O/T Hello just to let you know for those that like a tennis flutter I'm backing the following in Wimbledon. There's 3 mouth-watering quarter-finals today with only Djokovic's looking straight forward.
DIMITROV to beat Murray with a +4.5 game advantage at 5/6 with sportingbet.com. Both players in good nick but DIMITROV is one of most improved players on the circuit at the moment. The Bulgarian is on a 8 match winning streak on grass having won Queens. Murray's 2nd serve looks vulnerable and I fancy DIMITROV to push the Scot all the way.
Stan WAWRINKA is not without a chance against Federer and he was devastating against in-form Lopez. The 12/5 looks tempting against Federer as he moves towards the twilight of his career. However I think there's much more value in backing win each way to win the tournament at 18/1 with Stan James, Skybet and Bet365. You get a third of the odds for making the final and should WAWRINKA get past Federer he'll be favourite to get past Raonic or Kyrgios in the semi. Don't get me wrong Federer is the deserved favourite in this match having won 13 and only lost 2 against his compatriot. But they've only placed twice in the last year when Federer has fallen back. Federer won 6/3 6/7 7/5 in 2013 but WAWRINKA won their last match in April at the final in Rome 4/6 7/6 6/2. I'm going on the each-way title win with WAWRINKA at 18/1 where I think there's most value.
As for the Kyrgios-Raonic match you can make a case for KYRGIOS winning who will be running on adrenaline after his dusting of Nadal. Raonic surprisingly doesn't have a terrific record at Wimbledon though he is normally good on fast surfaces and shouldn't be underestimated. The crowd will be all behind KYRGIOS and I think the best value is for KYRGIOS to win the first set widely available at 11/8 but I'll not be going as big a match stake as I am with DIMITROV (famous last words).
I would've guessed revenge porn would already be illegal (posting such images of an individual without consent). The more interesting, and unpoliceable, aspect is the call to ban all psychological abuse: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28123128
"That control is central to domestic violence, which is why we're campaigning for all psychological abuse and coercive control to be criminalised. We urge Mr Grayling and the Home Office to go further, and ensure victims can get the support of the criminal justice system for all the abuse they experience."
Writing laws doesn't make bad things go away by magic, and whilst psych abuse is of course horrendous, it's also so vague and subjective as to be effectively unpoliceable. What about couples in S&M lifestyle relationships, to take it to an extreme? Some people happily insult one another, for others that would be very hurtful.
It's a good sentiment but would make an appalling law, I fear.
"It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory."
that is simply not true - the movie has them as a welsh regiment but the details are
"While most of the men of the 1st Battalion, 24th Regiment of Foot (1/24) were recruited from the industrial towns and agricultural classes of England, principally from Birmingham and adjacent southwest counties, only 10 soldiers of the 1/24 that fought in the battle were Welsh. Many of the soldiers of the junior battalion, the 2/24, were Welshmen. Of the 122 soldiers of the 24th Regiment present at the Battle of Rorke's Drift, 49 are known to have been of English nationality, 32 were Welsh, 16 were Irish, 1 was a Scot, and 3 were born overseas. The nationalities of the remaining 21 are unknown"
and as for singing Men of Harlech it was artistic licence at its best but no more....
Indeed. I have to admit, I chucked that detail in as bait. I knew, I just knew, that some credulous Nat would wade in with an attempted "correction" that purported to be factual, but which instead betrayed abject, credulous swallowing of a nonsensical myth. It is quite typical of your Nat to believe Zulu or Braveheart hook line and sinker. On some level MalcolmG almost certainly thinks Highlander was a documentary.
If you want a genuine example of a plucky and substantially Welsh battleline holding off a horde of what appeared to be Village People lookalikes, Agincourt is a better place to start. The French were still making the same mistake at Waterloo 400 years later.
"It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory."
Ah, but they weren't English soldiers.
It was a Welsh regiment The soldiers were mainly Welsh. That is why they sing Men of Harlech in the movie.
Your post neatly demonstrates one of the very things that the Welsh and Scottish find so irritating about the English.
And given it's set in southernmost Africa in mid to late summer I don't think it is the heathens who are "bizarrely clad".
I agree, but I wanted the parallels between the Zulus and the Nats to be as close as possible for the comparison to work. In reality the comparison is very slight - at Rorke's Drift the British were grossly outnumbered, whereas in PB terms the British grossly outnumber the Nats.
Besides which: the Zulus might have been more aptly dressed, but look where it got them.
"It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory."
Ah, but they weren't English soldiers.
It was a Welsh regiment The soldiers were mainly Welsh. That is why they sing Men of Harlech in the movie.
Your post neatly demonstrates one of the very things that the Welsh and Scottish find so irritating about the English.
That's not strictly true, there were more English in the two battalions than Welshmen. About 50 English and about 35 Welsh with the nationality of 20 or so unknown, along with a handful of Scots and Irish and the Natal mounted police contingent. The Main regiment was the 2nd Warwickshire regiment of foot under Bromhead, joined by Chards Royal Engineers, who then took command as senior officer, the regiment of Bromhead was based in Wales, but of mixed nationalities and was not renamed the borderers until after some time later.
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
Charles, I have heard all the fake arguments, whether currency union is the correct option or not it is still INDEPENDENCE compared to people in Westminster making all the decisions based on the benefits to London and the South East. Whilst we do not have democracy it is pointless. Given the mess of the current UK monetary policy it is a joke to say there would be tight restrictions, given UK is borrowing over £100B per annum , it sounds like a shake may be required. How people can seriously say it would be tough given the pathetic borrowing and wasting of money that currently takes place is hard to get my head round. No matter how much Scotland borrowed it could not be as profligate as London.
I agree that the UK government is profligate. But that is a decision for our politicians and voters.
If Scotland were independent, then you would be borrowing against the rUK balance sheet without any democratic oversight from the rUK. That's the issue in a nutshell: it creates an unquantifiable and uncontrollable contingent liability, and that's something that even our politicians won't sign up to.
Considering they would be happy to be borrowing as little as possible then it is no impediment. Control of fiscal policy would be sensible and so would mean that any agreed limits would be acceptable and part of policy in any event. Given rump UK deficit and the buffeting from the markets that will occur they will be very very happy to have a currency union, despite the current bluster from the 3 wise monkeys.
I can't see any part of Gospel Oak in that constituency.
Yeah, that's what I thought.
Part of the problem is that place names in London can be a bit elastic - witness the way in which West Dulwich now suspiciously borders West Norwood - presumably the people of "East Norwood" preferred to be part of a larger West Dulwich...
London's postcode districts are fixed and clear. That is all that matters. People will say they live in Clapham, but if they don't live in SW4, they don't live in Clapham. It's that simple.
The funny thing is that while your Clapham = SW4 unquestionably it need not follow in reverse, i.e. that if you're in SW4 you are in Clapham.
I once bought a flat in W9 which I assumed to be in Maida Vale, because Maida Vale is W9. Imagine my feelings when I later looked it up in the London A-Z, to find that my street could not be seen - because it had "West Kilburn" printed over it.
It was W9 all right, but there is W9 and there is W9. The clue was in the fact that the nearest Tube station was not Maida Vale or Warwick Avenue, but Queen's Park.
W9 .... and West Kilburn .... Oh the shame of it !!
Back in the day .... well the turn of the 20th century actually Maida Vale used to the haunt of the better class of prostitutes and the homes of the mistresses of the aristocracy .... apparently.
AIUI the Warrington Hotel, the listed pub that now has a Gordon Ramsay restaurant upstairs, used to be a knocking shop. In 1914-18 the troops on leave would come off the train at Paddington and head over there. The interior murals make a lot more sense when you know this. It was featured in an early episode of The Sweeney.
Awful. He might have done better to go without 'the straight choice' when running against Tatchell though. Or rather, it might have left a less bitter taste in the mouth
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
My own feeling though is that this isn't the only reason for the silence. The Anglophobes have had to recognise that they have comprehensively lost on every single point. It's not been an inconclusive or even a close debate, in the sense that they won on some points, lost on others, and honours are only just not even. On the contrary, the Nits have lost every aspect of every argument.
They've conceded.
It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory.
Cuckoo, Cuckoo
The quality and wit of Unionist trolling on here has got very poor recently.
Malcolm, having joined the herd of PBers monitoring that Pop-ular site that can't be named, I see Mick Pork wanted you to be made aware that rather than leaving PB by choice he was and is still banned after a bit of anonymous clyping by one of his fellow posters.
TUD, have to agree the site has really went downhill, the hysterics from the frothers is pretty dire. Most do not want to debate the biggest political event in the UK for 300 years, rather discuss some obscure English seat prediction in 2015.
Sort of on topic, an interesting editorial from SLAB's housepaper, the Daily Record. I'd fall off my perch if they came out for Yes, but there appears to be a bit of hedging going on.
'Record View: A no to Trident could be Yes vote
The SNP say September’s referendum is a chance to rid Scotland of nuclear weapons – which is a very attractive prospect to those who were first politicised by the anti-nuclear movement in the 1960s and in the 1980s. In the stroke of a pen the nuclear subs could be sent sailing from their Clyde base. So far, so good, for those of us who never wanted them here in the first place. Would it be that simple? Possibly not. But the fact remains that for many, getting rid of Trident is one good reason to vote Yes.'
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
Mr. X, bizarre clothing varies a lot. Not so long ago men wearing tights and tunics was the norm. Trousers were seen as 'barbarian' dress.
Yup. You only invent trousers when you start riding horses. The Greeks were terrified of the trousered Mede.
OTOH the Greeks rode, to hunt and as cavalry, but as far as I know only ever wore, effectively, dresses (and no underwear). Without stirrups. Doesn't really bear thinking about.
Very interesting post by Peter Kellner, and I think quite convincing.
The rage of the nats in the comments to his article is par for the course. This amusing little snippet by some called Peter Thomson gives you the flavour:
Some Scots would go further and suggest Mr Kellner's close association with the Tory Party and donations to said party makes YouGov a dubious sources of Scottish political polling analysis
Mr. X, bizarre clothing varies a lot. Not so long ago men wearing tights and tunics was the norm. Trousers were seen as 'barbarian' dress.
Yup. You only invent trousers when you start riding horses. The Greeks were terrified of the trousered Mede.
OTOH the Greeks rode, to hunt and as cavalry, but as far as I know only ever wore, effectively, dresses (and no underwear). Without stirrups. Doesn't really bear thinking about.
Only in Scotland, where the national plant is a waist-high thistle, could the national dress also be a skirt.
I can't see any part of Gospel Oak in that constituency.
Yeah, that's what I thought.
Part of the problem is that place names in London can be a bit elastic - witness the way in which West Dulwich now suspiciously borders West Norwood - presumably the people of "East Norwood" preferred to be part of a larger West Dulwich...
London's postcode districts are fixed and clear. That is all that matters. People will say they live in Clapham, but if they don't live in SW4, they don't live in Clapham. It's that simple.
The funny thing is that while your Clapham = SW4 unquestionably it need not follow in reverse, i.e. that if you're in SW4 you are in Clapham.
I once bought a flat in W9 which I assumed to be in Maida Vale, because Maida Vale is W9. Imagine my feelings when I later looked it up in the London A-Z, to find that my street could not be seen - because it had "West Kilburn" printed over it.
It was W9 all right, but there is W9 and there is W9. The clue was in the fact that the nearest Tube station was not Maida Vale or Warwick Avenue, but Queen's Park.
W9 .... and West Kilburn .... Oh the shame of it !!
Back in the day .... well the turn of the 20th century actually Maida Vale used to the haunt of the better class of prostitutes and the homes of the mistresses of the aristocracy .... apparently.
AIUI the Warrington Hotel, the listed pub that now has a Gordon Ramsay restaurant upstairs, used to be a knocking shop. In 1914-18 the troops on leave would come off the train at Paddington and head over there. The interior murals make a lot more sense when you know this. It was featured in an early episode of The Sweeney.
I've just advised Mrs JackW I'm corresponding online about the location of London "knocking shops".
She arched an eyebrow and said "Go for it .... if you think you're hard enough !!"
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
Decided to lay off betting on tennis for the rest of Wimbledon, but some interesting tips. I agree the Kyrgios could go far.
Thanks Morris Dancer. We're blessed with sport at the moment. Have you been following Nate Silver's modelling of chances for the World Cup? The only mismatch he has with the bookies odds is with Brazil who he fancies are a 39% chance which as you and I know is 6/4. They're available at 3/1. All the other teams are priced up short with the bookies. I'm not sure of their past record but the link is here if you and other PB gamblers are interested. http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/world-cup/
Kilts only became fashionable in the 18th century. Before that, it was the "plaid", which according to reports was an eminently sensible form of clothing for traveling light through rough terrain.
Mr. Manson, must admit I haven't. Only recently started tipping on tennis again, although F1's going a little better (my qualifying predictions remain ropier than a bondage enthusiast, alas).
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
"If you want a genuine example of a plucky and substantially Welsh battleline holding off a horde of what appeared to be Village People lookalikes, Agincourt is a better place to start. "
If you are talking about the archers in Henry V's army being mainly Welsh, I am afraid that is another myth. I would have go up into the attic to root out my 100 years war research papers to get the details but the idea that the longbow was ever a purely Welsh weapon is dubious to say the least and by Crecy (1346) let alone Agincourt (1415) the contingent of archers was drawn from all parts of the Kingdom.
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
My own feeling though is that this isn't the only reason for the silence. The Anglophobes have had to recognise that they have comprehensively lost on every single point. It's not been an inconclusive or even a close debate, in the sense that they won on some points, lost on others, and honours are only just not even. On the contrary, the Nits have lost every aspect of every argument.
They've conceded.
It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory.
Cuckoo, Cuckoo
The quality and wit of Unionist trolling on here has got very poor recently.
Malcolm, having joined the herd of PBers monitoring that Pop-ular site that can't be named, I see Mick Pork wanted you to be made aware that rather than leaving PB by choice he was and is still banned after a bit of anonymous clyping by one of his fellow posters.
TUD, have to agree the site has really went downhill, the hysterics from the frothers is pretty dire. Most do not want to debate the biggest political event in the UK for 300 years, rather discuss some obscure English seat prediction in 2015.
"the biggest political event in the UK for 300 years"?
Croatia joining the EU in 2013 was probably a big political event to Croatia, but of little to no account to the EU. As mathematicians say, it's not commutative.
These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before.
BBC - A leading barrister has told the Lords communication committee no new laws are needed to deal with social media, just a better understanding of the existing ones.
John Cooper QC said: stalking, threats to kill, sending obscene material and harassment were "age old" offences. The fact that they were being committed on Twitter did not make any difference.
Blimey, a QC with a rare commodity nowadays – common sense!
I've just advised Mrs JackW I'm corresponding online about the location of London "knocking shops".
She arched an eyebrow and said "Go for it .... if you think you're hard enough !!"
Game Set and Match to Er Indoors ....
This reminds me of a Chubby Brown joke about the time he got into a minicab and asked to be taken "somewhere I can get a BJ for £10....b****** took me to me own f******* house...."
Kilts only became fashionable in the 18th century. Before that, it was the "plaid", which according to reports was an eminently sensible form of clothing for traveling light through rough terrain.
AIUI kilts were invented during the industrial revolution, when Scotch workers heading south for jobs (plus ca change!) had to reduce the volume of their garb so it wouldn't get tangled in the machines.
The well-known tartans were all of course invented by English military tailors in the eighteenth century. A smart and unusual uniform was a recruiting aid, so when the English army started raising units of Scotch sepoys, they devised a militarised version of what they imagined north British ethnic dress to look like.
The spurious association with Scotch gangs or "clans" arose because recruiting was local, so everyone from Drumnafiggich or wherever, most of whom were called MacSporran, would end up in the same regiment. They would thereafter fondly imagine that their regimental sett of a Garter Blue field with a Rifle Green plaid and double Crimson overstripe was the auld ancestral Clan MacSporran tartan. It had in fact been run up in Piccadilly and was exactly as authentically Scotch as the hamburger, bratwurst or Mom's apple pie.
Sunny Hundal has looked into his crystal balls and found a Tory 33-1 shot with Lads for the 2016 Mayoral election.He also strongly fancies Sadiq Khan,still 8-1,with Diane Abbott his main competitor-she's on 33-1 too. http://labourlist.org/2014/07/how-london-could-have-a-tory-mayor-in-2016-again/ I am following Mike in on Sadiq Khan at 8-1.His advice to get on at long odds might just turn out to be as good a return as Galloway was in Bradford.For fuller cover the 2 at 33-1 to small money as savers. Bet no 3.
@Bond_James_Bond Partially right on the origins of the kilt, but it is usually attributed to an English owner of a foundry in Scotland. The "Black Watch" tartan was originally based on the "old" Sutherland Tartan, But the really old ones were based on local dyes and the weavers preference, and as such were representative of an area, rather than a "clan". 8 out 10 overall (way higher than average)
Sunny Hundal has looked into his crystal balls and found a Tory 33-1 shot with Lads for the 2016 Mayoral election.He also strongly fancies Sadiq Khan,still 8-1,with Diane Abbott his main competitor-she's on 33-1 too. http://labourlist.org/2014/07/how-london-could-have-a-tory-mayor-in-2016-again/ I am following Mike in on Sadiq Khan at 8-1.His advice to get on at long odds might just turn out to be as good a return as Galloway was in Bradford.For fuller cover the 2 at 33-1 to small money as savers. Bet no 3.
Sunny Hundal has looked into his crystal balls and found a Tory 33-1 shot with Lads for the 2016 Mayoral election.He also strongly fancies Sadiq Khan,still 8-1,with Diane Abbott his main competitor-she's on 33-1 too. http://labourlist.org/2014/07/how-london-could-have-a-tory-mayor-in-2016-again/ I am following Mike in on Sadiq Khan at 8-1.His advice to get on at long odds might just turn out to be as good a return as Galloway was in Bradford.For fuller cover the 2 at 33-1 to small money as savers. Bet no 3.
A few things have changed (the rules of selection for one) but I still think he's the man to beat for the Labour selection.
I remember that day, Mike said you had a belter of a tip coming up. So I waited in all morning, delaying the errands I had to run that day. Arrived back home around 3 hours later, obviously the price had been obliterated.
I'm on at 12-1 or so now but was miffed I missed the 33-1 on the day !
"Labour's biggest union backer, Unite, is expected to approve a motion at its annual conference calling on the party to offer an "In-Out" EU referendum.
The motion has the backing of the union leadership and is therefore almost certain to be approved.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has all but ruled out a referendum, unless further powers are transferred to Brussels.
But Unite's leadership fears this stance will be "a millstone" around Labour's neck at the next election.
Sources close to Unite general secretary Len McCluskey say he told his union executive: "It can never be wrong to consult the people.""
"These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before. "
Don't leave us in suspense Bond. We should be told the joke.
"These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before. "
Don't leave us in suspense Bond. We should be told the joke.
Sorry about that Pulp Star. If it's any consolation the 4 worth backing for the next Labour leader are Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham, Rachel Reeves and Chuka Umunna. They're the only 4 with the desire to walk over hot coals and base in the PLP to get the required nominations. They may not all run at the next leadership election (whenever that may be) but the candidate with the best value odds by far is Burnham at 14/1 with Skybet and 12s elsewhere. Get on now Pulp Star before you do today's errands.
Housebuilding at a record high this year? It might be kind if you inform the relevant ministers, as they were having a panic attack over the figures yesterday.
I agree with Sunny Hundal's logic and have heard whispers of a Goldsmith / BoJo job swap. 33/1 may well prove good value and I'll be backing him.
They are united in that they don't want a third runway, so I can see where the potential for a job swap comes from. I'm getting in now on Goldsmith for mayor.
I get the feeling that there will be a political scandal going back to the 1970's and 1980's, similar to Saville and Harris. There have long been rumours of politicians being involved in some pretty horrible stuff and the news of some file of allegations going missing in the Home Office makes me think there has been a lack of investigation. I would have thought that any Home Secretary would have called in the Police and not just passed allegations to officials. Perhaps the officials did pass it over to the Police ?
I get the feeling that there will be a political scandal going back to the 1970's and 1980's, similar to Saville and Harris. There have long been rumours of politicians being involved in some pretty horrible stuff and the news of some file of allegations going missing in the Home Office makes me think there has been a lack of investigation. I would have thought that any Home Secretary would have called in the Police and not just passed allegations to officials. Perhaps the officials did pass it over to the Police ?
In the news:
Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan this morning said he asked officials to look carefully at a dossier handed to him in the 1980s allegedly containing claims of a Westminster paedophile network. The Tory peer released a statement after he was challenged to make public what he knew about the file handed to him at the time by a fellow Conservative MP. Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale, told the Home Affairs Select Committee that Lord Brittan had been sent a dossier of allegations about paedophiles between 1983 and 1985.
They may not all run at the next leadership election (whenever that may be) but the candidate with the best value odds by far is Burnham at 14/1 with Skybet and 12s elsewhere. Get on now Pulp Star before you do today's errands.
Can Burnham really ever escape the Stafford hospital scandal following him everywhere he goes? What would the media do to a man who let that happen on his watch yet wanted to run the country?
That said, the other 3 you name are all underwhelming. Although IMHO the worst by far is Reeves. A dreadful media performer, her opinions just make her sound like Ed Miliband in a wig - would Labour really replace Ed with Ed2??
Interesting too that Ed Balls is not on your list.
Lib Dem decision not to guarantee EU referendum offers relief for Labour Miliband's party will not be left as the only one that "doesn't trust the people".
One last thing Henry, if Labour don't win the next election, will Ed M try and stay on as leader and contest 2019/20 or will they force him out?
If the Tories win most seats and Cameron is returned as the next PM then Ed Miliband will go within 48 hours. Even if he wanted to stay in those circumstances (I very much doubt) then he'll be marched off the premises anyhow. As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
@Bond_James_Bond Partially right on the origins of the kilt, but it is usually attributed to an English owner of a foundry in Scotland. The "Black Watch" tartan was originally based on the "old" Sutherland Tartan, But the really old ones were based on local dyes and the weavers preference, and as such were representative of an area, rather than a "clan". 8 out 10 overall (way higher than average)
IIRC the Sutherland tartan is the Government (aka Black Watch) sett with a yellow overstripe so I struggle with the idea that it came first.
However...the fact is that, as you said, local weavers working with local dyes would not have produced a uniform local sett. There would have been no reason even to attempt it; who cared? You need a centralised procurer who requires uniformity to achieve that, i.e. the British army.
Another point not often appreciated is that in cavalry regiments, the horse was considered part of the uniform, and therefore as fas as possible horses were all the same colour because this made the unit look sharper. If the whole regiment could not be equipped with the same colour of horses, then each squadron would be, with the senior squadron on the darker horses. It was also an aid to rallying: if your unit was dispersed after a melee you looked around for and rallied on other blokes in the same uniform on the same colour horse. Buglers were always on greys so the officers could easily see a bugler if they needed to issue orders.
In elite regiments, the horses were black (see the Household Cavalry even today), with white face and leg markings minimised because they made the unit look untidy. The Scots Greys originally wore grey coats, but at some point after they adopted red coats, someone decided to preserve a rationale for the name by mounting them on greys.
With their uniform appearance of red coats, white horses and ginger hair, they must have made a magnificent sight.
The apparent Coalition triumph of Circle/Hichingbrooke Hospital started it's tender process for private running under Burnham's stewardship of the NHS - I've never seen any Labour poster on this site point out this small, but important detail.
@HenryGmanson Do you think Andy Burnham will do better than the 4th/5 place he achieved last time for the Labour ladership ?
Burnham's campaign last time was woeful. However he's a man transformed in the eyes of the party grassroots, helped by both his brief and the way he's handled the Hillsborough campaign which is important in its own right but also very symbolic. What Ed's political team failed to grasp is Hillsborough matters to many across the labour movement because it is shorthand for other longstanding issues such as the conduct of the police during the miners strike and the way various groups have been reported by 'the Murdoch press'.
If a constituency Labour party is organising a fundraising dinner the person they want the most is Burnham. When he runs he'll have a much better team of people around him, I've no doubt.
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
One last thing Henry, if Labour don't win the next election, will Ed M try and stay on as leader and contest 2019/20 or will they force him out?
If the Tories win most seats and Cameron is returned as the next PM then Ed Miliband will go within 48 hours. Even if he wanted to stay in those circumstances (I very much doubt) then he'll be marched off the premises anyhow. As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
The only ICM polls in Scotland for the Euro elections I can find had the SNP on 41% and 36%, way above their actual total. Survaton had the SNP on 37% in the poll I can find. Both may have slightly understated the pro-independence Scottish Greens by 1 or 2%. However the fact that both pollsters completely over-stated the SNP for the Euros and are now the primary pollsters the Nats are clinging to for the indyref should raise serious alarm bells for them.
I actually wonder whether the SNP may really have given up and are more focussed on 2015/16 now. The No campaign may well prove to have worked but might the nature of it have harmed Labour? Scotland will almost certainly stay in the UK but next year's GE in Scotland will be very interesting and not getting enough UK attention. With the SNP ruling the roost since 2011, the collapse of the Lib Dems, non-Brown Labour uninspiring and a likely hung parliament on the horizon, there is much to play for. They key could be SNP tactics. Will they rule out a deal with the Tories and present themselves as a left wing anti-Tory alternative to Labour? Or will they concern themselves with 'more powers for Scotland' and prepare to work with whoever will deliver on that? Their voting intention figures in the monthly ICM have been pretty good - which is of course based on 2010.
As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
Wow, HenryG, that's quite a prediction. I certainly agree with the unpopularity point (it's one I've made here many times), but I hadn't thought of the possibility of a change of leader with Labour in government (presumably minority government). I would have thought it would be very hard to change in such circumstances - if it happened, I guess it would trigger a GE in practice.
Lib Dem decision not to guarantee EU referendum offers relief for Labour Miliband's party will not be left as the only one that "doesn't trust the people".
"One remaining nuance that separates the Lib Dems' stance from that of Labour is that Clegg believes the conditions for a referendum are likely to be met in the next parliament. Miliband, however, does not."
Now that Juncker is in charge, I wonder what Clegg thinks the EU has in store for the future that will force a referendum? – the list could be endless..!
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
You are getting out from under your rock a lot these days , cretin.
Oh, the rapier wit!
The scintillating repartee!
What will we do after September 18 when you fall strangely silent......?
One thing is for sure you will not get a life , and will be very embarrassed to boot . I will enjoy slagging foreigners, who will still be wittering about border posts and how big a clout they have as they get humilated once again by all and sundry. You will love being a RUMP UK citizen , near as good as JackW loving being an ARSE.
As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
Wow, HenryG, that's quite a prediction. I certainly agree with the unpopularity point (it's one I've made here many times), but I hadn't thought of the possibility of a change of leader with Labour in government (presumably minority government). I would have thought it would be very hard to change in such circumstances - if it happened, I guess it would trigger a GE in practice.
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now. And you yourself have pointed out the challenges of Gov't for Mr Miliband will be 'difficult' - at best I think he will have a slim majority...
That said the Labour Party has an absolutely appalling record of knifing obviously poor leaders whilst they are PM. We don't have to look back too far to find a massive example of that.
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
My own feeling though is that this isn't the only reason for the silence. The Anglophobes have had to recognise that they have comprehensively lost on every single point. It's not been an inconclusive or even a close debate, in the sense that they won on some points, lost on others, and honours are only just not even. On the contrary, the Nits have lost every aspect of every argument.
They've conceded.
It's like that scene towards the end of Zulu when the plucky English soldiers are waiting, exhausted, for the next onrush of the bizarrely-clad heathen horde. And gradually it dawns on them that the silence bespeaks total victory.
Cuckoo, Cuckoo
The quality and wit of Unionist trolling on here has got very poor recently.
Malcolm, having joined the herd of PBers monitoring that Pop-ular site that can't be named, I see Mick Pork wanted you to be made aware that rather than leaving PB by choice he was and is still banned after a bit of anonymous clyping by one of his fellow posters.
TUD, have to agree the site has really went downhill, the hysterics from the frothers is pretty dire. Most do not want to debate the biggest political event in the UK for 300 years, rather discuss some obscure English seat prediction in 2015.
"the biggest political event in the UK for 300 years"?
Croatia joining the EU in 2013 was probably a big political event to Croatia, but of little to no account to the EU. As mathematicians say, it's not commutative.
These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before.
I don't think Stafford will be an issue in a future Labour leadership election Marquee Mark.
Probably true. The fact that he presided over humiliation and carnage will not trouble the party of the NHS one little bit, because their interest - the staff - did just fine.
@Bond_James_Bond Partially right on the origins of the kilt, but it is usually attributed to an English owner of a foundry in Scotland. The "Black Watch" tartan was originally based on the "old" Sutherland Tartan, But the really old ones were based on local dyes and the weavers preference, and as such were representative of an area, rather than a "clan". 8 out 10 overall (way higher than average)
Pity his intellect was not the same , surprised he was able to read Wiki well enough to get that written down. Must have had help.
As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
Wow, HenryG, that's quite a prediction. I certainly agree with the unpopularity point (it's one I've made here many times), but I hadn't thought of the possibility of a change of leader with Labour in government (presumably minority government). I would have thought it would be very hard to change in such circumstances - if it happened, I guess it would trigger a GE in practice.
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now. And you yourself have pointed out the challenges of Gov't for Mr Miliband will be 'difficult' - at best I think he will have a slim majority...
That said the Labour Party has an absolutely appalling record of knifing obviously poor leaders whilst they are PM. We don't have to look back too far to find a massive example of that.
Miliband is leader because there is no different leader available. The whole disgraceful rabble are tarred with the record of 1997-2010 so they're all equally compromised. There is no Adenauer figure available.
One last thing Henry, if Labour don't win the next election, will Ed M try and stay on as leader and contest 2019/20 or will they force him out?
If the Tories win most seats and Cameron is returned as the next PM then Ed Miliband will go within 48 hours. Even if he wanted to stay in those circumstances (I very much doubt) then he'll be marched off the premises anyhow. As it happens I still fancy Labour to be the largest party. I do however expect the next Labour government to be incredibly unpopular. And with limited political capital then Ed may well not last the full term as party leader.
There is nobody to march him off the premises. It's one reason I could not join the Labour Party. Until they install a proper democratic system for removing leaders the Party no longer wants I'll continue to think that the culture of the Party is a little bit like all those communists states where leaders seemed to have a job for life.
One reason why the future of the Lib Dems could be quite bright if they got rid of their dunderheaded leader.
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now.
I'm not so sure about that, at least not with the available candidates. The only one of the five who ran last time that I rate is Ed Balls, but although he's a more effective politician than Ed M in my view, it's also true that he's not terribly likeable. And I don't see Chukka, Rachel Reeves or Yvette as obviously better than Ed M.
I think a lot of the strategic errors that Ed has made have effectively been forced on him by the blind alley Gordon Brown took the party into.
@TGOHF The art of politics is about claiming credit for the good stuff, and blaming the bad on others. It was ever thus. Should Ed hold a referendum? Ask him and his policy advisers, I don't have a clue, like Dave's disaster/triumph it depends on the first part of my post.
There was a time a few months ago on here when every thread, no matter what the subject, was instantly wrecked by buffoons banging on about north Britain and telling us all - from Sweden - about how wa didnae understand what was afoot in the centre of the political universe, Dundee (or wherever). No matter what the rest of us were talking about, all that mattered to a certain nutty tendency was Scotland.
Some of the more acutely touched in the head posters have departed, so that a blessed near-silence from this tendency now reigns.
Perhaps the cyber slush fund has dried up ?
You wish Flash, not many of your billionaire blood suckers helping NO out , leaving it to the Tories to use public funds to fight their battle.
You are getting out from under your rock a lot these days , cretin.
Oh, the rapier wit!
The scintillating repartee!
What will we do after September 18 when you fall strangely silent......?
One thing is for sure you will not get a life , and will be very embarrassed to boot . I will enjoy slagging foreigners, who will still be wittering about border posts and how big a clout they have as they get humilated once again by all and sundry. You will love being a RUMP UK citizen , near as good as JackW loving being an ARSE.
And the Nats wonder why they are losing.....what's plan B on currency? When was the last time you engaged in debate rather than simply insult those who hold a different view from yourself?
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now.
I'm not so sure about that, at least not with the available candidates. The only one of the five who ran last time that I rate is Ed Balls, but although he's a more effective politician than Ed M in my view, it's also true that he's not terribly likeable. And I don't see Chukka, Rachel Reeves or Yvette as obviously better than Ed M.
I think a lot of the strategic errors that Ed has made have effectively been forced on him by the blind alley Gordon Brown took the party into.
Obviously impossible to prove a counterfactual but I think Yvette would be doing better than Ed is right now.
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still be in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now.
I'm not so sure. The problem Labour has is that their front man has no policies to front. I have seen no evidence that any other Labour politician knows how to direct the party, now that it has no money to spend. Labour's business model is broken. Nobody at the top is acknowledging that they ALWAYS load unsustainable levels of public spending sector spending onto the private sector and long-term borrowing.
"... under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now."
Who would this wonderful leader be? Its all very well saying under a different leader but who is this person that could have swing the Unions behind him/her, got the vote of the membership and the trust of the MPs? Then there is the tricky bit of mobilising the electorate, who in Labour could do that?
P.S. Your earlier point about Labour not wishing to claim credit for starting the Hinchinbroke hospital rescue. It is not really surprising, one can't really bang on about the evil Conservatives wishing to privatise the NHS and then draw attention to the fact that when you were in office you thought it rather a good idea.
I actually think fixed term parliaments (which Labour look set to keep) can make an unpopular Prime Minister less secure, not more. Far harder for them to internally argue to back off or they'll 'press the button', as Brown did.
"they ALWAYS load unsustainable levels of public spending sector spending onto the private sector and long-term borrowing." Funny you should mention that, it is apparently the local councils fault not enough housing is being built. They were told to build one new house for every council house sold (usually at a huge discount). Can you see a small flaw in this idea?
@Morris_Dancer Yup, Brown and his property/debt fueled boom, thank George those days are past. How are house prices holding up? and are we making inroads into the shortfall?
I actually think fixed term parliaments (which Labour look set to keep) can make an unpopular Prime Minister less secure, not more. Far harder for them to internally argue to back off or they'll 'press the button', as Brown did.
Labour is just plain awful at knifing it's leaders though - Hoon, Hewitt, Byers and Clarke was the most pitiful assassination attempt I've ever witnessed in all my days.
HurstLlama - worth pointing out thought that the unions will not have a great deal of influence in the next leadership election under the new rules - especially if the leadership election is sooner rather than later. This allows 1 other potential candidate worth mentioning is Stella Creasy. She'd have a chance if shortlisted, but she'd have to still get sufficient MPs to be nominated which is not a given and she's fishing from the same pool in the PLP as Chuka now. I just think she'd struggle to get the numbers, but if she did then she could surprise a few people. I can imagine a bit of media interest.
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now.
I'm not so sure about that, at least not with the available candidates. The only one of the five who ran last time that I rate is Ed Balls, but although he's a more effective politician than Ed M in my view, it's also true that he's not terribly likeable. And I don't see Chukka, Rachel Reeves or Yvette as obviously better than Ed M.
I think a lot of the strategic errors that Ed has made have effectively been forced on him by the blind alley Gordon Brown took the party into.
I do hope they choose Chukka.
I can't imagine a more self-inflated empty suit.
I have great confidence that the British people will see through him in no time
I actually think fixed term parliaments (which Labour look set to keep) can make an unpopular Prime Minister less secure, not more. Far harder for them to internally argue to back off or they'll 'press the button', as Brown did.
Labour is just plain awful at knifing it's leaders though - Hoon, Hewitt, Byers and Clarke was the most pitiful assassination attempt I've ever witnessed in all my days.
Oh no no .... I think that accolade goes to Lord Oakeshott
I think when we look back at the 2010 Labour leadership election it really needed Yvette Cooper in there rather than Ed Balls. I wonder how different things would be for the party if Balls had failed to keep hold of his seat...
Obviously impossible to prove a counterfactual but I think Yvette would be doing better than Ed is right now.
I'm sure she'd be more focused, clear and coherent, so you could be right, but I think she'd also be quite off-putting to some. I try not to let my personal views influence my betting assessments but I certainly find her off-putting. Of course I'm not the target market!
But we all know Ed is basically Crap - under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now.
I'm not so sure about that, at least not with the available candidates. The only one of the five who ran last time that I rate is Ed Balls, but although he's a more effective politician than Ed M in my view, it's also true that he's not terribly likeable. And I don't see Chukka, Rachel Reeves or Yvette as obviously better than Ed M.
I think a lot of the strategic errors that Ed has made have effectively been forced on him by the blind alley Gordon Brown took the party into.
Obviously impossible to prove a counterfactual but I think Yvette would be doing better than Ed is right now.
Didn't she have ME at one point though? If true, I could quite understand why she wouldn't want the pressure and strain of being LOTO. She'd probably be the best candidate, with her husband as Shadow Chancellor.
HurstLlama - worth pointing out thought that the unions will not have a great deal of influence in the next leadership election under the new rules - especially if the leadership election is sooner rather than later. This allows 1 other potential candidate worth mentioning is Stella Creasy. She'd have a chance if shortlisted, but she'd have to still get sufficient MPs to be nominated which is not a given and she's fishing from the same pool in the PLP as Chuka now. I just think she'd struggle to get the numbers, but if she did then she could surprise a few people. I can imagine a bit of media interest.
Wouldn't argue with that Mr. Manson, but I was relying to Pulpstar's point that under a different leader Labour would now be cruising to victory.
I am not that well up on Labour's internal politics, but from the outside the person who appeals most to me is Cruddas. It is a shame that Brown was such a ghastly, malignant figure. We might have had a much wider and deeper pool of potential Labour Prime Ministers.
PMQ's - Miliband says the government has missed the cancer target for the first time ever.
Cameron says the government has introduced a cancer drugs fund for the first time. Labour is in charge in Wales. In Wales they have not met a cancer target since 2009.
You have to love how in politics some words mean completely the opposite to their literal meaning and some others are so massively understated its not even funny...
On 15 October, Campbell's deputy Vince Cable conceded on BBC Radio 4's The World at One programme that Campbell's position was "certainly under discussion", adding "I don't think it's under threat"
"certainly under discussion" + "I don't think it's under threat" = Already dead.
@Pulpstar "... under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now." Who would this wonderful leader be? Its all very well saying under a different leader but who is this person that could have swing the Unions behind him/her, got the vote of the membership and the trust of the MPs? Then there is the tricky bit of mobilising the electorate, who in Labour could do that? ......
The people with the best inside view on the "Leadership" qualities of someone amongst a pool of MPs are the MPs. Labour MPs wanted David not Ed Milliband. Clearly a majority had major doubts on EdM. The tragedy for Labour was the influence of the Unions and the campaigns within Unite etc for EdM. However it was a good outcome for the other parties.
When Ed moves onto A&E waiting times, the PM goes back to Wales:
We have met our waiting time target for Accident and Emergency... Let me admit to a mistake: I just said Labour haven’t met a cancer treatment target since 2009. I’m afraid I was wrong. They haven’t met a cancer target since 2008... People are dying on waiting lists and Labour are responsible.
Poor old Rory, coped with post invasion Iraq but can't organise a bit of hand holding.
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 11m Rory Stewart ditches Hands Across Border with 100,000 people linking hands, 19 July. Office blames "logistics & red tape". New event Sept
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 3m Rory Stewart was still discussing his Hands Across the Border event in a debate at Guildhall in City on Monday night, but met some ridicule
Comments
DIMITROV to beat Murray with a +4.5 game advantage at 5/6 with sportingbet.com. Both players in good nick but DIMITROV is one of most improved players on the circuit at the moment. The Bulgarian is on a 8 match winning streak on grass having won Queens. Murray's 2nd serve looks vulnerable and I fancy DIMITROV to push the Scot all the way.
Stan WAWRINKA is not without a chance against Federer and he was devastating against in-form Lopez. The 12/5 looks tempting against Federer as he moves towards the twilight of his career. However I think there's much more value in backing win each way to win the tournament at 18/1 with Stan James, Skybet and Bet365. You get a third of the odds for making the final and should WAWRINKA get past Federer he'll be favourite to get past Raonic or Kyrgios in the semi. Don't get me wrong Federer is the deserved favourite in this match having won 13 and only lost 2 against his compatriot. But they've only placed twice in the last year when Federer has fallen back. Federer won 6/3 6/7 7/5 in 2013 but WAWRINKA won their last match in April at the final in Rome 4/6 7/6 6/2. I'm going on the each-way title win with WAWRINKA at 18/1 where I think there's most value.
As for the Kyrgios-Raonic match you can make a case for KYRGIOS winning who will be running on adrenaline after his dusting of Nadal. Raonic surprisingly doesn't have a terrific record at Wimbledon though he is normally good on fast surfaces and shouldn't be underestimated. The crowd will be all behind KYRGIOS and I think the best value is for KYRGIOS to win the first set widely available at 11/8 but I'll not be going as big a match stake as I am with DIMITROV (famous last words).
HenryG.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28123128
"That control is central to domestic violence, which is why we're campaigning for all psychological abuse and coercive control to be criminalised. We urge Mr Grayling and the Home Office to go further, and ensure victims can get the support of the criminal justice system for all the abuse they experience."
Writing laws doesn't make bad things go away by magic, and whilst psych abuse is of course horrendous, it's also so vague and subjective as to be effectively unpoliceable. What about couples in S&M lifestyle relationships, to take it to an extreme? Some people happily insult one another, for others that would be very hurtful.
It's a good sentiment but would make an appalling law, I fear.
If you want a genuine example of a plucky and substantially Welsh battleline holding off a horde of what appeared to be Village People lookalikes, Agincourt is a better place to start. The French were still making the same mistake at Waterloo 400 years later. I agree, but I wanted the parallels between the Zulus and the Nats to be as close as possible for the comparison to work. In reality the comparison is very slight - at Rorke's Drift the British were grossly outnumbered, whereas in PB terms the British grossly outnumber the Nats.
Besides which: the Zulus might have been more aptly dressed, but look where it got them.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/1999/nov/02/simonhughes
The Main regiment was the 2nd Warwickshire regiment of foot under Bromhead, joined by Chards Royal Engineers, who then took command as senior officer, the regiment of Bromhead was based in Wales, but of mixed nationalities and was not renamed the borderers until after some time later.
Edit - never mind points already made
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2673136/SNP-crisis-summit-orders-huge-taxpayer-funded-publicity-blitz-support-Yes-campaign-plummets-polls.html
Decided to lay off betting on tennis for the rest of Wimbledon, but some interesting tips. I agree the Kyrgios could go far.
"Former home secretary Lord Brittan says information about paedophile ring was passed onto Home Office" (BBC breaking)
He might have done better to go without 'the straight choice' when running against Tatchell though.
Or rather, it might have left a less bitter taste in the mouth
'Record View: A no to Trident could be Yes vote
The SNP say September’s referendum is a chance to rid Scotland of nuclear weapons – which is a very attractive prospect to those who were first politicised by the anti-nuclear movement in the 1960s and in the 1980s.
In the stroke of a pen the nuclear subs could be sent sailing from their Clyde base.
So far, so good, for those of us who never wanted them here in the first place.
Would it be that simple? Possibly not. But the fact remains that for many, getting rid of Trident is one good reason to vote Yes.'
http://tinyurl.com/k7zzrwo
OTOH the Greeks rode, to hunt and as cavalry, but as far as I know only ever wore, effectively, dresses (and no underwear). Without stirrups. Doesn't really bear thinking about.
The rage of the nats in the comments to his article is par for the course. This amusing little snippet by some called Peter Thomson gives you the flavour:
Some Scots would go further and suggest Mr Kellner's close association with the Tory Party and donations to said party makes YouGov a dubious sources of Scottish political polling analysis
She arched an eyebrow and said "Go for it .... if you think you're hard enough !!"
Game Set and Match to Er Indoors ....
All those sensible Scottish ladies, turned away by the abuse, to vote 'No'.
Do you use the same language towards your minicab customers?
Kilts only became fashionable in the 18th century. Before that, it was the "plaid", which according to reports was an eminently sensible form of clothing for traveling light through rough terrain.
The scintillating repartee!
What will we do after September 18 when you fall strangely silent......?
"If you want a genuine example of a plucky and substantially Welsh battleline holding off a horde of what appeared to be Village People lookalikes, Agincourt is a better place to start. "
If you are talking about the archers in Henry V's army being mainly Welsh, I am afraid that is another myth. I would have go up into the attic to root out my 100 years war research papers to get the details but the idea that the longbow was ever a purely Welsh weapon is dubious to say the least and by Crecy (1346) let alone Agincourt (1415) the contingent of archers was drawn from all parts of the Kingdom.
Croatia joining the EU in 2013 was probably a big political event to Croatia, but of little to no account to the EU. As mathematicians say, it's not commutative.
These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before.
John Cooper QC said: stalking, threats to kill, sending obscene material and harassment were "age old" offences. The fact that they were being committed on Twitter did not make any difference.
Blimey, a QC with a rare commodity nowadays – common sense!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28104937
The well-known tartans were all of course invented by English military tailors in the eighteenth century. A smart and unusual uniform was a recruiting aid, so when the English army started raising units of Scotch sepoys, they devised a militarised version of what they imagined north British ethnic dress to look like.
The spurious association with Scotch gangs or "clans" arose because recruiting was local, so everyone from Drumnafiggich or wherever, most of whom were called MacSporran, would end up in the same regiment. They would thereafter fondly imagine that their regimental sett of a Garter Blue field with a Rifle Green plaid and double Crimson overstripe was the auld ancestral Clan MacSporran tartan. It had in fact been run up in Piccadilly and was exactly as authentically Scotch as the hamburger, bratwurst or Mom's apple pie.
http://labourlist.org/2014/07/how-london-could-have-a-tory-mayor-in-2016-again/
I am following Mike in on Sadiq Khan at 8-1.His advice to get on at long odds might just turn out to be as good a return as Galloway was in Bradford.For fuller cover the 2 at 33-1 to small money as savers.
Bet no 3.
Partially right on the origins of the kilt, but it is usually attributed to an English owner of a foundry in Scotland.
The "Black Watch" tartan was originally based on the "old" Sutherland Tartan, But the really old ones were based on local dyes and the weavers preference, and as such were representative of an area, rather than a "clan".
8 out 10 overall (way higher than average)
A few things have changed (the rules of selection for one) but I still think he's the man to beat for the Labour selection.
I'm on at 12-1 or so now but was miffed I missed the 33-1 on the day !
Should be a good test of Eds mettle in the face of his backers.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28125622
"Labour's biggest union backer, Unite, is expected to approve a motion at its annual conference calling on the party to offer an "In-Out" EU referendum.
The motion has the backing of the union leadership and is therefore almost certain to be approved.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has all but ruled out a referendum, unless further powers are transferred to Brussels.
But Unite's leadership fears this stance will be "a millstone" around Labour's neck at the next election.
Sources close to Unite general secretary Len McCluskey say he told his union executive: "It can never be wrong to consult the people.""
"These Nat delusions of Scotch significance always remind me of that joke about the mouse shagging the elephant, but I have probably posted that before. "
Don't leave us in suspense Bond. We should be told the joke.
Construction PMI for UK leaps - June's UK construction PMI reported as 62.6 vs 59.5 expected – a four-year high.
George is Bob the Builder's best mate.
Housebuilding at a record high this year?
It might be kind if you inform the relevant ministers, as they were having a panic attack over the figures yesterday.
Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan this morning said he asked officials to look carefully at a dossier handed to him in the 1980s allegedly containing claims of a Westminster paedophile network.
The Tory peer released a statement after he was challenged to make public what he knew about the file handed to him at the time by a fellow Conservative MP.
Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale, told the Home Affairs Select Committee that Lord Brittan had been sent a dossier of allegations about paedophiles between 1983 and 1985.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2676994/Former-Home-Secretary-Leon-Brittan-urged-step-forward-share-thoughts-child-sex-abuse-dossier-sent-Whitehall-1980s.html
That said, the other 3 you name are all underwhelming. Although IMHO the worst by far is Reeves. A dreadful media performer, her opinions just make her sound like Ed Miliband in a wig - would Labour really replace Ed with Ed2??
Interesting too that Ed Balls is not on your list.
Miliband's party will not be left as the only one that "doesn't trust the people".
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/07/lib-dem-decision-not-guarantee-eu-referendum-offers-relief-labour
Oh look! a buck just flew by.
However...the fact is that, as you said, local weavers working with local dyes would not have produced a uniform local sett. There would have been no reason even to attempt it; who cared? You need a centralised procurer who requires uniformity to achieve that, i.e. the British army.
Another point not often appreciated is that in cavalry regiments, the horse was considered part of the uniform, and therefore as fas as possible horses were all the same colour because this made the unit look sharper. If the whole regiment could not be equipped with the same colour of horses, then each squadron would be, with the senior squadron on the darker horses. It was also an aid to rallying: if your unit was dispersed after a melee you looked around for and rallied on other blokes in the same uniform on the same colour horse. Buglers were always on greys so the officers could easily see a bugler if they needed to issue orders.
In elite regiments, the horses were black (see the Household Cavalry even today), with white face and leg markings minimised because they made the unit look untidy. The Scots Greys originally wore grey coats, but at some point after they adopted red coats, someone decided to preserve a rationale for the name by mounting them on greys.
With their uniform appearance of red coats, white horses and ginger hair, they must have made a magnificent sight.
If a constituency Labour party is organising a fundraising dinner the person they want the most is Burnham. When he runs he'll have a much better team of people around him, I've no doubt.
I actually wonder whether the SNP may really have given up and are more focussed on 2015/16 now. The No campaign may well prove to have worked but might the nature of it have harmed Labour? Scotland will almost certainly stay in the UK but next year's GE in Scotland will be very interesting and not getting enough UK attention. With the SNP ruling the roost since 2011, the collapse of the Lib Dems, non-Brown Labour uninspiring and a likely hung parliament on the horizon, there is much to play for. They key could be SNP tactics. Will they rule out a deal with the Tories and present themselves as a left wing anti-Tory alternative to Labour? Or will they concern themselves with 'more powers for Scotland' and prepare to work with whoever will deliver on that? Their voting intention figures in the monthly ICM have been pretty good - which is of course based on 2010.
Now that Juncker is in charge, I wonder what Clegg thinks the EU has in store for the future that will force a referendum? – the list could be endless..!
You will love being a RUMP UK citizen , near as good as JackW loving being an ARSE.
Chris Leslie
?!?!
That said the Labour Party has an absolutely appalling record of knifing obviously poor leaders whilst they are PM. We don't have to look back too far to find a massive example of that.
One reason why the future of the Lib Dems could be quite bright if they got rid of their dunderheaded leader.
I think a lot of the strategic errors that Ed has made have effectively been forced on him by the blind alley Gordon Brown took the party into.
The art of politics is about claiming credit for the good stuff, and blaming the bad on others. It was ever thus.
Should Ed hold a referendum? Ask him and his policy advisers, I don't have a clue, like Dave's disaster/triumph it depends on the first part of my post.
"... under a different leader, I think Labour would perhaps still b in the forties heading for a nailed on majority right now."
Who would this wonderful leader be? Its all very well saying under a different leader but who is this person that could have swing the Unions behind him/her, got the vote of the membership and the trust of the MPs? Then there is the tricky bit of mobilising the electorate, who in Labour could do that?
P.S. Your earlier point about Labour not wishing to claim credit for starting the Hinchinbroke hospital rescue. It is not really surprising, one can't really bang on about the evil Conservatives wishing to privatise the NHS and then draw attention to the fact that when you were in office you thought it rather a good idea.
"they ALWAYS load unsustainable levels of public spending sector spending onto the private sector and long-term borrowing."
Funny you should mention that, it is apparently the local councils fault not enough housing is being built.
They were told to build one new house for every council house sold (usually at a huge discount).
Can you see a small flaw in this idea?
Yup, Brown and his property/debt fueled boom, thank George those days are past.
How are house prices holding up? and are we making inroads into the shortfall?
I can't imagine a more self-inflated empty suit.
I have great confidence that the British people will see through him in no time
Hoping like a heathen for India 5-0, big payout on that outcome, no loss if it doesn't happen.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay-festival/8557386/Hay-festival-Yvette-Cooper-talks-of-battle-with-ME.html
I am not that well up on Labour's internal politics, but from the outside the person who appeals most to me is Cruddas. It is a shame that Brown was such a ghastly, malignant figure. We might have had a much wider and deeper pool of potential Labour Prime Ministers.
I thought he'd do it last week.
Cameron says the government has introduced a cancer drugs fund for the first time. Labour is in charge in Wales. In Wales they have not met a cancer target since 2009.
On 15 October, Campbell's deputy Vince Cable conceded on BBC Radio 4's The World at One programme that Campbell's position was "certainly under discussion", adding "I don't think it's under threat"
"certainly under discussion" + "I don't think it's under threat" = Already dead.
When Ed moves onto A&E waiting times, the PM goes back to Wales:
We have met our waiting time target for Accident and Emergency... Let me admit to a mistake: I just said Labour haven’t met a cancer treatment target since 2009. I’m afraid I was wrong. They haven’t met a cancer target since 2008... People are dying on waiting lists and Labour are responsible.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/100871/pmqs_live_2nd_july.html
Welsh NHS a mill stone round Ed's neck.
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 11m
Rory Stewart ditches Hands Across Border with 100,000 people linking hands, 19 July. Office blames "logistics & red tape". New event Sept
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 3m
Rory Stewart was still discussing his Hands Across the Border event in a debate at Guildhall in City on Monday night, but met some ridicule
We should be thankful he went into politics, not medicine....
Cameron says average waiting times when Miliband was in cabinet was over 70 minutes. Now it is around 30 minutes.
There are more doctors, nurses and midwives. More patients are being treated every year, he says. Under Labour, we had the disgrace of Mid-Staffs.