reputation.
The damages can be from one penny to upwards of £250,000 depending on the seriousness of the allegations, where they were published and whether the defendant's conduct has aggravated the harm caused. In addition, any actual financial loss caused by the defamatory publication can be claimed.
I well remember the famous case of the "spanking colonel" who sat on Westminster Council. He was libelled by the tabloids who claimed he enjoyed rubbing a fine Scotch whisky into the spanked cheeks of the prostitute he had hired. The whisky story was found not to be true but the damages awarded, as most other details of the story were found to be true, were merely a penny.
Still costs go with cause, so winning a penny in damages does mean the libelling publication has to pay your reasonable litigation costs.
Anyone care to bet on UKIP either getting 10% of vote, or even their first elected member in Scotland?
Looks like the SNP's EU Parliament support is eroding.
While UKIP is stagnant? Or it's all MOE froth?
Happy to offer you evens on UKIP not breaking 10 % in Scotland. If you think that 18% on a 160 Scottish sub sample has any veracity, also happy to give you a price against UKIP winning a Scottish EU seat.
I would agree on MOE, but all the Scottish EU Parliament polls show a declining SNP vote. So it's not going to any one party in particular, but it is going.
On the bet. OK. £50(?) that UKIP get 10% or better in Scotland, in the EU Parliament election.
"In the interview, Connolly also addressed the subject of Scottish independence, saying: “You must remember that the Union saved Scotland. Scotland was bankrupt and the English opened us up to their American and Canadian markets, from which we just flowered.
“And I dislike patriots. I’m deeply suspicious of patriotism. It’s paved with fools.”"
Desperate Flashy resorting to lies now.
'He said: “I don’t have great belief in the Union of England and Scotland. But I have a great belief in the union of the human race.”
On the referendum, he said: “I’m not gonna say. It’s too important for people like me to put in their tuppenceworth.”
He added: “I’m really tired of people saying England won the war and calling Britain England. I think that does more harm… But you must remember that the Union saved Scotland. Scotland was bankrupt and the English opened us up to their American and Canadian markets, from which we just flowered.
“And I dislike patriots. I’m deeply suspicious of patriotism. People following the band, you know? I don’t want to be part of it… It’s paved with fools.”'
Still, there's hope for you yet if you have to misquote a Celtic supporter and agree that British patriots are fools.
Connolly, probably the most popular Scotsman in the world,has stated very clearly that he despises bandwagon followers and "patriots" like you. You must be gutted.
The most popular Scotsman in the world?
Johnnie Walker.
(Owned by the English, of course).
True, true. Though arguably ineligible anyway, as not a real person.
There's Robbie Coltrane as well, but I am not sure he's actually Scottish. I suspect he is English and putting it on under an assumed name, in the same way I didn't think Harry Enfield's Stavros was actually Greek.
This is a drawback in trying to identify any popular Scot. The "real" ones are indistinguishable from what a parody would be like. Sean Connery is perhaps the most entertaining example.
Robbie Coltrane was voted sixth in a poll of 2000 adults across the UK to find the 'most famous Scot', he was behind the Loch Ness Monster, Robert Burns, Sean Connery, Robert the Bruce and William Wallace.
That's not a bad position considering one is fictitious, 3 are dead, and the other is Spanish..!
On a Lib Dem price for a referendum, there's a very easy answer that suits both sides:
cut tuition fees.
If Willetts'[sp] proposals really do end up costing more than the previous system but with £6,000 fees, then return to the previous system and reduce fees to £6,000. Lib Dems feel better about themselves, Conservatives save money and get their referendum.
FutbolBible @FutbolBible 13h Balotelli just uploaded this picture on his Instagram with the caption "We are all monkeys". #SayNoToRacism pic.twitter.com/XS0azNRWef
Anyone care to bet on UKIP either getting 10% of vote, or even their first elected member in Scotland?
Looks like the SNP's EU Parliament support is eroding.
While UKIP is stagnant? Or it's all MOE froth?
Happy to offer you evens on UKIP not breaking 10 % in Scotland. If you think that 18% on a 160 Scottish sub sample has any veracity, also happy to give you a price against UKIP winning a Scottish EU seat.
I would agree on MOE, but all the Scottish EU Parliament polls show a declining SNP vote. So it's not going to any one party in particular, but it is going.
On the bet. OK. £50(?) that UKIP get 10% or better in Scotland, in the EU Parliament election.
Cool, £50 it is (on the basis of 2 decimal points, e.g. 9.99 would usually be rounded up to 10, but still counts as under?). I can drop Peter the Punter a line, or we can have a gentleman's agreement
@Mick_Pork Ed Miliband has been a very lucky general thus far.
Thus far he has basically had the kippers/Cammie and Clegg do all the work for him.
Come the GE campaign he will be front and centre with Europe long forgotten and fighting almost entirely on an economic focus. Seen much of his campaigning 'brilliance' so far? Nor will you. Little Ed approved and helped put in place the SLAB 'master strategy' for their 2011 scottish elections despite some of the wiser heads in SLAB (there are one or two) pointing out just how badly that same type strategy had backfired in 2007. Didn't go too well for little Ed and SLAB in 2011 as it turned out.
Importing American help won't cure that problem either. Axelrod can sharpen the focus on attacking Cammie as out of touch (like with Romney) but that won't be enough as long as little Ed is as 'formidable' as he is. Cammie, Clegg and little Ed all have real problems when it comes down to the voter putting their faith and trust in them personally.
"In the interview, Connolly also addressed the subject of Scottish independence, saying: “You must remember that the Union saved Scotland. Scotland was bankrupt and the English opened us up to their American and Canadian markets, from which we just flowered.
“And I dislike patriots. I’m deeply suspicious of patriotism. It’s paved with fools.”"
Desperate Flashy resorting to lies now.
'He said: “I don’t have great belief in the Union of England and Scotland. But I have a great belief in the union of the human race.”
Still, there's hope for you yet if you have to misquote a Celtic supporter and agree that British patriots are fools.
Connolly, probably the most popular Scotsman in the world,has stated very clearly that he despises bandwagon followers and "patriots" like you. You must be gutted.
The most popular Scotsman in the world?
Johnnie Walker.
(Owned by the English, of course).
True, true. Though arguably ineligible anyway, as not a real person.
There's Robbie Coltrane as well, but I am not sure he's actually Scottish. I suspect he is English and putting it on under an assumed name, in the same way I didn't think Harry Enfield's Stavros was actually Greek.
This is a drawback in trying to identify any popular Scot. The "real" ones are indistinguishable from what a parody would be like. Sean Connery is perhaps the most entertaining example.
Robbie Coltrane was voted sixth in a poll of 2000 adults across the UK to find the 'most famous Scot', he was behind the Loch Ness Monster, Robert Burns, Sean Connery, Robert the Bruce and William Wallace.
That's not a bad position considering one is fictitious, 3 are dead, and the other is Spanish..!
Who's the Spanish one, Sean Connery? He did do a most convincing Spanish accent in Highander. It was almost as good as Christophe Lambert's Scottish accent. The voice coach clearly told him "as long as you're unintelligible, the audience will accept you're Scottish".
It's interesting to think that just as some of us wonder what Shakespeare actually sounded like, in the future, because of Sean Connery, people will ashoom that a Shcottish acshent shounded like thish.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
Maybe go on tv and give a pro EU angle in a debate with Farage?!
On a Lib Dem price for a referendum, there's a very easy answer that suits both sides:
cut tuition fees.
If Willetts'[sp] proposals really do end up costing more than the previous system but with £6,000 fees, then return to the previous system and reduce fees to £6,000. Lib Dems feel better about themselves, Conservatives save money and get their referendum.
What are the repayments on the 'new style' tuition fees. I repay about a hundred a month, but I'm on the supersoft RPI /Base rates + 1% lower of (I think); not the RPI + 3.5%.
The loan book seems like a reasonable deal if you're looking at long term income (From the Gov't perspective) - but they've sold it off - which I can't quite figure out.
I'm guessing 90% of repayments these days have income as the limiting factor ?
Surely Andy Murray is the world's most famous living Scot.
I suspect not, because outside the UK, most people probably just assume he's English. The world generally if inaccurately uses England and Britain synonymously, like we use Holland to mean the Netherlands.
In any case the question was Scots who are popular, rather than famous.
Cameron and his referendum pledge: if a coalition has already been ruled out, how is this relevant? http://bit.ly/PNokUi
More to the point since the chances of any coalition (which is always very slim for those who have somehow forgotten why the lib dems wanted rid of FPTP) is self-evidently going to be hit even harder by a hugely diminished number of lib dem MPs, why even bother posturing over a theoretical referendum with theoretical coalition conditions?
With just a little over three weeks to the elections, you would think all parties would be rolling out the heavy artillery rather than the occasional sniping. Perhaps they are all just praying it goes away unnoticed?
But in all seriousness, I remember saying on here that I had my doubts about doing this cruise along the Kimberley. Yet it's turned out to be one of the peak travel experiences of my life. It is like nowhere else on earth. THE last great coastal wilderness on God's green earth. And the only real way to see it all is by boat. Hopefully with free bubbly.
It should be on everyone's bucket list.
It does look wonderful Sean. Went to the Whitsundays 25 years ago. My wife still regards it as our best trip ever and I hesitate to disagree with her. New Zealand had it's moments, but the Whitsundays ….
The amazing thing is the utter, spinetingling emptiness. The Kimberley is bigger than Germany, yet has a population of 50,000. Today I saw my first building, or sign of human habitation, in six days of constant voyaging. And it's not like it's all ice or desert, much of it is green and fertile. It's just so remote no one can get here. Even the aboriginal habitation was sparse (and now absent).
It is a vision of an edenic earth, a world before men, and before the Fall. And surely unique.
*guzzles more champagne*
I was impressed by the photo you posted the other day with the waterfalls. Can't remember the name of it.
Surely Andy Murray is the world's most famous living Scot.
I suspect not, because outside the UK, most people probably just assume he's English. The world generally if inaccurately uses England and Britain synonymously, like we use Holland to mean the Netherlands.
In any case the question was Scots who are popular, rather than famous.
Just because people think he is English does not mean he is not Scottish!
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them.
They could start by asking UKIP what Britain might look like under their tutelage.
They'd be better off convincing people Britain would look good with them governing instead of negative campaigning. The fact that people are sick of that style and unconvinced with the job the main parties are doing is precisely why the UKIP attacks aren't working. People are voting UKIP out of disillusionment, slinging more mud doesn't solve that problem but makes it worse.
Cameron has said that he would not be PM in a Coalition that did not agree to hold his 2017 referendum on EU membership. Assuming we take him at his word, has anyone asked him what he would be prepared to offer the Lib Dems in return for agreeing to this?
Given the importance he [claims] to attach to this one assumes he would be willing to pay quite a high price. How high?
It's the other way round. If the LibDems want to be in coalition government with the Conservatives, they will have to agree to this. If not, no coalition. It's not a question of 'price', it's a question of political reality - after all, anyone who knows anything about the Conservative Party will know that this is absolutely non-negotiable; the party simply will not accept anything other than a referendum by the end of 2017. It's frankly been difficult enough holding the line on the current compromise position of 2017, given the number of MPs and party members who want an earlier referendum.
In any case, I'm not so sure that the LibDems will be particularly fussed by it. It's been their own policy in the past, so why should they put their feet down this time? Even now they make vaguely supportive noises sometimes. And are they really going to stomp out in order to support the principle of denying people a choice?
Oh, Richard. You know I did pay attention when you lectured the site about how to conduct a negotiation, and why Cameron wouldn't set out his red lines before starting a negotiation with his European partners.
The Lib Dems now know what is really, really important to Cameron. I know they didn't cover themselves in glory during the last Coalition negotiations, but everyone is capable of learning from past mistakes. They know what Cameron really wants now. Do you have such a low opinion of the Deputy Prime Minster to think that he won't extract a price for it?
And if the Lib Dems are lucky the electoral arithmetic won't rule out a coalition with Labour. How much leverage does Cameron have in that situation?
After Sean T's mentions I decided to look up Kimberley and found this historical nugget on wiki of which I was completely unaware:
"The only Japanese force to land in Australia during World War II was a small reconnaissance party that landed in the Kimberley on 19 January 1944 to investigate reports that the Allies were building large bases in the region. The party consisted of four Japanese officers on board a small fishing boat. It investigated the York Sound region for a day and a night before returning to Kupang in Timor on 20 January. Upon returning to Japan in February, the junior officer who commanded the party suggested using 200 Japanese prison inmates to launch a guerrilla campaign in Australia. Nothing came of this and the officer was posted to other duties.[7]"
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
I just think they need some probing questions, like what should happen to the 400,000 French people who live in London or the 200,000 english people who live in France, should a large proportion of these return home?
Interesting European poll - the Swedes and Poles (the latter unsurprisingly) most in favour of sanctions against the Russians. The Germans (often portrayed here as equivocal) with us:
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
I just think they need some probing questions, like what should happen to the 400,000 French people who live in London or the 200,000 english people who live in France, should a large proportion of these return home?
No one is saying that these people would have to return home.
"Farage said he wanted to refrain from saying anything about Ukip's domestic policies until after the European elections, but said he would not throw out existing EU migrants.
He said: "You can't change the law retrospectively – anyone who's come here legally, you can't say you can't be here legally. You might say there's a slight change to your long-term benefit entitlement but you can't say to people who have legally come that you can't be here." "
Cameron declares that he won't offer concessions to Eurosceptics. (Or listen to the British people). Make him listen on May 22nd.
UK Prime Minister David Cameron has vowed not to make any further concessions to Eurosceptics despite a rising tide of anti-EU sentiment within Tory ranks and in the British public.
Nigel Farage's Ukip party came top of a YouGov poll for the Sunday Times, which asked "Which party would you vote for in the Europ elections? 31% of respondents said they would vote for Ukip, putting them three points clear of Labour at 28%. The Conservatives came in third with 19%, ahead of the Liberal Democrats at 9% and the Green Party at 8%.
According to the Sunday Times, Cameron faces calls from Conservative MPs to reclaim more powers from Brussels in order to counter the threat from Ukip, which is predicted to win a majority of votes in the European Parliament election in May.
Senior Conservative backbenchers said they would visit Downing Street after the vote, which takes place on 22 May, to demand that Cameron issues more extensive plans to repatriate powers from Brussels back to Westminster.
Leading figures on the Eurosceptic right, including John Redwood, Bernard Jenkin, Gerald Howarth and Bill Cash are all preparing to tell the prime minister that he must tackle the issue of the European Commission's attempts to impose the Charter of Fundamental Rights on Britain and of border controls for existing EU migrants.
However, Cameron privately dismissed the concerns of Tory Eurosceptics, saying he would not give an inch even if the Conservatives lose out in the European elections.
Anyone care to bet on UKIP either getting 10% of vote, or even their first elected member in Scotland?
Looks like the SNP's EU Parliament support is eroding.
While UKIP is stagnant? Or it's all MOE froth?
Happy to offer you evens on UKIP not breaking 10 % in Scotland. If you think that 18% on a 160 Scottish sub sample has any veracity, also happy to give you a price against UKIP winning a Scottish EU seat.
I would agree on MOE, but all the Scottish EU Parliament polls show a declining SNP vote. So it's not going to any one party in particular, but it is going.
On the bet. OK. £50(?) that UKIP get 10% or better in Scotland, in the EU Parliament election.
Cool, £50 it is (on the basis of 2 decimal points, e.g. 9.99 would usually be rounded up to 10, but still counts as under?). I can drop Peter the Punter a line, or we can have a gentleman's agreement
OK. No rounding up. Let Mr Punter know, or not, as you like.
I think I've sent you a message with my email address via Vanilla's message system. But I don't use it much, so I may have pressed the wrong button.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
That French figure suggests that London is the fifth-largest French city, just behind Toulouse and just ahead of Nice. That's astonishing and puts into perspective the conversation yesterday about which countries have other cities of significance comparable to their capital.
The French are developing such cities, clearly, but unfortunately for the rest of France, the most successful one is turning out to be London.
Tinfoil Nationalists were very upset yesterday. Salmond was being “smeared” by, er, being quoted. GQ, clearly part of the pan-Unionist BritNat propaganda media machine, had “leaked” excerpts of their interview with the First Minister to undermine, eclipse or otherwise divert attention from a speech Mr Salmond was giving in Belgium. Because, obviously.
No one is saying that these people would have to return home.
So you merely want to stop more coming in? keep things as they are now?
For someone who's so critical of the current arrangements, you seem strangely happy with the status quo.
I am critical of what has been allowed to happen, and I am not happy with the status quo, but I don't think it is fair to force people who have legally come here to leave.
Surely Andy Murray is the world's most famous living Scot.
I suspect not, because outside the UK, most people probably just assume he's English. The world generally if inaccurately uses England and Britain synonymously, like we use Holland to mean the Netherlands.
In any case the question was Scots who are popular, rather than famous.
Just because people think he is English does not mean he is not Scottish!
I'd reckon that football's greater reach would have Sir Alex Ferguson ahead of Murray, and I might also reckon on film actors also, Sean Connery, Ewan Macgregor.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
UKIP are gaining votes on the back of being perceived as anti establishment
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
UKIP's opponents need to come up with some positive reasons for not voting UKIP, rather than just attacking them. It's the same thing as with the NO campaign in Scotland.
I just think they need some probing questions, like what should happen to the 400,000 French people who live in London or the 200,000 english people who live in France, should a large proportion of these return home?
I'm willing to stand corrected, but I don't think that UKIP are proposing forced transfers of population between the UK and France.
UKIP MEP for East Midlands standing against Sun Political Editor's Dad, MEP for East Midlands
Disgraceful if this is true,the sun newspaper always did a good job on the political party they went against,that is until Tom newton dunn took over,the sun's political attacks on labour and miliband have been laughable to poor.
And Miliband is right. Cameron is absolutely terrified at the prospect of debating his main political rival. Sadly, his main political rival isn’t Miliband. It’s Nigel Farage.
Suppose there is a referendum and the British people vote to leave the EU, what will UKIP do when it turns out Westminster government is just as - or even more crap - than Brussels?
UKIP MEP for East Midlands standing against Sun Political Editor's Dad, MEP for East Midlands
Disgraceful if this is true,the sun newspaper always did a good job on the political party they went against,that is until Tom newto dunn took over,the sun's political attacks on labour and miliband have been laughable to poor.
It's true
"William "Bill" Newton Dunn (born 3 October 1941 in Greywell, Hampshire) is a British politician. He is a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands for the Liberal Democrats.
His son is Tom Newton Dunn, an award-winning journalist for The Sun newspaper. "
I am critical of what has been allowed to happen, and I am not happy with the status quo, but I don't think it is fair to force people who have legally come here to leave.
Well if you aren;t happy with the status quo, and you don;t intend to force people to leave, then how on earth do you intend to achieve your aims?
Let's face it, slashing immigration is very much a first step for UKIP. After that, pressure would be ratcheted up to make certain immigrant communities you disapprove of smaller.
I am critical of what has been allowed to happen, and I am not happy with the status quo, but I don't think it is fair to force people who have legally come here to leave.
Well if you aren;t happy with the status quo, and you don;t intend to force people to leave, then how on earth do you intend to achieve your aims?
Let's face it, slashing immigration is very much a first step for UKIP. After that, pressure would be ratcheted up to make certain immigrant communities you disapprove of smaller.
So, are you arguing that the hidden agenda of anyone who objects to mass immigration is actually mass deportation?
Comments
Come on, you know full well that people of relatively limited means would be bonkers to go to court even if they thought others had defamed them. After all, the PB Tories would be landed with a writ almost every day if we were all as litigious as lawyers wished we were.
Although I'm glad you take my uncle's point :-)
"...in Scotland, only one in 10 of those surveyed said they would be voting Ukip, compared with the 33% who plan to vote SNP and the 31% who said they would back Labour. Scottish support for the Tories in the European elections was put at 12%, while for the Liberal Democrats it was 7%."
The most recent Scottish EU Parliament poll was:
Lab 29%
Con 11%
UKIP 10%
LD 6%
SNP 37%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014_(United_Kingdom)#Scottish_polls
In rare defence of Sean, he has never claimed to be a Cockney, merely a Londoner.
But let's not start all that again..,
In future, Helmer should wear a Tin Foil Hat to block the mind warping beams projected by the Gays.
I fear you mistake my supply of the piece for ignorance of the motives behind it and laughable nature of it given we are talking about the Sun and it's 'outrage' over supposed homophobia.
And I'm not sure using Kurt Cobain for wisdom on anything's a particularly good idea ...
If he doesn't accept Dave will look "frit" because he knows he would be floored.Has working with the LibDems turned Cameron "yellow"?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/labour-goes-after-cameron-over-tv-debates/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=labour-goes-after-cameron-over-tv-debates
Case closed
If it does not, the Sun's been cr@p, either for not recording the conversation as standard, or lying.
It's precisely this sort of nonsense that is going to gain both 'Yes' and UKIP votes...
Which means the loss of reputation needs to result in third parties (say the man on the Clapham Omnibus) changing their actions as a result of the libel.
I somewhat doubt that any more people would 'shun and avoid' Roger Helmer than did prior to the Sun's publication. I also estimate that Helmer may be one of those defamed whose reputation was so low in the first place that it could not suffer from further tellings of untruth.
Damages of one pence perhaps?
If only we had a statutory system of press regulation set up under Royal Charter....
Given the importance he [claims] to attach to this, one assumes he would be willing to pay quite a high price. How high?
Lab 33
Con 30
UKIP 16
LD 14
Can anyone remember what the scores were last time? I can't find the blasted things anywhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley,_Nottinghamshire
Perhaps the most telling thing about the Cameroon reaction to the inevitable isn't yet another Cast Iron pledge but the rote repetition of a vote for Farge is a vote for Miliband. (which I guarantee you will be seeing far more of in the weeks and indeed months ahead.)
What makes that so amusing isn't just that it reinforces the sense of entitlement the exudes from the chumocracy 'those are out votes, how dare you vote for someone else etc.' but that this is almost all a problem of Cammie's own making.
See for yourself.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
The notable points being Cammies Veto flounce, Osbrowne's omnishambles, the Cast Iron IN/OUT refrendum pledge and the inexorable rise of the kipper vote while all that occurred. It certainly had zero to do with little Ed. While the Cameroons can indeed point to the fear and anger from unhappy tory Eurosceptics as reasons for Cammie's EU posturing, the fact remains that this is almost entirely a problem of their own making. Tory Euroscepticism didn't just magically pop up after 2010. Nor did Farage even have to do very much other than just sit back and enjoy the fallout as Cammie seemed intent on feeding the kipper fire on issues such as the EU and immigration.
In any case, I'm not so sure that the LibDems will be particularly fussed by it. It's been their own policy in the past, so why should they put their feet down this time? Even now they make vaguely supportive noises sometimes. And are they really going to stomp out in order to support the principle of denying people a choice?
#boyswhocriedwolf
Indeed. Exactly right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-27191333
Happy to offer you evens on UKIP not breaking 10 % in Scotland. If you think that 18% on a 160 Scottish sub sample has any veracity, also happy to give you a price against UKIP winning a Scottish EU seat.
There's Robbie Coltrane as well, but I am not sure he's actually Scottish. I suspect he is English and putting it on under an assumed name, in the same way I didn't think Harry Enfield's Stavros was actually Greek.
This is a drawback in trying to identify any popular Scot. The "real" ones are indistinguishable from what a parody would be like. Sean Connery is perhaps the most entertaining example.
I am not sure what more the government can do in the space of a year. It's up to the people who run businesses to come up to the plate. There is a lot of money sitting in corporate accounts that is not being spent. In the short term their actins are more likely to deliver the Tories an election win than anything George or Dave do.
The Carter Ruck website sets out practice:
If a claimant is successful in a claim what might be recovered?
Compensation for damage caused by the defamatory publication and to vindicate reputation, an apology (often in agreed terms) and an undertaking not to repeat the defamatory allegations are the main remedies usually sought by a libel claimant. However, it should be noted that the court cannot usually force a defendant to apologise, although if a court finds in the claimant's favour this will inevitably have a vindicatory effect on the claimant's reputation.
The damages can be from one penny to upwards of £250,000 depending on the seriousness of the allegations, where they were published and whether the defendant's conduct has aggravated the harm caused. In addition, any actual financial loss caused by the defamatory publication can be claimed.
I well remember the famous case of the "spanking colonel" who sat on Westminster Council. He was libelled by the tabloids who claimed he enjoyed rubbing a fine Scotch whisky into the spanked cheeks of the prostitute he had hired. The whisky story was found not to be true but the damages awarded, as most other details of the story were found to be true, were merely a penny.
Still costs go with cause, so winning a penny in damages does mean the libelling publication has to pay your reasonable litigation costs.
On the bet. OK. £50(?) that UKIP get 10% or better in Scotland, in the EU Parliament election.
That's not a bad position considering one is fictitious, 3 are dead, and the other is Spanish..!
cut tuition fees.
If Willetts'[sp] proposals really do end up costing more than the previous system but with £6,000 fees, then return to the previous system and reduce fees to £6,000. Lib Dems feel better about themselves, Conservatives save money and get their referendum.
With every establishment attack the VI rises
Sun's political editor attacks UKIP MEP that is standing against his Dad...
Come the GE campaign he will be front and centre with Europe long forgotten and fighting almost entirely on an economic focus. Seen much of his campaigning 'brilliance' so far? Nor will you. Little Ed approved and helped put in place the SLAB 'master strategy' for their 2011 scottish elections despite some of the wiser heads in SLAB (there are one or two) pointing out just how badly that same type strategy had backfired in 2007. Didn't go too well for little Ed and SLAB in 2011 as it turned out.
Importing American help won't cure that problem either. Axelrod can sharpen the focus on attacking Cammie as out of touch (like with Romney) but that won't be enough as long as little Ed is as 'formidable' as he is. Cammie, Clegg and little Ed all have real problems when it comes down to the voter putting their faith and trust in them personally.
It's interesting to think that just as some of us wonder what Shakespeare actually sounded like, in the future, because of Sean Connery, people will ashoom that a Shcottish acshent shounded like thish.
The loan book seems like a reasonable deal if you're looking at long term income (From the Gov't perspective) - but they've sold it off - which I can't quite figure out.
I'm guessing 90% of repayments these days have income as the limiting factor ?
Food for thought.
In any case the question was Scots who are popular, rather than famous.
Cameron and his referendum pledge: if a coalition has already been ruled out, how is this relevant? http://bit.ly/PNokUi
More to the point since the chances of any coalition (which is always very slim for those who have somehow forgotten why the lib dems wanted rid of FPTP) is self-evidently going to be hit even harder by a hugely diminished number of lib dem MPs, why even bother posturing over a theoretical referendum with theoretical coalition conditions?
Desperation, that's why.
Perhaps they are all just praying it goes away unnoticed?
They could start by asking UKIP what Britain might look like under their tutelage.
The Lib Dems now know what is really, really important to Cameron. I know they didn't cover themselves in glory during the last Coalition negotiations, but everyone is capable of learning from past mistakes. They know what Cameron really wants now. Do you have such a low opinion of the Deputy Prime Minster to think that he won't extract a price for it?
And if the Lib Dems are lucky the electoral arithmetic won't rule out a coalition with Labour. How much leverage does Cameron have in that situation?
"The only Japanese force to land in Australia during World War II was a small reconnaissance party that landed in the Kimberley on 19 January 1944 to investigate reports that the Allies were building large bases in the region. The party consisted of four Japanese officers on board a small fishing boat. It investigated the York Sound region for a day and a night before returning to Kupang in Timor on 20 January. Upon returning to Japan in February, the junior officer who commanded the party suggested using 200 Japanese prison inmates to launch a guerrilla campaign in Australia. Nothing came of this and the officer was posted to other duties.[7]"
www.twitter.com/IpsosMORI/status/461095767957336064/photo/1/large
"Farage said he wanted to refrain from saying anything about Ukip's domestic policies until after the European elections, but said he would not throw out existing EU migrants.
He said: "You can't change the law retrospectively – anyone who's come here legally, you can't say you can't be here legally. You might say there's a slight change to your long-term benefit entitlement but you can't say to people who have legally come that you can't be here." "
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/22/nigel-farage-ukip-european-elections-campaign
Roger Helmer @RogerHelmerMEP Apr 27
Cameron declares that he won't offer concessions to Eurosceptics. (Or listen to the British people). Make him listen on May 22nd.
UK Prime Minister David Cameron has vowed not to make any further concessions to Eurosceptics despite a rising tide of anti-EU sentiment within Tory ranks and in the British public.
Nigel Farage's Ukip party came top of a YouGov poll for the Sunday Times, which asked "Which party would you vote for in the Europ elections? 31% of respondents said they would vote for Ukip, putting them three points clear of Labour at 28%. The Conservatives came in third with 19%, ahead of the Liberal Democrats at 9% and the Green Party at 8%.
According to the Sunday Times, Cameron faces calls from Conservative MPs to reclaim more powers from Brussels in order to counter the threat from Ukip, which is predicted to win a majority of votes in the European Parliament election in May.
Senior Conservative backbenchers said they would visit Downing Street after the vote, which takes place on 22 May, to demand that Cameron issues more extensive plans to repatriate powers from Brussels back to Westminster.
Leading figures on the Eurosceptic right, including John Redwood, Bernard Jenkin, Gerald Howarth and Bill Cash are all preparing to tell the prime minister that he must tackle the issue of the European Commission's attempts to impose the Charter of Fundamental Rights on Britain and of border controls for existing EU migrants.
However, Cameron privately dismissed the concerns of Tory Eurosceptics, saying he would not give an inch even if the Conservatives lose out in the European elections.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/uk-pm-david-cameron-defies-eurosceptics-despite-ukip-surge-polls-1446303
We'll see soon enough who blinks first because it certainly wasn't the tory rebels on the Syria or immigration votes.
The Krankies have told how they were secret swingers who slept with a string of lovers in their heyday.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/scots-stars-krankies-reveal-wild-1089897
This story ruined my childhood memories.
Do not read the first two comments below the line on that article.
I think I've sent you a message with my email address via Vanilla's message system. But I don't use it much, so I may have pressed the wrong button.
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com
The French are developing such cities, clearly, but unfortunately for the rest of France, the most successful one is turning out to be London.
Just got your bike message, and replied.
So you merely want to stop more coming in? keep things as they are now?
For someone who's so critical of the current arrangements, you seem strangely happy with the status quo.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/alex-salmond-receives-a-lesson-from-the-school-of-foreign-policy-hard-knocks/
Tinfoil Nationalists were very upset yesterday. Salmond was being “smeared” by, er, being quoted. GQ, clearly part of the pan-Unionist BritNat propaganda media machine, had “leaked” excerpts of their interview with the First Minister to undermine, eclipse or otherwise divert attention from a speech Mr Salmond was giving in Belgium. Because, obviously.
One of the things Salmond admires about Putin:He ignored Cameron begging him to undermine #IndyRef pic.twitter.com/10S4dpk3lR
Phil @Philgry 2h
Me and my friend Vlad: Cameron relaxes with macho Putin. http://owl.li/weaJH #indyref #bettertogether @AmnestyScotland @AmnestyUK#YES
LOL
Poor old PB tories.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/why-ukip-matters-in-the-scottish-independence-referendum/
Got it & replied.
Boris is searingly brilliant on the idiocy and wrong-headedness of our immigration policy http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/04/29/boris-johnson-attacks-crazy-immigration-crackdown …
The Sun @TheSunNewspaper
Boris lashes out at David Cameron for 'not doing anything' about flood of EU immigrants: http://bit.ly/QRjfeX pic.twitter.com/Fh5lWUHKkI
Doesn't Boris have anything better to do than stick the knife into the incompetent fop?
Scandinavian Kitchen @Scanditwitchen 12h
Tube strike? Try these alternative ways to get to work #helpful #boris #strike pic.twitter.com/gw7ljtmtIS
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/29/ukip-conservative-party-members-_n_5231176.html?1398769299
Disgraceful if this is true,the sun newspaper always did a good job on the political party they went against,that is until Tom newton dunn took over,the sun's political attacks on labour and miliband have been laughable to poor.
And Miliband is right. Cameron is absolutely terrified at the prospect of debating his main political rival. Sadly, his main political rival isn’t Miliband. It’s Nigel Farage.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100269373/theres-not-going-to-be-a-tv-debate-and-by-calling-for-one-ed-miliband-has-already-lost-it/
"William "Bill" Newton Dunn (born 3 October 1941 in Greywell, Hampshire) is a British politician. He is a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands for the Liberal Democrats.
His son is Tom Newton Dunn, an award-winning journalist for The Sun newspaper. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Newton_Dunn
Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
The Sun's Political Editor, and Arsenal FC season ticket holder. Also follow @Sun_Politics for breaking Westminster news.
Well if you aren;t happy with the status quo, and you don;t intend to force people to leave, then how on earth do you intend to achieve your aims?
Let's face it, slashing immigration is very much a first step for UKIP. After that, pressure would be ratcheted up to make certain immigrant communities you disapprove of smaller.
In the past he's said, homosexuality should be treated like a mental illness.
Charming fellow.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/27201384