Judgment on various preliminary applications in Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Rowland v Mitchell MP will be handed down tomorrow by Nicola Davies J on behalf of Tugendhat J, retired.
Of course there are, respond the wilder Nats. These people are suffering from Jockholm Syndrome. You couldn’t be proud of voting No, could you and deep down you have to know doing so is an act of betrayal. Toom tabard and all that.
The betting implication of that is that they'll vote SNP in the GE and in Holyrood, to assuage their guilt at the betrayal.
When Ireland was part of the UK, the irish people were not thought of as british citizens, that is the key to the disaster that was British management of Ireland.
The Irish famine was the ultimate proof that Britain was incapable of running the place, there was more that enough food to feed the people but the authorities preferred to export it to pocket the money (not much difference that the stalinist famine in the USSR in the 1930's), when international aid was offered to alleviate the famine Queen Victoria refused, she preffered for her people to die of starvation than reduce the prestige of the empire.
That was the end of the irish people thinking that they can stay subjects to the queen's government and stay alive, Irish Home Rule demands never ended and got stronger and more radical until the opportunity arrived for independence.
Blame Westminster ! Nothing changes...
The only reason is oil revenues and those will not exist for long.
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
This is forecasting a net gain of 9 Con seats - yet the "dozen" has two Con losses and no Con gains.
So where are the Con gains forecast to arise?
And does this not suggest that the "dozen" is not doing its job as it appears to be missing where the Con gains are forecast to arise.
Thanks for your comment and a casual glance would indicate to some degree that you have a fair point.
However covering a range of options with 13 seats is tricky. I've tried to give a broad geographical and political spread within the context of the likely outcome from the ARSE national projection. The Cornwall North projection is TCTC but if "called" today would be Con Gain.
Within that context the present Conservative figure of 315 is the second highest since July last year and has usually been in the 290/300 range which would make the 13 seats slightly more appropriate. Even so the difference is at the margin as indeed are a number of seats that made the long list but not the final cut.
Further I think in fairness I haven't chosen a batch of easy seats. I might get most wrong or right and yet be within a point or two in each case both with the seats and the national projection.
OK JackW - many thanks - I was not looking to criticise in any way - I have the highest regard for your forecasts.
Incidentally, whilst you're around, what are your views on what appears to be an increase of approx 2 points in the Lab lead since the Euros? This hasn't caused your forecast to move to any noticeable degree so what do you make of it?
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
Of course there are, respond the wilder Nats. These people are suffering from Jockholm Syndrome. You couldn’t be proud of voting No, could you and deep down you have to know doing so is an act of betrayal. Toom tabard and all that.
I did enjoy the Jockholm Syndrome line.
I'm struggling mightily to think of any Swedish, let alone Stockholm resident PBer that "Jockholm Syndrome" might apply to ....
That rings bells. My son stopped believing in the tooth fairy on the basis that nothing magical could be so incompetent and fail to turn up so regularly. Not my finest hour.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
Hold on...
Yesterday the line was "Obama is a Yoonyoonist puppet, parroting lines fed to him from Westminster", today it's "We don't know what he said"?
Alright, if JackW can do it, then so can I. Introducing the... OblitusSumMe Four to Forgo Forgetting! Predicted using the swing votes from Table 2 of the Ashcroft National Poll.
Kingswood: Con 12488 33.5% (-6.9) Lab 13335 35.8% (+0.5) Lib Dem 2332 6.3% (-10.5) UKIP 7093 19.0% (+15.8) Green 1997 5.4% (+4.6) Others 1644 4.4% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 8033 21.6%
Pendle: Con 11429 34.2% (-4.7) Lab 11337 33.9% (+3.0) Lib Dem 2490 7.4% (-12.8) UKIP 6561 19.6% (+16.3) Green 1629 4.9% (+4.9) Others 3035 9.1% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7558 22.6%
Vale of Glamorgan: Con 12988 35.2% (-6.6) Lab 12624 34.2% (+1.3) Lib Dem 2196 5.9% (-9.3) UKIP 7139 19.3% (+16.2) Green 1999 5.4% (+4.5) Others 2903 7.9% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7905 21.4%
Harlow: Con 12452 36.6% (-8.3) Lab 11519 33.8% (+0.1) Lib Dem 1859 5.5% (-8.2) UKIP 6856 20.1% (+16.5) Green 1348 4.0% (+4.0) Others 1840 5.4% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7229 21.2%
Methodology: Note that I have assumed that UKIP/Greens and Others retain 100% of their 2010 vote and the percentage for "Don't Know/etc" is relative to the total number who do give a party, and so is additional to the other 100%.
Note that comparing with, say, the 2010 general election prediction poll by ICM for the Guardian, and we see that the rates for "Don't Know/etc" are relatively similar now as then, so there's not much hope for those reducing in the polls as we approach next May. Therefore I'll have to think of something to do with them if I want to use this approach to make predictions.
Also, Others here includes a lot of votes for the BNP which will most likely not be repeated in 2015, so I might make some adjustment to that in the future, though Plaid Cymru make up most of the Others in Vale of Glamorgan.
This is forecasting a net gain of 9 Con seats - yet the "dozen" has two Con losses and no Con gains.
So where are the Con gains forecast to arise?
And does this not suggest that the "dozen" is not doing its job as it appears to be missing where the Con gains are forecast to arise.
Thanks for your comment and a casual glance would indicate to some degree that you have a fair point.
However covering a range of options with 13 seats is tricky. I've tried to give a broad geographical and political spread within the context of the likely outcome from the ARSE national projection. The Cornwall North projection is TCTC but if "called" today would be Con Gain.
Within that context the present Conservative figure of 315 is the second highest since July last year and has usually been in the 290/300 range which would make the 13 seats slightly more appropriate. Even so the difference is at the margin as indeed are a number of seats that made the long list but not the final cut.
Further I think in fairness I haven't chosen a batch of easy seats. I might get most wrong or right and yet be within a point or two in each case both with the seats and the national projection.
OK JackW - many thanks - I was not looking to criticise in any way - I have the highest regard for your forecasts.
Incidentally, whilst you're around, what are your views on what appears to be an increase of approx 2 points in the Lab lead since the Euros? This hasn't caused your forecast to move to any noticeable degree so what do you make of it?
No problems. It was a fair question and it gave me an opportunity to give a fuller explanation.
I indicated prior to the May elections that I expected Labour to enjoy a bounce back in the polls in the Summer. I expect this situation to continue but within the context of the past years overall decline.
In essence Labours deflating lead will have a little more air before slowly deflating again. I expect some crossover polls through the rest of the year but no regular and consistent Conservative leads until the new year.
In broad terms when the voters are more highly engaged Labour suffer.
That rings bells. My son stopped believing in the tooth fairy on the basis that nothing magical could be so incompetent and fail to turn up so regularly. Not my finest hour.
You should have explained that Labour had nationalized the tooth fairy and it was now under the magical stewardship of Gordon Brown who had sadly exchanged all the fairy gold for shares in the Bank of Zimbabwe and accordingly Fairyland was temporarily financially embarrassed.
This is forecasting a net gain of 9 Con seats - yet the "dozen" has two Con losses and no Con gains.
So where are the Con gains forecast to arise?
And does this not suggest that the "dozen" is not doing its job as it appears to be missing where the Con gains are forecast to arise.
Thanks for your comment and a casual glance would indicate to some degree that you have a fair point.
However covering a range of options with 13 seats is tricky. I've tried to give a broad geographical and political spread within the context of the likely outcome from the ARSE national projection. The Cornwall North projection is TCTC but if "called" today would be Con Gain.
Within that context the present Conservative figure of 315 is the second highest since July last year and has usually been in the 290/300 range which would make the 13 seats slightly more appropriate. Even so the difference is at the margin as indeed are a number of seats that made the long list but not the final cut.
Further I think in fairness I haven't chosen a batch of easy seats. I might get most wrong or right and yet be within a point or two in each case both with the seats and the national projection.
OK JackW - many thanks - I was not looking to criticise in any way - I have the highest regard for your forecasts.
Incidentally, whilst you're around, what are your views on what appears to be an increase of approx 2 points in the Lab lead since the Euros? This hasn't caused your forecast to move to any noticeable degree so what do you make of it?
No problems. It was a fair question and it gave me an opportunity to give a fuller explanation.
I indicated prior to the May elections that I expected Labour to enjoy a bounce back in the polls in the Summer. I expect this situation to continue but within the context of the past years overall decline.
In essence Labours deflating lead will have a little more air before slowly deflating again. I expect some crossover polls through the rest of the year but no regular and consistent Conservative leads until the new year.
In broad terms when the voters are more highly engaged Labour suffer.
OK, many thanks - and somewhat reassuring for Con supporters!
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
Hold on...
Yesterday the line was "Obama is a Yoonyoonist puppet, parroting lines fed to him from Westminster", today it's "We don't know what he said"?
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
So it was clear in context? What is the problem then.
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
So it was clear in context? What is the problem then.
Simply that it's much more equivocal than one might guess from some media reports (and some posters on PB).
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
So it was clear in context? What is the problem then.
How anyone might have thought he was talking about NATO is what is baffling me.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Italy finished bottom of their group in 2010. England would be more than happy with the same this time. I wouldn't, having drawn them in the sweepstake.
@Tissue Price - I can't see England beating Costa Rica (or the other two either). I can see England coming home without winning a game. I'd like to be wrong, but defeat at the hands of Italy and Uruguay seems nailed on. If at that point England are already eliminated, then they might scrape a win against whomever they play last, although if they play Italy or Uruguay last, even then I doubt it.
My guess would be Brazil versus Argentina in the final with Germany and Italy playing off for third.
England's playing order is Italy, Uruguay and then Costa Rica. Means that the final game could easily be meaningless for both sides.
@Tissue Price - I can't see England beating Costa Rica (or the other two either). I can see England coming home without winning a game. I'd like to be wrong, but defeat at the hands of Italy and Uruguay seems nailed on. If at that point England are already eliminated, then they might scrape a win against whomever they play last, although if they play Italy or Uruguay last, even then I doubt it.
My guess would be Brazil versus Argentina in the final with Germany and Italy playing off for third.
England's playing order is Italy, Uruguay and then Costa Rica. Means that the final game could easily be meaningless for both sides.
Serious question, do any of you chaps in Englandshire expect the shower of numpties recently arrived in Brazil to do anything other than be on a plane home on conclusion of the group stage? They really are totally uninspiring and instead of actively supporting Italy and the other teams playing them, I just want them to be put out of their misery. Not a ball kicked and it seems half of them are already nursing injuries. Just not a patch on the likes of Beckham, Nevilles x 2, Scoles etc from a decade or so ago.
They're reliably disappointing, the more so in the bigger events, which is why I think they'll do something especially infuriating - like lose the first two games then win the last stylishly when it doesn't matter.
ISTR they beat Germany 3 nil some years ago on a similar basis, then returned to their usual form as soon as it did.
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
So it was clear in context? What is the problem then.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Uruguay only got to the semi by virtue of sickening cheating by one Luis Suarez, who scooped a goal bound ball out of the net against Ghana in the last minute. Made me realise the rules of football should be changed so, in such circumstances, a penalty goal is awarded.
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
@Tissue Price - I can't see England beating Costa Rica (or the other two either). I can see England coming home without winning a game. I'd like to be wrong, but defeat at the hands of Italy and Uruguay seems nailed on. If at that point England are already eliminated, then they might scrape a win against whomever they play last, although if they play Italy or Uruguay last, even then I doubt it.
My guess would be Brazil versus Argentina in the final with Germany and Italy playing off for third.
England's playing order is Italy, Uruguay and then Costa Rica. Means that the final game could easily be meaningless for both sides.
@Tissue Price - I can't see England beating Costa Rica (or the other two either). I can see England coming home without winning a game. I'd like to be wrong, but defeat at the hands of Italy and Uruguay seems nailed on. If at that point England are already eliminated, then they might scrape a win against whomever they play last, although if they play Italy or Uruguay last, even then I doubt it.
My guess would be Brazil versus Argentina in the final with Germany and Italy playing off for third.
England's playing order is Italy, Uruguay and then Costa Rica. Means that the final game could easily be meaningless for both sides.
Serious question, do any of you chaps in Englandshire expect the shower of numpties recently arrived in Brazil to do anything other than be on a plane home on conclusion of the group stage? They really are totally uninspiring and instead of actively supporting Italy and the other teams playing them, I just want them to be put out of their misery. Not a ball kicked and it seems half of them are already nursing injuries. Just not a patch on the likes of Beckham, Nevilles x 2, Scoles etc from a decade or so ago.
They're reliably disappointing, the more so in the bigger events, which is why I think they'll do something especially infuriating - like lose the first two games then win the last stylishly when it doesn't matter.
ISTR they beat Germany 3 nil some years ago on a similar basis, then returned to their usual form as soon as it did.
When was this 3-0 over Germany then? Do tell.
England has only beaten Germany 3-0 once, in 1935.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Uruguay only got to the semi by virtue of sickening cheating by one Luis Suarez, who scooped a goal bound ball out of the net against Ghana in the last minute. Made me realise the rules of football should be changed so, in such circumstances, a penalty goal is awarded.
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
He was following Jack Charlton's lead, when he handled the ball on the line, in the last minute to deny Portugal a goal in the World Cup Semi Final.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Italy finished bottom of their group in 2010. England would be more than happy with the same this time. I wouldn't, having drawn them in the sweepstake.
Even if I had drawn them in the sweepstake and they weren't in England's group I would still be delighted to see them come bottom.
They've been boring the arse off football fans the world over for years.
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
I wish someone had told Thierry Henry this before the UEFA play-offs for that tournament.
I can't understand where some people get the idea that the Irish can't put past injustices behind them.
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
I wish someone had told Thierry Henry this before the UEFA play-offs for that tournament.
I can't understand where some people get the idea that the Irish can't put past injustices behind them.
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
Keep it real, this was the most egregious handball in football history, it ultimately denied England their second world cup
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
We'll be hearing about the bull Laudabiliter of Adrian IV next, and the sins of Richard de Clare, lord of Stirgoil after that...
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
I wish someone had told Thierry Henry this before the UEFA play-offs for that tournament.
I can't understand where some people get the idea that the Irish can't put past injustices behind them.
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
Keep it real, this was the most egregious handball in football history, it ultimately denied England their second world cup
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls
Now if anyone deserved a fate worse than death....
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
We'll be hearing about the bull Laudabiliter of Adrian IV next, and the sins of Richard de Clare, lord of Stirgoil after that...
YESNP adopting Obama's Yes We Can slogan looking stupid after the US President's recent statement in support of the Union. It's no surprise, I'm sure he'd have been a Lincoln Unionist rather than a Southern Confederate in the US's great struggle.
You might want to read what Mr Obama said. It's presumably only the context of a press question that makes it clear he may even be talking about Scottish independence. And that's not even clear. He could be hoping the Scots stay in NATO, for all one knows.
I thought it was abundantly clear he was talking about Scotland in the UK?
In context, yes, but look at the wording.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
So it was clear in context? What is the problem then.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Italy finished bottom of their group in 2010. England would be more than happy with the same this time. I wouldn't, having drawn them in the sweepstake.
England v Italy is a dead cert 1-1 for me, 6.5 available, 6.82 with Betdaq or 5.5 with bet365 but money back if it ends 0-0, which is a distinct possibility.
There is a school of thought that the IRA was always a front for the establishment -MI6, Prince Phillip, Nasty Bilderbergers etc. Hence them blowing up Airey Neave pretty sharpish after he deposed Heath. And the later attempt to destroy Thatcher and her cabinet. Thatcher of course is always seen as the arch-establishment figure, but if you take a radical view of post war British politics as the slow but deliberate disintegration of the British economy and indeed the British state, then Thatcher must be seen as more of an accidental insurgent, and her time in office as an interregnum bookended by engineered decline. Interesting to think of the IRA as the reactionaries, and Thatcher as a revolutionary.
It is a theory made more plausible by stories like this. In this context, Martin McGuinness in white tie hobnobbing with the Royals makes a sort of grim sense.
There is a school of thought that the IRA was always a front for the establishment -MI6, Prince Phillip, Nasty Bilderbergers etc. Hence them blowing up Airey Neave pretty sharpish after he deposed Heath. And the later attempt to destroy Thatcher and her cabinet. Thatcher of course is always seen as the arch-establishment figure, but if you take a radical view of post war British politics as the slow but deliberate disintegration of the British economy and indeed the British state, then Thatcher must be seen as more of an accidental insurgent, and her time in office as an interregnum bookended by engineered decline. Interesting to think of the IRA as the reactionaries, and Thatcher as a revolutionary.
It is a theory made more plausible by stories like this. In this context, Martin McGuinness in white tie hobnobbing with the Royals makes a sort of grim sense.
But you yourself assured me that I hadnt a clue what was going on at the Olympics so that was probably just me being confused. It is so useful to have you around to tell me what I think though. Where I would be without you I only dread to think.
There are people who believe that there is no such thing as terrorism. That there never has been. That it's a political tool. I don't agree, but I'm open to the idea. Certainly if terrorism did not exist, someone would surely have to invent it.
Anyway, SeanT is very definitely a North London boy, snobbishly so in fact, and is always very disparaging about those, like yours truly, who live south of the river.
Was it thee who was asking for the Con and Lab seat bands market?
TSE - Many thanks for the links to Lab & Con seat bands which, as if by magic, have re-appeared from Ladbrokes this afternoon. I had thought of backing both parties in combination to win between 301-325 seats, but this produces winning odds of only 11/8 so no real value there - perhaps I'll have another look if/when other bookies enter the fray.
But you yourself assured me that I hadnt a clue what was going on at the Olympics so that was probably just me being confused. It is so useful to have you around to tell me what I think though. Where I would be without you I only dread to think.
I merely make the point that your sporting loyalties are somewhat flexible. Not that we should even have a Team GB - should be home nations like every other major team sport.
That all said I fully agree with you about Thierry Henry's handball, another reason why we should have video replays.
Anyway, SeanT is very definitely a North London boy, snobbishly so in fact, and is always very disparaging about those, like yours truly, who live south of the river.
Was it thee who was asking for the Con and Lab seat bands market?
TSE - Many thanks for the links to Lab & Con seat bands which, as if by magic, have re-appeared from Ladbrokes this afternoon. I had thought of backing both parties in combination to win between 301-325 seats, but this produces winning odds of only 11/8 so no real value there - perhaps I'll have another look if/when other bookies enter the fray.
I'm keeping my powder dry at the moment, backed a few Labour bands a few weeks ago.
I think the next big event will be the Lord Ashcroft LD marginals poll this month.
Excuse me, I've only mentioned the famine and the most egregious handball in the history of football on this thread so far. If I'd been seeking to rake over past injustices I would have brought up the Penal Laws too.
We'll be hearing about the bull Laudabiliter of Adrian IV next, and the sins of Richard de Clare, lord of Stirgoil after that...
There are people who believe that there is no such thing as terrorism. That there never has been. That it's a political tool. I don't agree, but I'm open to the idea. Certainly if terrorism did not exist, someone would surely have to invent it.
Well the concept of intimidating people into actions they otherwise wouldn't take isn't new. It's arguable but one of the earliest terror cells were either the Jewish Sicarii or the Islamic Hashhashin.
Bercow wants us to vote electronically from home. I'm not sure I agree, I'm not against innovation but there has to be a certain otherness to voting. We shouldn't reduce Parliamentary democracy to an x-factor episode.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
Henry II's lordship of Ireland had been recognised and assented to by the Irish chieftains long before the tyrannous O'Connor was reconciled to his rightful lord at Windsor in 1175. In 1171 following Richard de Clare's machinations in Leinster, the Irish chieftains 'sent messages to the king of England, urging him to come to Ireland to protect them … and to accept overlordship of Ireland' (quotation from M.T. Flanagan, Irish Society, Anglo-Norman Settlers, Angevin Kingship: Interactions in Ireland in the Late Twelfth Century, (Oxford, 1989), p. 169).
"Better Together" will be superseded with "No Thanks" in campaign publicity, the BBC understands.
That sounds very sensible. 'Better together' is too wishy-washy and apologetic, and doesn't really come across as a call to action, more a rather tentative suggestion, almost a question.
There are people who believe that there is no such thing as terrorism. That there never has been. That it's a political tool. I don't agree, but I'm open to the idea. Certainly if terrorism did not exist, someone would surely have to invent it.
Well the concept of intimidating people into actions they otherwise wouldn't take isn't new. It's arguable but one of the earliest terror cells were either the Jewish Sicarii or the Islamic Hashhashin.
I googled them -my history doesn't really go any further back than the Tudors. This caught my eye -'Victims of the Sicarii included Jonathan the High Priest, although it is possible that his murder was orchestrated by the Roman governor Antonius Felix.' -State sponsored attack being blamed on A.N.Other nasty terrorist?!!
History can teach us everything -there's nothing new under the sun.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
Bercow wants us to vote electronically from home. I'm not sure I agree, I'm not against innovation but there has to be a certain otherness to voting. We shouldn't reduce Parliamentary democracy to an x-factor episode.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
What ex parte Northumbria Police Authority makes clear is that the Secretary of State for the Home Department could herself acquire water cannon, and supply them to the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis, or any other Chief Constable, and that she could do so without the consent of the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime, or the relevant Police and Crime Commissioner.
Bercow wants us to vote electronically from home. I'm not sure I agree, I'm not against innovation but there has to be a certain otherness to voting. We shouldn't reduce Parliamentary democracy to an x-factor episode.
Would prefer an increase in complexity and every more stringent ID checks. Would suppress the low IQ Labour vote. Even less Labour supporters would vote then, after all with IQ correlating with conscientiouness they struggle to vote as it is.
Henry II's lordship of Ireland had been recognised and assented to by the Irish chieftains long before the tyrannous O'Connor was reconciled to his rightful lord at Windsor in 1175. In 1171 following Richard de Clare's machinations in Leinster, the Irish chieftains 'sent messages to the king of England, urging him to come to Ireland to protect them … and to accept overlordship of Ireland' (quotation from M.T. Flanagan, Irish Society, Anglo-Norman Settlers, Angevin Kingship: Interactions in Ireland in the Late Twelfth Century, (Oxford, 1989), p. 169).
Not fussed about Rory.
One of my ancestors and 11 friends had sailed to Ireland to support Henry in return for a promise of "all the land over the Shannon".
Guess which bit he let the O'Connor's keep....
@RichardNabavi - does this answer your question? The first cut cuts the deepest, etc, etc
There are people who believe that there is no such thing as terrorism. That there never has been. That it's a political tool. I don't agree, but I'm open to the idea. Certainly if terrorism did not exist, someone would surely have to invent it.
Well the concept of intimidating people into actions they otherwise wouldn't take isn't new. It's arguable but one of the earliest terror cells were either the Jewish Sicarii or the Islamic Hashhashin.
I googled them -my history doesn't really go any further back than the Tudors. This caught my eye -'Victims of the Sicarii included Jonathan the High Priest, although it is possible that his murder was orchestrated by the Roman governor Antonius Felix.' -State sponsored attack being blamed on A.N.Other nasty terrorist?!!
History can teach us everything -there's nothing new under the sun.
The Romans were ruthless, look at the annihilation they furnished upon the Jews when they subjugated the revolts. Practically depopulated Judaea enslaved thousands, sacked Jerusalem and razed the Temple to the ground.
"Better Together" will be superseded with "No Thanks" in campaign publicity, the BBC understands.
That sounds very sensible. 'Better together' is too wishy-washy and apologetic, and doesn't really come across as a call to action, more a rather tentative suggestion, almost a question.
The new slogan is polite but condescending to the alternative - a phrase used when offered something unpleasant - want ketchup on your lobster ? no thanks..
"Better Together" will be superseded with "No Thanks" in campaign publicity, the BBC understands.
That sounds very sensible. 'Better together' is too wishy-washy and apologetic, and doesn't really come across as a call to action, more a rather tentative suggestion, almost a question.
The new slogan is polite but condescending to the alternative - a phrase used when offered something unpleasant - want ketchup on your lobster ? no thanks..
I use the phrase "No thanks" in many situations, condescending and otherwise.
World Cup 2010, Uruguay finished 3rd - Italy 4th. England will be hoping that both teams have regressed in the last 4 years.
Italy finished bottom of their group in 2010. England would be more than happy with the same this time. I wouldn't, having drawn them in the sweepstake.
Even if I had drawn them in the sweepstake and they weren't in England's group I would still be delighted to see them come bottom.
They've been boring the arse off football fans the world over for years.
Yes, but I stand to win £3k+ if they end up lifting the cup so frankly they can go through 0-0 on penalties for all I care.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Quite. And "buy" them a new one every five years (a new coat of paint and they won't notice!)...
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Not new. Second-hand from Germany.
But still, if it is not used ever, it shouldn't deteriorate much over 5 years.
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Not new. Second-hand from Germany.
But still, if it is not used ever, it shouldn't deteriorate much over 5 years.
Hmm is it just me or does something not add up with these cannon
from the bbc report
"In a statement, the mayor's office said purchasing the cannon now for just over £218,000, before Theresa May approves them, meant they could be bought at a "considerably reduced rate".
and later on in the same report
"The cannon will be purchased for £30,000 each, as opposed to the cost of a single new one at £870,000."
Now when I went to school 3 x £30000 made £90000 where then has the extra 128000 gone to make up the 218000 mentioned?
Theresa May? give permission. Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
So if it is not used, it still breaks after 5 years. Call me skeptical, but I don't buy that.
Even if it gets used everyday. It's only a lorry with a water tank, a pump and a directional hose attached. With a decent maintenance regime (the kind that you need to have to gain an operators licence from VOSA), they should be able to last for way, way more than 5 years. Who the hell does government have working for them? I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
Not new. Second-hand from Germany.
But still, if it is not used ever, it shouldn't deteriorate much over 5 years.
They will need to play practice with them.
Why practice with them if they aren't authorised to use them? I suppose a situation could arise where the Home Secretary passes a law rapidly in a crisis situation...
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-27760311
Incidentally, whilst you're around, what are your views on what appears to be an increase of approx 2 points in the Lab lead since the Euros? This hasn't caused your forecast to move to any noticeable degree so what do you make of it?
Titters ....
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100027431/there-is-life-after-europe-but-let-us-stop-the-triumphalism/
Yesterday the line was "Obama is a Yoonyoonist puppet, parroting lines fed to him from Westminster", today it's "We don't know what he said"?
YeSNP in disarray...
OblitusSumMe Four to Forgo Forgetting!
Predicted using the swing votes from Table 2 of the Ashcroft National Poll.
Kingswood: Con 12488 33.5% (-6.9) Lab 13335 35.8% (+0.5) Lib Dem 2332 6.3% (-10.5) UKIP 7093 19.0% (+15.8) Green 1997 5.4% (+4.6) Others 1644 4.4% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 8033 21.6%
Pendle: Con 11429 34.2% (-4.7) Lab 11337 33.9% (+3.0) Lib Dem 2490 7.4% (-12.8) UKIP 6561 19.6% (+16.3) Green 1629 4.9% (+4.9) Others 3035 9.1% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7558 22.6%
Vale of Glamorgan: Con 12988 35.2% (-6.6) Lab 12624 34.2% (+1.3) Lib Dem 2196 5.9% (-9.3) UKIP 7139 19.3% (+16.2) Green 1999 5.4% (+4.5) Others 2903 7.9% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7905 21.4%
Harlow: Con 12452 36.6% (-8.3) Lab 11519 33.8% (+0.1) Lib Dem 1859 5.5% (-8.2) UKIP 6856 20.1% (+16.5) Green 1348 4.0% (+4.0) Others 1840 5.4% Don't Know/Refused/Won't Vote 7229 21.2%
Methodology: Note that I have assumed that UKIP/Greens and Others retain 100% of their 2010 vote and the percentage for "Don't Know/etc" is relative to the total number who do give a party, and so is additional to the other 100%.
Note that comparing with, say, the 2010 general election prediction poll by ICM for the Guardian, and we see that the rates for "Don't Know/etc" are relatively similar now as then, so there's not much hope for those reducing in the polls as we approach next May. Therefore I'll have to think of something to do with them if I want to use this approach to make predictions.
Also, Others here includes a lot of votes for the BNP which will most likely not be repeated in 2015, so I might make some adjustment to that in the future, though Plaid Cymru make up most of the Others in Vale of Glamorgan.
I indicated prior to the May elections that I expected Labour to enjoy a bounce back in the polls in the Summer. I expect this situation to continue but within the context of the past years overall decline.
In essence Labours deflating lead will have a little more air before slowly deflating again. I expect some crossover polls through the rest of the year but no regular and consistent Conservative leads until the new year.
In broad terms when the voters are more highly engaged Labour suffer.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27781673
Excellent.
BTW. Thanks for your comments this morning.
"The UK has been an extraordinary partner to us. From the outside at least it looks like things have worked pretty well and we obviously have a deep interest in making sure one of the closest allies that we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner. Ultimately these are decisions to be made by folks there."
It's only the 'united' that is specific to the indyref and it is only the context that gives the indyref. It's pretty weak wording, considering it was bang in front of Mr Cameron, which ends by saying it's for the natives to decide. And even that had to be dragged out by a planted media question according to the FT correspondent.
BTW what nobody seems to have pointed out is that Mr Salmond has one thing in common with Mr Obama - both have upset Mr Trump to the degree that he has launched press advertising and media campaigns against both. .
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/06/tories-hit-back-at-clegg-call-for-academy-changes/
Indeed. Lots of people on here today who know nothing about football!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/05/barack-obama-suggests-scotland-should-stay-uk-independence
As Mike once told me "Never forget the golden rule of Scottish politics, no matter what happens, ultimately it is good for Yes and the SNP"
No way should you be able to gain an advantage by cheating, which is what happened.
They've been boring the arse off football fans the world over for years.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/mar/25/world-cup-moments-andres-escobar-death
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls
I am not sure I could finance it,never mind risk it. Any Black swans near the border?
It is a theory made more plausible by stories like this. In this context, Martin McGuinness in white tie hobnobbing with the Royals makes a sort of grim sense.
Looks a great bet. I've noted in the past that your football tips are often right.
I might have a little flutter at that price. Thanks.
But you yourself assured me that I hadnt a clue what was going on at the Olympics so that was probably just me being confused. It is so useful to have you around to tell me what I think though. Where I would be without you I only dread to think.
There are people who believe that there is no such thing as terrorism. That there never has been. That it's a political tool. I don't agree, but I'm open to the idea. Certainly if terrorism did not exist, someone would surely have to invent it.
I had thought of backing both parties in combination to win between 301-325 seats, but this produces winning odds of only 11/8 so no real value there - perhaps I'll have another look if/when other bookies enter the fray.
That all said I fully agree with you about Thierry Henry's handball, another reason why we should have video replays.
I think the next big event will be the Lord Ashcroft LD marginals poll this month.
I'll make an assessment then.
Rule #1: never trust a English King
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10890445/Let-people-vote-electronically-from-their-armchairs-says-John-Bercow.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27779131
"Better Together" will be superseded with "No Thanks" in campaign publicity, the BBC understands.
The politeness may spook the cybernats..
Interesting way to pressure an unannounced decision?
"The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) said that each cannon had a life-expectancy of five years, or longer with good maintenance, and if approval was not given by Ms May, then they could be re-sold".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27781673
History can teach us everything -there's nothing new under the sun.
Reading between the lines, they are second hand kit someone was flogging off.
"The cannon will be purchased for £30,000 each, as opposed to the cost of a single new one at £870,000." (same link)
"the low IQ Labour vote"
It might reduce the low IQ Tory vote,thus disenfranchising yourself?
One of my ancestors and 11 friends had sailed to Ireland to support Henry in return for a promise of "all the land over the Shannon".
Guess which bit he let the O'Connor's keep....
@RichardNabavi - does this answer your question? The first cut cuts the deepest, etc, etc
Depends on where they are coming from and prior maintenance.
I can make a stab at second hand car and motorcycle values, water cannon I have no idea.
As ever, a genuine Scottish thread makes me wary and scared.
However - I do have a killer quote that everyone should know by now that I'm not quite complete enough to speed fire.
Lagarde: "Do you want me to go down on my knees for you" (AMarr, Bbc, Sunday Am)
Sexy bitch.
All well done Morris at your weekend performance - it certainly kept us interested.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10889066/Teachers-in-a-drunken-brawl-on-school-trip-to-Barcelona.html
Who the hell does government have working for them?
I can be their fleet manager for a very modest fee.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/06/10/us-britain-economy-manufacturing-idUKKBN0EL0NQ20140610
[Factory output is still 7.0 percent below its peak, while services sector output is already well above its pre-crisis peak.]
That's a double win.
To be blunt-
Brit has rocked the productivity world for decades - on an economic level, we don't have much to worry about.
from the bbc report
"In a statement, the mayor's office said purchasing the cannon now for just over £218,000, before Theresa May approves them, meant they could be bought at a "considerably reduced rate".
and later on in the same report
"The cannon will be purchased for £30,000 each, as opposed to the cost of a single new one at £870,000."
Now when I went to school 3 x £30000 made £90000 where then has the extra 128000 gone to make up the 218000 mentioned?
It would be hilarious if the Germans had sold them some left over kit from the east.
A Lada badged cannon would stop a riot just by the sight of it.