@TSE - My dear fellow, if under your tenure as Supreme Dictator, the Church of England is not forbidden from using any translation of the Bible other than the King James Authorised Version, then what in the name of heaven is the point of having a Supreme Dictator in the first place?
Off topic, but you pays your money and you take your choice.
G'dn front page: Cameron accused of blackmail over threat to leave EU T'graph front page: Cameron winning major allies to prevent federalist leading EU
Two very different views and interpretations of the latest showdown. Or maybe they are both right, and the blackmail is working by getting more allies.
I assume that as Merkel has backed Junker it is almost certain he will get the job, and that Cameron is just trying to sound tough, and of course he was never alone in being opposed to Junker being the president of the Commission, but if he could manage to prevent it I guess he could get a boost for awhile, though I cannot see 'preventing major Federalist from being Commission President' drawing back in many Cameron doubters. In fact, not succeeding might well in the short term be better, as I presume any other candidate proposed for the job would hold pretty much identical views as Junker on the EU anyway, so better for Cameron to just complain about it.
Wasn't there a TV debate between the candidates? I don't see how Cameron can possibly get his way on this.
I doubt he can either, but IIRC the debates were a sham anyway, because there is nothing in the law that says the Commission president must be one of those candidates, merely that when making the choice the Council (I think it's them, although I get confused between such things as the European Council and the Council of Europe, which are not the same thing) must 'take into account' the result of the election.
The candidates and the parliament are choosing to interpret it in their own way, but the people of Europe did not vote for a president, the law doesn't say the largest group will have its candidate become president, so Cameron would not be subverting any democratic mandate by insisting upo someone else.
But as any candidate would be heavily pro-EU, how could they not be, I suspect it is all just smoke and noise for its own sake. The fact they went through with that debate was probably solely to make anyone considering anyone but those candidates think twice, but trying to present the decision as a fait accompli, ie, 'We've already promised the people of Europe it will be one of these people; sure legally it's a bit iffy, but you really want to cause a kerfuffle over this? Is it worth it?'
@TSE - My dear fellow, if under your tenure as Supreme Dictator, the Church of England is not forbidden from using any translation of the Bible other than the King James Authorised Version, then what in the name of heaven is the point of having a Supreme Dictator in the first place?
Quite right, Mr. Nabavi. The CofE must also be forced to use the BCP for its liturgy and drop all the happy-clappy crap.
Truly, has there ever been a Labour Leader of the calibre of Ed Miliband? His name is a Byword for Authority and Decision; his Impeccable Baritone made all the more Resonant by the Sheer Force of his Character and the Innate Power of his Ideas.
Sometimes it is the prerogative of Great Thoughts to be before their time; yet others which were once considered Great must sadly wither when faced with confronted with the Cruel Taskmaster that is History. It is our Tremendous Privilege to live in one of the Great Ages of Civilisation, thanks alone to the Sterling Mind of Ed Miliband. After his Fundamental Reorientation of Labour as the One Nation Party, the Swing Voters at the Dog and Duck cannot contain their Excitement at his Prophetic and Fundamental Idea: Predistribution. We can pay for Predistribution using a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Under the Vicious Cuts of the Tory Toffs, fine Public Servants Up and Down the Country have been Humiliated. Chris Smith was made a Scape Goat at the Environment Agency, despite being the first ever Chair to implement the Ground Breaking Diversity Initiative of ordering Equali-Tea Gay Awareness Mugs. The most Inspirational Speaker of a Generation - Michael Martin MP - was hounded out just for quite properly allowing Tory Toff Damien Green to be Arrested, despite being Scottish. Dame Suzi Leather was Persecuted for her Fine Campaign against the Iniquity of Private Schooling (you may not know, but Private Schooling is also known as Public Schooling to the Tory Vermin). The Tory Toffs have even tried to cut the Union Funding of the Labour Party! We can cement the New Order by Legislating for Gender Equality, Ethnic Diversity and Quotas by Sexuality throughout the Civil Service; under Labour, every worker should be compelled to join a Union; we should legislate to ensure every Union is adequately Compensated for their Sterling Work by the Taxpayer, and each Union can show their Eternal Gratitude to Ed Miliband by contributing Half of their Annual Taxpayer Revenues to the Peoples' Party. This can be paid for using a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Miliband's Forebearance and Leadership are not limited to the Narrow Confines of the British Isles. Alone, he stood tall and rejected the Drumbeats of War from the Eton Toff. The peace in Syria, and indeed, throughout the Middle East today, can be attributed to Miliband and Miliband alone. I believe this Supreme Act of Service to the World deserves the Utmost Commemmoration. Mere Nobel Peace Prizes and other Trinkets will not Suffice: throughout the Ages, Miliband will be mentioned in the same breath as Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and Herman Van Rompuy. This is why I propose replacing the Statue of Churchill in Parliament Square with one of Ed. This can be paid for with a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Though Cowards Flinch and Traitors Sneer, We'll Keep the Red Flag Flying Here. The Red Flag will be paid for with a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Collectively, the have the same right to represent their members as any other interest group.
No they don't, any more than judges would. That is because they are not just a membership organisation, but have a special constitutional position.
A truly idiotic comment from you.
Exactly what "membership" do judges head?
Blimey, this statement from the C.of E. is really driving the bigots to the surface.
I'm mystified as to why you think anything I said is bigoted (and against whom, exactly?), but, leaving that aside, yes, you are right: judges do not represent members. Nor do clergy, and especially not clergy of the Established Church.
@TSE - My dear fellow, if under your tenure as Supreme Dictator, the Church of England is not forbidden from using any translation of the Bible other than the King James Authorised Version, then what in the name of heaven is the point of having a Supreme Dictator in the first place?
I understand, I need to fully flesh out my policies.
I came up with a new policy for my tenure.
Anyone wanting to have children will need the approval of the state.
They will need to prove their gene pool is deep, have the financial resources to look after their offspring.
@TSE - My dear fellow, if under your tenure as Supreme Dictator, the Church of England is not forbidden from using any translation of the Bible other than the King James Authorised Version, then what in the name of heaven is the point of having a Supreme Dictator in the first place?
Collectively, the have the same right to represent their members as any other interest group.
No they don't, any more than judges would. That is because they are not just a membership organisation, but have a special constitutional position.
A truly idiotic comment from you.
Exactly what "membership" do judges head?
Blimey, this statement from the C.of E. is really driving the bigots to the surface.
I'm mystified as to why you think anything I said is bigoted (and against whom, exactly?), but, leaving that aside, yes, you are right: judges do not represent members. Nor do clergy, and especially not clergy of the Established Church.
Keep digging, bigot.
You yourself admit they are a membership organisation in your previous post, they certainly represent themselves and the interests of their worshippers e.g. graves and church buildings.
Churches may not be above the law but neither are they below it.
Collectively, the have the same right to represent their members as any other interest group.
No they don't, any more than judges would. That is because they are not just a membership organisation, but have a special constitutional position.
A truly idiotic comment from you.
Exactly what "membership" do judges head?
Blimey, this statement from the C.of E. is really driving the bigots to the surface.
It's bigoted to think an established church should tread carefully before wading into political debate, and that this does not appear to have been the case here, given the church knows full well this will be framed as an attack but are using a technical change which does not even appear to be necessary as the need to treat remains with care and dignity will be covered in the bill apparently, as a smokescreen?
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself. I have no ill feeling toward them, they can play politics if they like and especially if their members want them to play politics, but that statement was thoroughly unconvincing to me that the graves issue was the genuine thrust of their opposition, given the official reply which seems to cover everything they claim they are asking for.
Something about UKIP's Newark candidate scares me. Never mind his political views, it's his moustache which looks it's come straight from 1980s gay porn that disturbs me.
Homophobe
Comrade Sunilsky
Why is the background to your Avatar purple on PB and red on twitter?
Is this duplicity?
Shouldn't it be pure sunil?
Do you think I should change it to purple on Twitter, Comrade Chancellor?
Quite right, Mr. Nabavi. The CofE must also be forced to use the BCP for its liturgy and drop all the happy-clappy crap.
I find the modern wording of services almost physically painful, like music sung out of tune. The whole idea is based on a monumental misconception IMO: you don't go to Church to hear ordinary everyday stuff. And it's not even consistent: if they REALLY wanted to use modern, everyday language, the responses would go like this:
"The Lord be with you"
"And with you too mate"
Having said that, as a devout atheist my views are probably not very relevant!
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself.
Take a look at The Screaming Eagles' comment then.
As citizens, clergymen have as much right to participate in the political debate as anybody else, if not moreso.
Something about UKIP's Newark candidate scares me. Never mind his political views, it's his moustache which looks it's come straight from 1980s gay porn that disturbs me.
Homophobe
Comrade Sunilsky
Why is the background to your Avatar purple on PB and red on twitter?
Is this duplicity?
Shouldn't it be pure sunil?
Do you think I should change it to purple on Twitter, Comrade Chancellor?
Only if you grow a moustache, join the Handlebar Club and attend its Annual General Meeting.
This, I think, is a photograph of said club's AGM attendees although it may be of a more recent UKIP husting in Newark.
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself.
Take a look at The Screaming Eagles' comment then.
As citizens, clergymen have as much right to participate in the political debate as anybody else, if not moreso.
I do not think @TSE is being 100% sincere in all his comments(except the bits about being dictator, those are serious), but thinking that a church that is part of the State should not interfere with other parts of the State is a point of view (not my own, not quite, but a view nonetheless), not a bigoted position, and you were pretty clear that 'the bigots' were coming to the surface, plural.
I am fine with clergymen participating in political debate (I don't really see why they might have 'more' of a right to do so than anyone else because of their self imposed moral authority), but if its going to be framed as a moral intervention, it should be more plausible than this particular statement. If they just want to favour one political view, they can choose to do that (it might be inadvisable, but they can do it if they want), but the weakness of their argument on that point for this one makes it look like they want to make a political point but wish to pretend it is not political.
Interesting how the non-ironic wearing of moustaches is out of fashion at the moment. Everything else is okay — designer stubble, beards without moustaches, bushy beards, clean-shaven, goatees.
Something about UKIP's Newark candidate scares me. Never mind his political views, it's his moustache which looks it's come straight from 1980s gay porn that disturbs me.
Homophobe
Comrade Sunilsky
Why is the background to your Avatar purple on PB and red on twitter?
Is this duplicity?
Shouldn't it be pure sunil?
Do you think I should change it to purple on Twitter, Comrade Chancellor?
Only if you grow a moustache, join the Handlebar Club and attend its Annual General Meeting.
This, I think, is a photograph of said club's AGM attendees although it may be of a more recent UKIP husting in Newark.
Perhaps we should have a Directly Elected Archbishop of Canterbury.
I made a few bob on the last Papal election.
So I'm looking for more opportunities.
As an aside, Robert and his Dad once mentioned that during the Papal election in 2005, PB started getting a visitor or two with an IP address from Vatican City.
Something about UKIP's Newark candidate scares me. Never mind his political views, it's his moustache which looks it's come straight from 1980s gay porn that disturbs me.
Homophobe
Comrade Sunilsky
Why is the background to your Avatar purple on PB and red on twitter?
Is this duplicity?
Shouldn't it be pure sunil?
Do you think I should change it to purple on Twitter, Comrade Chancellor?
Only if you grow a moustache, join the Handlebar Club and attend its Annual General Meeting.
This, I think, is a photograph of said club's AGM attendees although it may be of a more recent UKIP husting in Newark.
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself.
Take a look at The Screaming Eagles' comment then.
As citizens, clergymen have as much right to participate in the political debate as anybody else, if not moreso.
As citizens they can do what they like. They just need to get their arses out of the Lord's first.
Could they have finally found an issue which could garner them significant support in more than one or two areas? Everyone will get their turn I guess.
The politics of it are rather odd. The anti-fracking movement is largely a collection of true grass-roots local groups - I know lots of people, not normally politically active, who are putting serious effort into opposing fracking. However, these are not at all the kind of people who will be attracted by the Caroline Lucas anti-prosperity,anti-capitalist, far-left style of Greenism. Meanwhile UKIP, which ought to be in an ideal position to capitalise on anti-fracking protest votes in leafy Tory strongholds, is strongly pro-fracking.
I don't think this is politically stable. Someone other than the Greens will break ranks in order to harvest this low-hanging political fruit. I expect it to be UKIP.
I think we might well see the Greens back off a bit from some of the more leftwing economic policies (a bit like some of the more centrist Green parties in the likes of Germany), precisely so that they can make in-roads into the Tory shires which are exercised by fracking.
Meanwhile, at the same time, UKIP are going in the opposite direction and becoming more left-wing economically, as I've long been predicting, because they know most of their voters are vehemently anti-business and anti-rich, and do not want neverending austerity.
They're not vehemently anti-rich or anti-business on principle. They equate the long-term prospects of the country with the long-term prospects of their kith and kin which makes them vehemently anti the current political class and the lobbyists who own them.
I do not think @TSE is being 100% sincere in all his comments(except the bits about being dictator, those are serious), but thinking that a church that is part of the State should not interfere with other parts of the State is a point of view (not my own, not quite, but a view nonetheless), not a bigoted position, and you were pretty clear that 'the bigots' were coming to the surface, plural.
I am fine with clergymen participating in political debate (I don't really see why they might have 'more' of a right to do so than anyone else because of their self imposed moral authority), but if its going to be framed as a moral intervention, it should be more plausible than this particular statement. If they just want to favour one political view, they can choose to do that (it might be inadvisable, but they can do it if they want), but the weakness of their argument on that point for this one makes it look like they want to make a political point but wish to pretend it is not political.
Considering C.of E. bishops are in the House of Lords precisely to "interfere" with the State, it is ridiculous to complain when they do.
The fact they are citizens with full democratic rights means for that reason alone the response should not be they should keep silent beacause they are simply clergy, as TSE did.
They perhaps have more right to speak out as they represent a valid interest group, just as leaders of political parties and of pressure groups do.
Interesting how the non-ironic wearing of moustaches is out of fashion at the moment. Everything else is okay — designer stubble, beards without moustaches, bushy beards, clean-shaven, goatees.
You have to go back to the 1950s to see a non-ironic moustachioed Prime Minister.
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself.
Take a look at The Screaming Eagles' comment then.
As citizens, clergymen have as much right to participate in the political debate as anybody else, if not moreso.
As citizens they can do what they like. They just need to get their arses out of the Lord's first.
Bishops in the House of Lords are appointed by Her Majesty.
Just like everyone else there.
Has some 'bigot gas' been released into the atmosphere?
Something about UKIP's Newark candidate scares me. Never mind his political views, it's his moustache which looks it's come straight from 1980s gay porn that disturbs me.
a big increase in Romanian love all round in a week
UKIP up 19 LD up 30 Lab up 33 Con up 14
Regarding the "earthquake" @MikeSmithson keeps referring to, thinking he is being clever, Farage described potentially winning the Euros as an earthquake, not the locals. Dont know why Mike keeps making this mistake
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
Labour will always be ahead on the NHS anyway, but whether the UK is ready for more taxes to go up uner a Labour government I'm not sure.
Remember at the last election Labour's NI increase was named "the jobs tax" by the Tories and it was one of the most effective aspects of the Con's otherwise terrible 2010 campaign.
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
Labour will always be ahead on the NHS anyway, but whether the UK is ready for more taxes to go up I'm not sure.
Labours tax bombshell. They won't win in 2015 on the decrepit old cesspit of the NHS. Unless they are planning to provide an actual NHS rather then one we pay for about 6 times
Perhaps we should have a Directly Elected Archbishop of Canterbury.
I made a few bob on the last Papal election.
So I'm looking for more opportunities.
As an aside, Robert and his Dad once mentioned that during the Papal election in 2005, PB started getting a visitor or two with an IP address from Vatican City.
To be fair, that's to elect a bishop, someone who is probably a bishop already and almost certainly a priest.
The last Pope not to already be a priest was already a deacon i.e. clergy.
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
I think UKIP will suffer over the NHS.. the other parties are already constantly misrepresenting them and it will only get worse when UKIP announce cuts to middle management. It will be reported as "UKIP will slash NHS budget" by people that care about power more than results
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spnding significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
Labour will always be ahead on the NHS anyway, but whether the UK is ready for more taxes to go up I'm not sure.
Labours tax bombshell. They won't win in 2015 on the decrepit old cesspit of the NHS. Unless they are planning to provide an actual NHS rather then one we pay for about 6 times
Blimey Labour going tax and spend this far out from the election. Their policy polling must be running in a parallel universe full of thick lefties.
Perhaps we should have a Directly Elected Archbishop of Canterbury.
I made a few bob on the last Papal election.
So I'm looking for more opportunities.
As an aside, Robert and his Dad once mentioned that during the Papal election in 2005, PB started getting a visitor or two with an IP address from Vatican City.
To be fair, that's to elect a bishop, someone who is probably a bishop already and almost certainly a priest.
The last Pope not to already be a priest was already a deacon i.e. clergy.
When J Christ of Nazereth committed criminal damage on the money lenders tables, he made sure he'd got a few quid on St Peter to be the first pope beforehand . Bet void though, not open to founding members of the religion or God and God's immediate family. No wonder he went bananas
Thanks for all the helpful (and otherwise) advice downthread - will pass it on. She's not my aunt and I've not met her, so I don't really know all the details except that it was a private firm, but I knew PB would rally round with helpful points.
Incidentally, I had my first-ever call from the Sun today, asking if I'd like to say something critical about Anna Soubry's remarks that immigration isn't an issue in Broxtowe and some constituents are racists. I declined - there's actually not a lot of difference between us on this.
It is perhaps his physical resemblence and antedeluvian that does it.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
I think UKIP will suffer over the NHS.. the other parties are already constantly misrepresenting them and it will only get worse when UKIP announce cuts to middle management. It will be reported as "UKIP will slash NHS budget" by people that care about power more than results
It doesn't quite fit their theme but the EU wants the NHS privatized so other countries can bid for the work (same as Royal Mail) and the LibLabCon all know it and are all lying about it. That's more of a No2EU line though.
As for the welfare state generally the line that it's basically been hijacked by the guardianista middle class to provide very well paid non-jobs for liberal arts graduates should go down fairly well in the current climate because immigration dwarfs everything else e.g. if you can't get treated on the NHS anyway cos of it being overloaded then "save the NHS" rhetoric doesn't have as much play.
It is perhaps his physical resemblence and antedeluvian that does it.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
Mr Rahman pays tens of thousands of pounds to Channel S, a London-based Bengali television station influential with his Bangladeshi base. It gives him fawning coverage. He pays £50,000 a year from council funds into the personal bank account of Channel S’s chief reporter.
But it is the mayor’s politics of racial and faith favouritism which are doing most to poison the atmosphere. Tower Hamlets is a genuinely mixed borough, 45 per cent white and 32 per cent Bangladeshi, and no part of it is a ghetto.
Yet of Mr Rahman’s 18 councillors elected last week, all are Bangladeshi (and 17 are men). He has never appointed a non-Bangladeshi to his council cabinet, though he says that is because none will join.
This is happening in the heart of London. A major borough has been transformed into a third world Bangladeshi corrupt electoral system. Yet it gets barely any coverage at all from the BBC, while an offhand comment by Nigel Farage about Romanians gets plastered wall to wall.
It is perhaps his physical resemblence and antedeluvian that does it.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
Wasn't there a TV debate between the candidates? I don't see how Cameron can possibly get his way on this.
I doubt he can either, but IIRC the debates were a sham anyway, because there is nothing in the law that says the Commission president must be one of those candidates, merely that when making the choice the Council (I think it's them, although I get confused between such things as the European Council and the Council of Europe, which are not the same thing) must 'take into account' the result of the election.
The candidates and the parliament are choosing to interpret it in their own way, but the people of Europe did not vote for a president, the law doesn't say the largest group will have its candidate become president, so Cameron would not be subverting any democratic mandate by insisting upo someone else.
But as any candidate would be heavily pro-EU, how could they not be, I suspect it is all just smoke and noise for its own sake. The fact they went through with that debate was probably solely to make anyone considering anyone but those candidates think twice, but trying to present the decision as a fait accompli, ie, 'We've already promised the people of Europe it will be one of these people; sure legally it's a bit iffy, but you really want to cause a kerfuffle over this? Is it worth it?'
Yes, it's the European Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council. Lisbon says the European Council must note Juncker, but there's nothing making them select him if they don't want. Since the selection must be unanimous, Cameron can win this easily by simply refusing to say "yes" to Juncker indefinitely.
But the door swings both ways: if Cameron can prevent Juncker indefinitely, Merkel can prevent somebody else indefinitely too. So the question becomes: if not Juncker, then who?
If my maths is correct, there are thirteen heads of government in the European Council who represent national parties in the EPP, three more than are in PES. So whoever the winner is, it'd have to be a current/former head of government from an EPP national party (PES would get the second prize, which is the High Representative - aren't there rumors Catherine Ashton will keep this for another term?). If I was doing the appointing it'd be John Bruton (Ireland) or Donald Tusk (Poland), but since I am always wrong in these things it'd probably be someone else
Every lefties favourite borough. Dont dare question the fact that barely anyone speaks English and street signs are in Bengali
There has always been immigration, its always been like this
Given the disgrace towards democracy that has happened there, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for central government to step it and run new elections there, with postal and proxy voting banned, and outside people counting the vote. The borough is only 30% or so Bangladeshi, yet no-one outside that group gets near political power. It's disgusting, and left-wingers are too cowardly to condemn it.
Perhaps we should have a Directly Elected Archbishop of Canterbury.
I made a few bob on the last Papal election.
So I'm looking for more opportunities.
As an aside, Robert and his Dad once mentioned that during the Papal election in 2005, PB started getting a visitor or two with an IP address from Vatican City.
To be fair, that's to elect a bishop, someone who is probably a bishop already and almost certainly a priest.
The last Pope not to already be a priest was already a deacon i.e. clergy.
It is perhaps his physical resemblence and antedeluvian that does it.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
Every lefties favourite borough. Dont dare question the fact that barely anyone speaks English and street signs are in Bengali
There has always been immigration, its always been like this
Given the disgrace towards democracy that has happened there, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for central government to step it and run new elections there, with postal and proxy voting banned, and outside people counting the vote. The borough is only 30% or so Bangladeshi, yet no-one outside that group gets near political power. It's disgusting, and left-wingers are too cowardly to condemn it.
English the first language of no one in the house hold
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
A rise in national insurance is insane. On employees, it's a completely arbitrary and regressive tax, which goes from 11% to 2% as you get richer. On companies, its a tax which hurts companies which employ people more over those that run on machines. It is literally a jobs tax. Only the truly economically stupid would raise taxes this way.
It is perhaps his physical resemblence and antedeluvian that does it.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
The borough is only 30% or so Bangladeshi, yet no-one outside that group gets near political power. It's disgusting
So it's the outcome of the elections as well as the questions over the electoral processes that has you so exercised?
The outcome of the elections isn't exactly independent of massive electoral abuse, is it?
Your statement seemed to indicate that you find the outcome distasteful in itself.
I actually do find it distasteful when someone picks a cabinet entirely of one race, in a highly ethnically mixed borough, but that isn't the electoral process. I find it curious that that is the part of the post you decided to comment on though. Unfazed by the story, I guess?
I actually do find it distasteful when someone picks a cabinet entirely of one race
I bet there are many, many local authorities out there for you to be disgusted by!
In ethnically diverse boroughs? Perhaps you could link another council where every member comes from an ethnic group making up just a third of the borough?
The borough is only 30% or so Bangladeshi, yet no-one outside that group gets near political power. It's disgusting
So it's the outcome of the elections as well as the questions over the electoral processes that has you so exercised?
The outcome of the elections isn't exactly independent of massive electoral abuse, is it?
Your statement seemed to indicate that you find the outcome distasteful in itself.
I actually do find it distasteful when someone picks a cabinet entirely of one race, in a highly ethnically mixed borough, but that isn't the electoral process. I find it curious that that is the part of the post you decided to comment on though. Unfazed by the story, I guess?
Actually, you have been quite consistent on this.
Ukippers' chief complaint seems to be the way minority and, sometimes, majority opinions have been excluded from the public sphere. Cameron's chumocracy is an extreme example of this.
So your opinion is so much more valid than the usual it's-a-Labour-borough and we've-lost-control-of-the-honeypot sore losers who usually complain about Tower Hamlets. Funny how they only complain when diversity affects their interests.
I actually do find it distasteful when someone picks a cabinet entirely of one race
I bet there are many, many local authorities out there for you to be disgusted by!
In ethnically diverse boroughs? Perhaps you could link another council where every member comes from an ethnic group making up just a third of the borough?
It looks as though the journalist has used the words "his retired colonel’s moustache" merely to describe the style of moustache, but that those words have been misunderstood by the sub-editor who transplanted the words "Retired colonel, 70, says..." into the sub-heading at the top.
Please give me the exact time and date of your call from Prince Charles and the number he was calling from and I will contact him to verify that conversation.
The rest of your unverifiable assertions will be ignored.
Joan Veon was (sadly no longer with us) a professional journalist, giving all her sources and references. She established that Prince Charles was the driving force behind the current 'sustainable development', Agenda 21 basis for world government. He was working from within the United Nations, controlling the Prince's Business Leaders Forum driving the Public Private partnership (seizing the world's government assets into private control) and identifying ways to cut the human population using clandestine means. The UN being the method of bringing the USA back within the global power structure, controlled by Charles from Britain. If you won't read or listen to Joan Veon, then of course you will be absolutely sure The Tap Blog has no sources. Prince Charles communicates with me via his assistants, and of course they deny he has a senior role in global government. Sustainable development will kill far more human beings than lebensraum. Prince Charles is the new version of Hitler in terms of mass killing on a global scale, not Vladimir Putin. As usual what you accuse is what you are.
Comments
Exactly what "membership" do judges head?
Blimey, this statement from the C.of E. is really driving the bigots to the surface.
The candidates and the parliament are choosing to interpret it in their own way, but the people of Europe did not vote for a president, the law doesn't say the largest group will have its candidate become president, so Cameron would not be subverting any democratic mandate by insisting upo someone else.
But as any candidate would be heavily pro-EU, how could they not be, I suspect it is all just smoke and noise for its own sake. The fact they went through with that debate was probably solely to make anyone considering anyone but those candidates think twice, but trying to present the decision as a fait accompli, ie, 'We've already promised the people of Europe it will be one of these people; sure legally it's a bit iffy, but you really want to cause a kerfuffle over this? Is it worth it?'
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8fglspvdzl/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140530.pdf
For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horse
King James Version
Sometimes it is the prerogative of Great Thoughts to be before their time; yet others which were once considered Great must sadly wither when faced with confronted with the Cruel Taskmaster that is History. It is our Tremendous Privilege to live in one of the Great Ages of Civilisation, thanks alone to the Sterling Mind of Ed Miliband. After his Fundamental Reorientation of Labour as the One Nation Party, the Swing Voters at the Dog and Duck cannot contain their Excitement at his Prophetic and Fundamental Idea: Predistribution. We can pay for Predistribution using a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Under the Vicious Cuts of the Tory Toffs, fine Public Servants Up and Down the Country have been Humiliated. Chris Smith was made a Scape Goat at the Environment Agency, despite being the first ever Chair to implement the Ground Breaking Diversity Initiative of ordering Equali-Tea Gay Awareness Mugs. The most Inspirational Speaker of a Generation - Michael Martin MP - was hounded out just for quite properly allowing Tory Toff Damien Green to be Arrested, despite being Scottish. Dame Suzi Leather was Persecuted for her Fine Campaign against the Iniquity of Private Schooling (you may not know, but Private Schooling is also known as Public Schooling to the Tory Vermin). The Tory Toffs have even tried to cut the Union Funding of the Labour Party! We can cement the New Order by Legislating for Gender Equality, Ethnic Diversity and Quotas by Sexuality throughout the Civil Service; under Labour, every worker should be compelled to join a Union; we should legislate to ensure every Union is adequately Compensated for their Sterling Work by the Taxpayer, and each Union can show their Eternal Gratitude to Ed Miliband by contributing Half of their Annual Taxpayer Revenues to the Peoples' Party. This can be paid for using a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Miliband's Forebearance and Leadership are not limited to the Narrow Confines of the British Isles. Alone, he stood tall and rejected the Drumbeats of War from the Eton Toff. The peace in Syria, and indeed, throughout the Middle East today, can be attributed to Miliband and Miliband alone. I believe this Supreme Act of Service to the World deserves the Utmost Commemmoration. Mere Nobel Peace Prizes and other Trinkets will not Suffice: throughout the Ages, Miliband will be mentioned in the same breath as Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and Herman Van Rompuy. This is why I propose replacing the Statue of Churchill in Parliament Square with one of Ed. This can be paid for with a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Though Cowards Flinch and Traitors Sneer, We'll Keep the Red Flag Flying Here. The Red Flag will be paid for with a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
I came up with a new policy for my tenure.
Anyone wanting to have children will need the approval of the state.
They will need to prove their gene pool is deep, have the financial resources to look after their offspring.
I plan on creating a QUANGO to run this.
Jeremy Kyle will be the head of this QUANGO.
Now more accurately known as "the old men on the block" which sounds rather more like moustache flavoured videos.
Though I suspect soon we're going to have a poster called "Proud to be Labour's Mum"
You yourself admit they are a membership organisation in your previous post, they certainly represent themselves and the interests of their worshippers e.g. graves and church buildings.
Churches may not be above the law but neither are they below it.
You may disagree with my view that the CoE is playing politics and using a flimsy moral argument to justify it and that's all well and good, but I struggle to see any comments from people which are bigoted against the church itself. I have no ill feeling toward them, they can play politics if they like and especially if their members want them to play politics, but that statement was thoroughly unconvincing to me that the graves issue was the genuine thrust of their opposition, given the official reply which seems to cover everything they claim they are asking for.
"The Lord be with you"
"And with you too mate"
Having said that, as a devout atheist my views are probably not very relevant!
As citizens, clergymen have as much right to participate in the political debate as anybody else, if not moreso.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB · 10h
A reminder of the UKIP council seats split in what the BBC described as an "earthquake" at the
May 22 elections
pic.twitter.com/ZT5uhXS6ar
twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/473076398014615552
This, I think, is a photograph of said club's AGM attendees although it may be of a more recent UKIP husting in Newark.
http://bit.ly/1nGcU4R
A Liberal Democrat suddenly converted to the joys of FPTP.
What a bunch of cynical [self-moderated]s Liberal Democrats are.
So I'm looking for more opportunities.
As an aside, Robert and his Dad once mentioned that during the Papal election in 2005, PB started getting a visitor or two with an IP address from Vatican City.
Labour is drawing up plans to go into the next election with a manifesto pledge to increase NHS spending significantly should the party be returned to power, The Independent can reveal.
Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are examining options for how Labour could fund additional investment in health over and above current spending plans. Shadow Cabinet sources said no decision had yet been taken on how to fund the pledge, although one option is to introduce a ring-fenced rise in national insurance (NI) contributions both for employers and employees.
This would mirror Gordon Brown’s raising of NI by 1 per cent in 2002 to fund Labour’s last expansion of the NHS.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-labour-plans-big-risein-nhs-spending-9468344.html
The fact they are citizens with full democratic rights means for that reason alone the response should not be they should keep silent beacause they are simply clergy, as TSE did.
They perhaps have more right to speak out as they represent a valid interest group, just as leaders of political parties and of pressure groups do.
Oh the glory of the past!
Just like everyone else there.
Has some 'bigot gas' been released into the atmosphere?
Mr no bumming perhaps
a big increase in Romanian love all round in a week
UKIP up 19
LD up 30
Lab up 33
Con up 14
Regarding the "earthquake" @MikeSmithson keeps referring to, thinking he is being clever, Farage described potentially winning the Euros as an earthquake, not the locals. Dont know why Mike keeps making this mistake
Clutching at straws?
Remember at the last election Labour's NI increase was named "the jobs tax" by the Tories and it was one of the most effective aspects of the Con's otherwise terrible 2010 campaign.
They won't win in 2015 on the decrepit old cesspit of the NHS. Unless they are planning to provide an actual NHS rather then one we pay for about 6 times
The last Pope not to already be a priest was already a deacon i.e. clergy.
I think UKIP will suffer over the NHS.. the other parties are already constantly misrepresenting them and it will only get worse when UKIP announce cuts to middle management. It will be reported as "UKIP will slash NHS budget" by people that care about power more than results
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2644905/Newark-election-Will-brazen-dandy-really-cause-UKIP-earthquake-Meet-Roger-Helmer-Tory-defector-views-immigration-gays-make-Nigel-Farage-look-progressive.html
Blimey Labour going tax and spend this far out from the election. Their policy polling must be running in a parallel universe full of thick lefties.
Bet void though, not open to founding members of the religion or God and God's immediate family. No wonder he went bananas
Incidentally, I had my first-ever call from the Sun today, asking if I'd like to say something critical about Anna Soubry's remarks that immigration isn't an issue in Broxtowe and some constituents are racists. I declined - there's actually not a lot of difference between us on this.
To my mind he looks more like the Viz character Major Misunderstanding.
"Major Misunderstanding – As his name suggests, he often misunderstands situations, and is seemingly unable to interpret incidences in their own context, instead viewing them through the prism of his own prejudices, typically centered on inter-war upper-class values. For example, he once believed that a blood donor van was a chip van, and berated the nurse operating the van for trying to bring "unwanted custom" (i.e. proles) to his "close-knit community". The Major has mistaken hooded monks for Asbos and vendors at a church fete for asylum seekers.He is apparently a retired major who dresses in the regimental blazer, cravat, slacks and has a bushywalrus moustache "
The Major features in the latest edition it seems...
As for the welfare state generally the line that it's basically been hijacked by the guardianista middle class to provide very well paid non-jobs for liberal arts graduates should go down fairly well in the current climate because immigration dwarfs everything else e.g. if you can't get treated on the NHS anyway cos of it being overloaded then "save the NHS" rhetoric doesn't have as much play.
But damn that Nigel Farage and his stereotypical views of Romanians vs Germans (backed up by supporters of all other parties)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10867666/Stolen-election-in-the-heart-of-London.html
But it is the mayor’s politics of racial and faith favouritism which are doing most to poison the atmosphere. Tower Hamlets is a genuinely mixed borough, 45 per cent white and 32 per cent Bangladeshi, and no part of it is a ghetto.
Yet of Mr Rahman’s 18 councillors elected last week, all are Bangladeshi (and 17 are men). He has never appointed a non-Bangladeshi to his council cabinet, though he says that is because none will join.
This is happening in the heart of London. A major borough has been transformed into a third world Bangladeshi corrupt electoral system. Yet it gets barely any coverage at all from the BBC, while an offhand comment by Nigel Farage about Romanians gets plastered wall to wall.
There has always been immigration, its always been like this
But Roger Helmet as the public face of UKIP, if he wins, will be excellent entertainment.
But the door swings both ways: if Cameron can prevent Juncker indefinitely, Merkel can prevent somebody else indefinitely too. So the question becomes: if not Juncker, then who?
If my maths is correct, there are thirteen heads of government in the European Council who represent national parties in the EPP, three more than are in PES. So whoever the winner is, it'd have to be a current/former head of government from an EPP national party (PES would get the second prize, which is the High Representative - aren't there rumors Catherine Ashton will keep this for another term?). If I was doing the appointing it'd be John Bruton (Ireland) or Donald Tusk (Poland), but since I am always wrong in these things it'd probably be someone else
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-27658817
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_X
English the first language of no one in the house hold
Over 20% in almost half of Tower Hamlets
#onenation
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys.
Ukippers' chief complaint seems to be the way minority and, sometimes, majority opinions have been excluded from the public sphere. Cameron's chumocracy is an extreme example of this.
So your opinion is so much more valid than the usual it's-a-Labour-borough and we've-lost-control-of-the-honeypot sore losers who usually complain about Tower Hamlets. Funny how they only complain when diversity affects their interests.
Tap:
No verifiable references are given on your url.
Please give me the exact time and date of your call from Prince Charles and the number he was calling from and I will contact him to verify that conversation.
The rest of your unverifiable assertions will be ignored.
Joan Veon was (sadly no longer with us) a professional journalist, giving all her sources and references. She established that Prince Charles was the driving force behind the current 'sustainable development', Agenda 21 basis for world government. He was working from within the United Nations, controlling the Prince's Business Leaders Forum driving the Public Private partnership (seizing the world's government assets into private control) and identifying ways to cut the human population using clandestine means. The UN being the method of bringing the USA back within the global power structure, controlled by Charles from Britain. If you won't read or listen to Joan Veon, then of course you will be absolutely sure The Tap Blog has no sources. Prince Charles communicates with me via his assistants, and of course they deny he has a senior role in global government. Sustainable development will kill far more human beings than lebensraum. Prince Charles is the new version of Hitler in terms of mass killing on a global scale, not Vladimir Putin. As usual what you accuse is what you are.