Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
Case for Scottish independence has not been made, say business leaders More than 130 Scottish business leaders sign open letter urging Scots to vote no in next month's referendum
Agree with Mike that 80% is a tall order. 5% or so of the electorate aren't actually there - they've died or moved. Perhaps another 5% are not really compos mentis. Of the remainder, 20% are telling pollsters they still don't know how they'll vote, which to me suggests more lack of interest than thoughtful indecision.
Ed Balls agrees to do ice bucket challenge - will he nominate Osborne?
Only a person of little brain and seeking publicity would do this - especially when he should be formulating credible economic plans for the UK - of course he cannot do that if he has little brain.
If someone is taking a few minutes out to raise money for research into MND I applaud them. MND is a dreadful, currently incurable, disease. It’s not even possible to slow it’s “progress”!
And, RobD, if a member of HMG or senior opposition member wants to support a particular health charity, why on earth not?
Because I believe it could be construed as a conflict of interest, especially if they are in charge of how money is being distributed.
I suspect we will be seeing more of these donate-or-be-shamed drives in the future, given the success of this one.
I know what you mean and I think charity is best done privately. But they're hard to refuse - all politicians get challenges like that (ice buckets are just the latest variation, sometimes they're basically just a demand for a donation/sponsorship) and they're public so the choice is do them or look like a wimp and/or a cheapskate. I used to routinely say that I couldn't appropriately donate publicly to one cause rather than another, and invariably got a mildly grumpy look.
BTW, I see YouGov have tweaked their panel rating, the effect being to increase UKIP by 1% with everyone else fractionally down - they say it's to reflect post-2010 changes in the electorate with UKIP rising. Details here:
Malc if it's the wrong answer on the 19th I'll be moving my pensions from Edinburgh as any sane person would to avoid the currency hit.
Unfortunately, quite a lot of people aren't sane and in the event of the wrong result on 19 Sep will wait all the way until "Independence Day". Which interestingly has been pencilled in for 16 March 2016. That's Maundy Thursday. Followed by a bank holiday north of the border and two south of the border. Oh and the Thursday is also triple witching day in the derivatives markets. Picture the roads south being gridlocked, but...oh no!...the bank branches are all shut...ouch!
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, why would some lies in the Telegraph upset me. He was very clear he has a plan A and at least 3 Plan B's, even the most stupid unionist should be able to take that in. The doom mongers can say it is all very scary but as almost 200 other countries manage to have a currency I am pretty sure we will manage to have one as well. Only fools will be concerned.
No one is saying you wouldn't be able to have a currency, the argument is (should be) about the consequences of each choice.
Rob, that would be fine but as we see the NO nutters do not want to discuss anything , they just want to say scary, scary , you will not be allowed , etc. They are scared to discuss anything in detail and when they do they look stupid.
Actually, Darling was quite clear about some of the downsides to being in a Panama-like situation, where you don't have a central bank (crucial for a big financial industry), and can't set your own interest rates. These are all facts, and not some scare story designed to frighten the voters.
Darling has 100% downsides view, if he was honest and could bring himself to say that some things could be good instead of just scary scary, then people may listen. I am sure you know about the boy that cried wolf too often.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There are still some bodies unaccounted for as well, I think.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
The best thing about the independence referendum is that I've learnt there is an economist called Professor Ronald MacDonald.
He's a Unionist.
His counterpart on the Nat side is Mickey Mouse. Though increasingly it may be Dumbo.
you seem confused. the arch-nemesis of Ronald mcDonald is Hamburglar. I am not sure how this pertains to the referendum debate.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
A CURRENCY union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would collapse within months, plunging the country into a devastating recession, a leading economist has warned.
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
The Donbass rebels seem to have turned the military tide, violence, repression and armed force has proven a failure as a strategy to solve a political crisis.
Mr. G, but the Scottish voters will worry about it. The politicians this side of the border have been clear, and if they changed their minds voters would be furious.
Mr. Socrates, I did mention it, but for obvious reasons there were other matters being discussed. Nothing will happen from the West.
I'm sure China will be taking notes. When they come to invade Taiwan or Mongolia, all they need to do is invade with unmarked uniforms and tanks, pretend its "pro-Chinese militias" unrelated to them, stage fixed referendums and then agree to annexation. We didn't stand for countries invading their neighbours in 1914 or 1939 or 1979 or 1991 - what's happened to us?
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, mad cochers the arch unionist , financial expert and all round TURNIP. Luckily he is moving to a foreign country soon.
So a bit like Scotland's financial sector then ;-)
We will see if the doom mongers are correct Alan, we have heard it all before and they went nowhere. You would think by now they would just shut up or move.
Malc if it's the wrong answer on the 19th I'll be moving my pensions from Edinburgh as any sane person would to avoid the currency hit.
Likewise I'd be banking with the newly created Natwest Group instead of RBS at some point.
Alan, moving them to another UK organisation seems a bit premature but hey ho , maybe there will be lots of people moving their cash the other way. Given you will be with Nat West whilst we will be with RBS and all with the same company it does seem a bit odd for an intelligent person. Moving brass plates will change nothing , but you paying the spivs lots of commission to move your cash will benefit someone. I have to admit they do know how to fleece people, scary scary move your cash and thank you very much.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
World-weary, are you, Soccers?
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
The best thing about the independence referendum is that I've learnt there is an economist called Professor Ronald MacDonald.
He's a Unionist.
His counterpart on the Nat side is Mickey Mouse. Though increasingly it may be Dumbo.
you seem confused. the arch-nemesis of Ronald mcDonald is Hamburglar. I am not sure how this pertains to the referendum debate.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
A CURRENCY union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would collapse within months, plunging the country into a devastating recession, a leading economist has warned.
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
LOL, he does not have a funny name for NO reason. He is a joke. I thought we would be bankrupted because there was no oil, he thought so a few weeks ago. Now we will be bankrupted because we are swimming in oil. You would think these boys could make up their minds, he has obviously lost the script and not realised that this is NO oil week scary scary and used last weeks there are lakes of oil scary scary by mistake. Ha Ha Ha , we are going to be so rich we cannot use the pound.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
World-weary, are you, Soccers?
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
Just wondered.
Do you have a source? Did they ever plunge Sweden into war?
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
Must have been chemical weapons Assad is using that shot down MH17, perhaps he borrowed them off of Saddam. Must invade Iran now in case they build nuclear power plants rather than solar enabling the Palestinians to start a new holocaust as the new Tsar Putin watches on whilst jailing oligarchs.
Mr. Socrates, the Iraq invasion, the Syria vote, a weak president and a talented, ruthless Russian Czar. Sorry, president. Russia is, of course, a democracy. Ahem.
We've also stupidly reduced our military far too much.
Edited extra bit: just read a chapter on the second Emperor Andronicus, who also slashed his military budget. Didn't have a great impact on the Roman Empire's long-term prospects.
The best thing about the independence referendum is that I've learnt there is an economist called Professor Ronald MacDonald.
He's a Unionist.
His counterpart on the Nat side is Mickey Mouse. Though increasingly it may be Dumbo.
you seem confused. the arch-nemesis of Ronald mcDonald is Hamburglar. I am not sure how this pertains to the referendum debate.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
A CURRENCY union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would collapse within months, plunging the country into a devastating recession, a leading economist has warned.
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
Mr. G, but the Scottish voters will worry about it. The politicians this side of the border have been clear, and if they changed their minds voters would be furious.
Mr. Socrates, I did mention it, but for obvious reasons there were other matters being discussed. Nothing will happen from the West.
I'm sure China will be taking notes. When they come to invade Taiwan or Mongolia, all they need to do is invade with unmarked uniforms and tanks, pretend its "pro-Chinese militias" unrelated to them, stage fixed referendums and then agree to annexation. We didn't stand for countries invading their neighbours in 1914 or 1939 or 1979 or 1991 - what's happened to us?
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, why would some lies in the Telegraph upset me. He was very clear he has a plan A and at least 3 Plan B's, even the most stupid unionist should be able to take that in. The doom mongers can say it is all very scary but as almost 200 other countries manage to have a currency I am pretty sure we will manage to have one as well. Only fools will be concerned.
Is that why he can't tell anyone what those plans might be be?
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, mad cochers the arch unionist , financial expert and all round TURNIP. Luckily he is moving to a foreign country soon.
So a bit like Scotland's financial sector then ;-)
We will see if the doom mongers are correct Alan, we have heard it all before and they went nowhere. You would think by now they would just shut up or move.
Malc if it's the wrong answer on the 19th I'll be moving my pensions from Edinburgh as any sane person would to avoid the currency hit.
Likewise I'd be banking with the newly created Natwest Group instead of RBS at some point.
Moving brass plates will change nothing.
- one brass plate has a lender of last resort behind it - the other brass plate doesn't.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
Mr. G, but the Scottish voters will worry about it. The politicians this side of the border have been clear, and if they changed their minds voters would be furious.
Mr. Socrates, I did mention it, but for obvious reasons there were other matters being discussed. Nothing will happen from the West.
I'm sure China will be taking notes. When they come to invade Taiwan or Mongolia, all they need to do is invade with unmarked uniforms and tanks, pretend its "pro-Chinese militias" unrelated to them, stage fixed referendums and then agree to annexation. We didn't stand for countries invading their neighbours in 1914 or 1939 or 1979 or 1991 - what's happened to us?
The best thing about the independence referendum is that I've learnt there is an economist called Professor Ronald MacDonald.
He's a Unionist.
His counterpart on the Nat side is Mickey Mouse. Though increasingly it may be Dumbo.
you seem confused. the arch-nemesis of Ronald mcDonald is Hamburglar. I am not sure how this pertains to the referendum debate.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
A CURRENCY union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would collapse within months, plunging the country into a devastating recession, a leading economist has warned.
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
The best thing about the independence referendum is that I've learnt there is an economist called Professor Ronald MacDonald.
He's a Unionist.
His counterpart on the Nat side is Mickey Mouse. Though increasingly it may be Dumbo.
you seem confused. the arch-nemesis of Ronald mcDonald is Hamburglar. I am not sure how this pertains to the referendum debate.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
A CURRENCY union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would collapse within months, plunging the country into a devastating recession, a leading economist has warned.
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
Must have been chemical weapons Assad is using that shot down MH17, perhaps he borrowed them off of Saddam. Must invade Iran now in case they build nuclear power plants rather than solar enabling the Palestinians to start a new holocaust as the new Tsar Putin watches on whilst jailing oligarchs.
Assad said he had no chemical weapons. Assad uses chemical weapons. Assad then agrees the chemical weapons he does not have should be destroyed. The international community destroys those weapons. Assad uses other chemical weapons.
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, mad cochers the arch unionist , financial expert and all round TURNIP. Luckily he is moving to a foreign country soon.
So a bit like Scotland's financial sector then ;-)
We will see if the doom mongers are correct Alan, we have heard it all before and they went nowhere. You would think by now they would just shut up or move.
Malc if it's the wrong answer on the 19th I'll be moving my pensions from Edinburgh as any sane person would to avoid the currency hit.
Likewise I'd be banking with the newly created Natwest Group instead of RBS at some point.
Moving brass plates will change nothing.
- one brass plate has a lender of last resort behind it - the other brass plate doesn't.
Still can't believe Boris will lead the Conservatives. The media love him as do some of the grassroots, but I don't think he'd travel that well beyond the south (where the blues do well anyway), and I cannot see the PCP lining up behind him.
Still, could be wrong. Many thought he couldn't win in London.
If Boris were to make it through to the member's vote he would walk it.
The question then is whether he can find the support of one-third (+1) of Conservative MPs to make it that far. I don't think he is as popular with MPs as he is with the members, but he's a proven winner and he may be able to straddle the line between not being a continuity Cameroon and not being an IDS-like right winger.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
The Donbass rebels seem to have turned the military tide, violence, repression and armed force has proven a failure as a strategy to solve a political crisis.
Just have to hope the peoples of the East are given free and fair elections to decide where they see their future.
1. They're not "Donbass rebels", they're Russian troops in unmarked uniforms. 2. The Ukrainian government is not "a regime", it was democratically elected in free and fair elections, unlike Russia. 3. The US Assistant Secretary of State is called Victoria Nuland. Only anti-Semitic cranks call her by her family's older name. But it doesn't surprise me you're an anti-Semite since you've openly admitted you prefer the values of the US during the Jim Crow era. 4. The people of Eastern Ukraine are the same as the people of Western Ukraine: Ukrainians 5. There's no chance they will get free and fair elections under Russian control. You only need to look at the fixed referendum in Crimea to see the abuses to democracy in that vote.
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
Do you have a source?
Start with the piece in the Sunday Times by Pelle Neroth, 27 Jan 2008. He refers to the book by Ola Tunander, a prof at IPRI, Oslo. click.
No. And in a large confrontation between NATO and the WTO (or, after 1991, Russia), Sweden wouldn't have had much chance of staying neutral. But some in the country would have tried to stay out, and the British actions would have reduced their chances of success.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
Ssshhhh, someone'll be along soon to say that they were not Russian troops but EU troops masquerading as Russian troops who were about to invade Crimea to shoot down Putin's plane as it overflew Syria. There would probably be chemical weapons in there somewhere as well, along with an escort of fictitious Ukrainian fighter planes.
Still no news on MH17, I wonder why?
There's plenty of news on MH17. Take your tinfoil hat off and you might even be able to read some of it.
Must have been chemical weapons Assad is using that shot down MH17, perhaps he borrowed them off of Saddam. Must invade Iran now in case they build nuclear power plants rather than solar enabling the Palestinians to start a new holocaust as the new Tsar Putin watches on whilst jailing oligarchs.
Assad said he had no chemical weapons. Assad uses chemical weapons. Assad then agrees the chemical weapons he does not have should be destroyed. The international community destroys those weapons. Assad uses other chemical weapons.
And you support Assad.
Assad did not use chemical weapons and does not have chemical weapons anymore than Saddam did.
I am British, I am loyal to this country and this one alone, I don't care about Assad.
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
Do you have a source?
Start with the piece in the Sunday Times by Pelle Neroth, 27 Jan 2008. He refers to the book by Ola Tunander, a prof at IPRI, Oslo. click.
No. And in a large confrontation between NATO and the WTO (or, after 1991, Russia), Sweden wouldn't have had much chance of staying neutral. But some in the country would have tried to stay out, and the British actions would have reduced their chances of success.
Do you have a source that isn't from the international website to create an Islamic caliphate?
What seems clear from this debate (and all others) is that the rUK, and England in particular, is in a lose lose situation wrt Scottish independence. The English will be blamed no matter what the outcome. Plus ca change
Lost in the news yesterday was the Russian troops captured 30km inside Ukraine. We now have concrete proof that one country has invaded another for the second time, after previously annexing part of it. Is there a more basic principle of international law we should defend? This is sheer aggression by Russia, and all our MPs do is wring their hands.
The Donbass rebels seem to have turned the military tide, violence, repression and armed force has proven a failure as a strategy to solve a political crisis.
Just have to hope the peoples of the East are given free and fair elections to decide where they see their future.
1. They're not "Donbass rebels", they're Russian troops in unmarked uniforms. 2. The Ukrainian government is not "a regime", it was democratically elected in free and fair elections, unlike Russia. 3. The US Assistant Secretary of State is called Victoria Nuland. Only anti-Semitic cranks call her by her family's older name. But it doesn't surprise me you're an anti-Semite since you've openly admitted you prefer the values of the US during the Jim Crow era. 4. The people of Eastern Ukraine are the same as the people of Western Ukraine: Ukrainians 5. There's no chance they will get free and fair elections under Russian control. You only need to look at the fixed referendum in Crimea to see the abuses to democracy in that vote.
1. They are primarily Donbass people. 2. Ukrainian elections free and fair? Hahahaha. Not even included the votes of the Donbass region they purport to represent. 3. Why change your name? Must always understand the motivations of those involved in provoking these crises. 4. They aren't, as even someone with a cursory knowledge of the region knows. 5. I don't think anyone disputes the Crimea referendum was a reflection of the will of the people. I don't see any rebels in Crimea.
Plan A: a currency union. rUK says no. There are no obvious benefits to them and substantial detriments so this is a rational position. Just not going to happen.
Plan B: using Sterling without a currency union. Means no lender of last resort and the departure of most of our financial services industry which currently produces 8% of Scotland's GDP. Makes it very difficult and expensive to borrow. Simply catastrophic for the economy. Works for small countries with basic economies but not for a sophisticated economy like Scotland.
Plan B2. Use the Euro. So we can be treated with the same care and consideration as Greece, Portugal and Ireland presumably. Not something Alec really wants to talk about given the state of the EZ.
Plan B3 Have our own currency. Frankly inevitable if we are daft enough to vote for independence. Not without risks of course and there is that small matter of negotiating membership of the EU... A Scottish Pound will be more volatile than the rUK pound because of our vulnerability to the price of oil. It will demonstrate the transaction costs to our exporters for whom rUK is by far the largest market. It frankly shows what a bad idea independence is which is why Alec doesn't want to talk about this either.
So there are no good options really...except of course being Better Together.
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
Do you have a source?
Start with the piece in the Sunday Times by Pelle Neroth, 27 Jan 2008. He refers to the book by Ola Tunander, a prof at IPRI, Oslo. click.
No. And in a large confrontation between NATO and the WTO (or, after 1991, Russia), Sweden wouldn't have had much chance of staying neutral. But some in the country would have tried to stay out, and the British actions would have reduced their chances of success.
Do you have a source that isn't from the international website to create an Islamic caliphate?
Don't be silly. If you want to verify that the article was actually in the Sunday Times, you can pay to get through their paywall.
The ST article has been discussed on several special forces websites. Or check with author Pelle Neroth or navy minister Keith Speed, whom the ST reference as acknowledging that the ops took place.
Maybe reallocate some of the time you spend concocting tone-heavy imaginative parodies of 'conspiracy theories'?
If so, it has to be either Assad's regime, one of the various Islamic groups at the time, or the FSA. Look at where the attacks were, who had access, who had the delivery mechanisms, and who had most to gain from the attacks. The best-fit to all of these questions is the Assad regime.
However, that does not necessarily mean that Assad ordered them; it could have been a localised decision by a Syrian Army commander. But it is still Assad's responsibility.
The latest chemical attacks are of chlorine (I won't reproduce the links again, as you don't believe them). If you're saying Assad and Syria doesn't have access to chlorine then you're being rather silly.
You seem to support Russia and Assad more than you do Britain. Perhaps you need to retune your tinfoil hat. Or perhaps take it off ...
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
Suspect Hamilton could well leave Mercedes if he is not allowed to be 'top dog'. His naturally rebellious streak and his self-belief that he is the best, makes him a difficult person to be an equal part of a team. Could he replace Alonso at Ferrari?
It is fun to see the squirming Tories on here, predicting doom and gloom on one hand or being bedevilled by too much wealth on the other side. Only constant is the whinge whinge about how we are too stupid and too poor to do anything without those clever Tories with their pockets full of our money. Get a life or a vote.
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
It just shows how badly that team is being managed. Team orders that are expected to be followed should be given by senior manager not just a race engineer..
However it doesn't excuse what Rosberg did as his action cost Mercedes 25 points.
Misreading of the worst kind. I said my cousins have "historically" been SNP supporter
Some might say missing out the word 'ardent' when quoting yourself is a tad misleading.
Malcolm said he could understand if I had said my cousins had previously voted for the SNP. My response was to demonstrate that was what I had done. The ardency or otherwise didn't come into it.
Plan A: a currency union. rUK says no. There are no obvious benefits to them and substantial detriments so this is a rational position. Just not going to happen.
Plan B: using Sterling without a currency union. Means no lender of last resort and the departure of most of our financial services industry which currently produces 8% of Scotland's GDP. Makes it very difficult and expensive to borrow. Simply catastrophic for the economy. Works for small countries with basic economies but not for a sophisticated economy like Scotland.
Plan B2. Use the Euro. So we can be treated with the same care and consideration as Greece, Portugal and Ireland presumably. Not something Alec really wants to talk about given the state of the EZ.
Plan B3 Have our own currency. Frankly inevitable if we are daft enough to vote for independence. Not without risks of course and there is that small matter of negotiating membership of the EU... A Scottish Pound will be more volatile than the rUK pound because of our vulnerability to the price of oil. It will demonstrate the transaction costs to our exporters for whom rUK is by far the largest market. It frankly shows what a bad idea independence is which is why Alec doesn't want to talk about this either.
So there are no good options really...except of course being Better Together.
David, you will be fine you can move your fortune to England and smile smugly at all those poor people and say told you so. You could join the D&G Tories at their Champagne Brunch celebration on the 19th, I am sure there are plenty of the £35 tickets available, though you will likely be attending your local one.
So there are no good options really...except of course being Better Together.
Agree B3 is the least worst option - it's also the most intellectually coherent - yes, things may get tricky, but we'll sort it out and there are plenty of small successful countries (Norway, New Zealand, Singapore) with their own currencies and they do just fine.
Instead we've got this car crash of being dependent on a foreign country which has said it will say no and whose voters are overwhelmingly opposed. As you write, not going to happen.....
The uncharitable might think that despite 80 years of preparation they hadn't thought this through.....
I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing that we can talk about on here atm (Mods, please delete if necessary):
The stereotypical belief that boys are less vulnerable to child sexual exploitation means they are receiving insufficient protection from frontline services, Barnardo's has claimed.
The children's charity says new findings reveal up to a third of victims are male.
An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric.
Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
Mr. Financier, I'm not sure he would demand number one status, but he could leave the team if trust with Rosberg (who has a new contract, unlike Hamilton) vanishes entirely. Ferrari and maybe Red Bull will be watching with interest.
The downside of moving is that the Mercedes is a monster of a car, whereas the prancing horse is more of a lame donkey.
Mr. Eeek, jein. They've actually been managing the situation much better than I expected, until very recently. I did predict they'd miss Ross Brawn and the last race (and maybe Hungary) confirmed that, I feel. Brawn's experience and gravitas far exceeds that of Wolff and Lowe (and Lauda), and he was, as he put it, the single point of reference (ie sole boss).
I agree with you entirely that team orders should be sent via the boss himself (as Lowe did in Bahrain), not by a race engineer.
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
Suspect Hamilton could well leave Mercedes if he is not allowed to be 'top dog'. His naturally rebellious streak and his self-belief that he is the best, makes him a difficult person to be an equal part of a team. Could he replace Alonso at Ferrari?
Only if he is willing to accept that he will never be World Champion again..
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
Suspect Hamilton could well leave Mercedes if he is not allowed to be 'top dog'. His naturally rebellious streak and his self-belief that he is the best, makes him a difficult person to be an equal part of a team. Could he replace Alonso at Ferrari?
I think you might be being a little unfair to Hamilton there. He worked well enough with Button when they were both at McLaren (Button beat Hamilton in 2011).
If so, it has to be either Assad's regime, one of the various Islamic groups at the time, or the FSA. Look at where the attacks were, who had access, who had the delivery mechanisms, and who had most to gain from the attacks. The best-fit to all of these questions is the Assad regime.
However, that does not necessarily mean that Assad ordered them; it could have been a localised decision by a Syrian Army commander. But it is still Assad's responsibility.
The latest chemical attacks are of chlorine (I won't reproduce the links again, as you don't believe them). If you're saying Assad and Syria doesn't have access to chlorine then you're being rather silly.
You seem to support Russia and Assad more than you do Britain. Perhaps you need to retune your tinfoil hat. Or perhaps take it off ...
Such certitude regarding events occurring in the fog of war in a far off country. On such basis should matters of war be decided.
What seems clear from this debate (and all others) is that the rUK, and England in particular, is in a lose lose situation wrt Scottish independence. The English will be blamed no matter what the outcome. Plus ca change
Did you really want to have that bit of hackneyed self pity as your first ever comment? Though tbf you've found the spiritual home of that sort of guff.
Only thing wrong with Mike's proposition is that it will be YES and so you just lose all your money exactly the same as if you had backed NO at 1-6. Only consolation is that you will have had fun thinking you were going to win more money but same end result.
A smart bettor would have hopefully be in a situation where they win regardless of the outcome, taking advantage of changing prices to hedge bets one way or the other.
Must say, you seem to be in a good mood today.. you've posted three times and not had a go at anyone... ;-)
LOL, I am indeed in a sunny mood, all is well
Then don't read this then:
When will the penny drop for Alex Salmond? Monday’s TV debate was no triumph for the SNP leader – it was his biggest deceit. He may have got cheap cheers from the studio audience but his currency plans, whether A or B, don’t add up
LOL, why would some lies in the Telegraph upset me. He was very clear he has a plan A and at least 3 Plan B's, even the most stupid unionist should be able to take that in. The doom mongers can say it is all very scary but as almost 200 other countries manage to have a currency I am pretty sure we will manage to have one as well. Only fools will be concerned.
Is that why he can't tell anyone what those plans might be be?
So there are no good options really...except of course being Better Together.
Agree B3 is the least worst option - it's also the most intellectually coherent - yes, things may get tricky, but we'll sort it out and there are plenty of small successful countries (Norway, New Zealand, Singapore) with their own currencies and they do just fine.
Instead we've got this car crash of being dependent on a foreign country which has said it will say no and whose voters are overwhelmingly opposed. As you write, not going to happen.....
The uncharitable might think that despite 80 years of preparation they hadn't thought this through.....
My little ray of sunshine, a night at the pub with you would be some treat. Eeyore is happier than you.
1. They are primarily Donbass people. 2. Ukrainian elections free and fair? Hahahaha. Not even included the votes of the Donbass region they purport to represent. 3. Why change your name? Must always understand the motivations of those involved in provoking these crises. 4. They aren't, as even someone with a cursory knowledge of the region knows. 5. I don't think anyone disputes the Crimea referendum was a reflection of the will of the people. I don't see any rebels in Crimea.
1. There's no such thing as a Donbass ethnic group. You just make up laughable new nations to justify your support for Russian imperialism. 2. Ukrainian elections were indeed free and fair: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/ukraine/119078?download=true Yes, it was sad that the people of Donetsk didn't get their votes included. Sadly, the place has been plunged into a warzone, but even if everyone in the region unanimously voted against Poroshenko, he still would have won. 3. Victoria Nuland never changed her name. Her father did. I guess you think her credibility is tarnished by her Jewish ancestral guilt? 4. The people of eastern Ukraine are indeed majority Ukrainian:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine#mediaviewer/File:Ethnicukrainian2001.PNG This is unchanged from 1914: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Ethnic-Ukrainians.jpg 5. Yeah, that's why the Russian-appointed PM of Crimea received 4% in the previous free and fair election. There wasn't even an option in the Crimean referendum on the status quo. The most recent opinion poll carried out prior to the Russian military occupation of the presence, after which pro-Ukrainian protesters were beaten up on the streets, showed that 53% wanted autonomy in Ukraine, with just 29% wanting secession to join Russia. There were more voters in Sevastopol than residents!
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing that we can talk about on here atm (Mods, please delete if necessary):
The stereotypical belief that boys are less vulnerable to child sexual exploitation means they are receiving insufficient protection from frontline services, Barnardo's has claimed.
The children's charity says new findings reveal up to a third of victims are male.
An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric.
Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
A good Minister for Children would help. Tim Loughton was on Newsnight last night and was very impressive. A shame he was sacked by Cameron; one of the latter's more stupid decisions.
Mr. Financier, I'm not sure he would demand number one status, but he could leave the team if trust with Rosberg (who has a new contract, unlike Hamilton) vanishes entirely. Ferrari and maybe Red Bull will be watching with interest.
The downside of moving is that the Mercedes is a monster of a car, whereas the prancing horse is more of a lame donkey.
Mr. Eeek, jein. They've actually been managing the situation much better than I expected, until very recently. I did predict they'd miss Ross Brawn and the last race (and maybe Hungary) confirmed that, I feel. Brawn's experience and gravitas far exceeds that of Wolff and Lowe (and Lauda), and he was, as he put it, the single point of reference (ie sole boss).
I agree with you entirely that team orders should be sent via the boss himself (as Lowe did in Bahrain), not by a race engineer.
I don't think Hungary shows anything. I almost think something like this happended:-
Rosberg engineer: Can you ask Hamilton to move over, Rosberg is on a different strategy Hamilton engineer: no R Engineer: You have to H Engineer: no point he'll just say no R Engineer: you have to H Engineer: ok then, Hamilton let him through Hamilton: No H Engineer: Told ya
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
Why do the polling companies seem to access a totally different group of people than on-the-street canvassers? Stories from both BT and Nat supporters on here seem to indicate a great deal more YES support than is seen in any poll, so I'm minded to discount confirmation bias as being behind the reports.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
The "Tories on here" have been saying for quite some time that it will be the traditional Labour vote, in particular in the poorer western parts of the central belt that decide this - and praying daily for SLAB to get its act together.
But if you read anything anyone else wrote, instead of just reacting with bile and invective, you'd know that.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
Yep, the history books may end up defining this referendum as much more about class than nationality.
What seems clear from this debate (and all others) is that the rUK, and England in particular, is in a lose lose situation wrt Scottish independence. The English will be blamed no matter what the outcome. Plus ca change
Did you really want to have that bit of hackneyed self pity as your first ever comment? Though tbf you've found the spiritual home of that sort of guff.
It's not my self pity; that lies on the other side of the border - it's merely a rather jaded prediction. We'll see the outcome no matter what.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
Why do the polling companies seem to access a totally different group of people than on-the-street canvassers? Stories from both BT and Nat supporters on here seem to indicate a great deal more YES support than is seen in any poll, so I'm minded to discount confirmation bias as being behind the reports.
It's bloody weird, whatever the reason.
The people AS is talking about are not on the books of polling companies , most will not have computers and would not be involved in political polls. He is correct and it is fairly common elsewhere. I posted a video recently of Jim Murphy in Motherwell, Tories on here tut tutted but ignored the point. In what was previously solid 100% labour territory , their supposed big beast was booed by almost the whole crowd and was unable even with loudspeaker to have one word heard. Poor people , working class people are not happy, and they are not concerned about what currency we will have, as someone said this week they just want something. People are in for a shock.
I'm not going to mention the "R" word, but I feel I owe an apology to Mr Jones. I thought he was in the Tapestry category (and I've nothing against Tap) but he may have had a point after all.
Listening to one girl's testimony on R5L last night while driving, I could hardly believe what I was hearing.
Mr. Eeek, I feel Hungary went very differently to that. The below is mostly conjecture.
Because of the strategy choices I think they didn't want Hamilton hold Rosberg up. And they probably said something like that to Hamilton.
However, because the circuit's a bit rubbish letting someone past actually costs a fair bit of time (2-3s, perhaps). So he said he wouldn't hold Rosberg up but he couldn't just pull over and lose so much time.
Rosberg was told Hamilton would let him through. This didn't happen and Hamilton very narrowly finished ahead of Rosberg.
In Malaysia last year, I think, Rosberg reluctantly agreed not to pass Hamilton (even though he was faster) after Brawn got on the radio and laid down the law. The fallout? None whatsoever.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
The "Tories on here" have been saying for quite some time that it will be the traditional Labour vote, in particular in the poorer western parts of the central belt that decide this - and praying daily for SLAB to get its act together.
But if you read anything anyone else wrote, instead of just reacting with bile and invective, you'd know that.
Dear Dear, mrs gloom and doom pauses from posting blatant propaganda to berate me once again. Is that your Tory get out clause , "it was labour that lost it". It is cowardly Tories trying to get Labour to do their dirty work that has scuppered both of them. Tories are a busted flush but creepy enough to have taken Labour patsies to the cleaners. Throw in the Lib Dumbs and you have a full set of rogues.
Objection, Mr. Chairman! You cannot call Mornington Crescent from Rotherham. Such a reverse side twist was specifically banned when the rules were revised at the Council Of West Brompton in 1976 when, following the dreadful case of Professor Green, Archdeacon D'Ascoyne made an impassioned speech from the floor.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
Yep, the history books may end up defining this referendum as much more about class than nationality.
Agree - and it's been pretty consistent in the polling - let's hope once they start using their vote they keep using it.
And what drivel he writes. UKIP are not anti-globalization. They openly want trade deals with Brazil and India.
Isn't Montgomerie's point that there is a tension between what UKIP set out to be, and what many of its supporters believe?
He didn't seem to make that argument. People keep on trying to pigeon hole UKIP, but, just like Labour and the Tories, they have many different elements within them. That's what being a major political party means.
I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing that we can talk about on here atm (Mods, please delete if necessary):
The stereotypical belief that boys are less vulnerable to child sexual exploitation means they are receiving insufficient protection from frontline services, Barnardo's has claimed. The children's charity says new findings reveal up to a third of victims are male.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28935733 An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric. Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect? No they are really really worried about male partners telling females they are fat. Beyond parody in the list of priorities.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
The "Tories on here" have been saying for quite some time that it will be the traditional Labour vote, in particular in the poorer western parts of the central belt that decide this - and praying daily for SLAB to get its act together.
But if you read anything anyone else wrote, instead of just reacting with bile and invective, you'd know that.
Dear Dear, mrs gloom and doom pauses from posting blatant propaganda to berate me once again. Is that your Tory get out clause , "it was labour that lost it". It is cowardly Tories trying to get Labour to do their dirty work that has scuppered both of them. Tories are a busted flush but creepy enough to have taken Labour patsies to the cleaners. Throw in the Lib Dumbs and you have a full set of rogues.
If you ever bothered to read the polls:
Net "no" (excl DK) Con: +82 Lab: +50
There aren't many Tories left to persuade to vote no......
And what drivel he writes. UKIP are not anti-globalization. They openly want trade deals with Brazil and India.
Isn't Montgomerie's point that there is a tension between what UKIP set out to be, and what many of its supporters believe?
UKIP is attracting a large group of protest NOTA voters. They attach to UKIP their own views which they want to register a protest. These often contradict with other UKIP voters but that is the essence of a party that attracts protest voters. They are the nuLibDems. They start out as Libertarians and end up attracting opponents of same sex marriage.
I'm not convinced on turnout below 80%, I recently spent some time in Scotland, in the housing estate of the western central belt.
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
The Tories on here do not want to hear sensible stuff like that. They know that we are all so stupid we will vote to continue getting subsidised and leading the high life chanting Better Together. They think it is paradise up here and they are paying for us to sup champagne and nibble caviar on the dole, whilst selecting holiday locations.
The "Tories on here" have been saying for quite some time that it will be the traditional Labour vote, in particular in the poorer western parts of the central belt that decide this - and praying daily for SLAB to get its act together.
But if you read anything anyone else wrote, instead of just reacting with bile and invective, you'd know that.
Dear Dear, mrs gloom and doom pauses from posting blatant propaganda to berate me once again. Is that your Tory get out clause , "it was labour that lost it". It is cowardly Tories trying to get Labour to do their dirty work that has scuppered both of them. Tories are a busted flush but creepy enough to have taken Labour patsies to the cleaners. Throw in the Lib Dumbs and you have a full set of rogues.
If you ever bothered to read the polls:
Net "no" (excl DK) Con: +82 Lab: +50
There aren't many Tories left to persuade to vote no......
I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing that we can talk about on here atm (Mods, please delete if necessary):
The stereotypical belief that boys are less vulnerable to child sexual exploitation means they are receiving insufficient protection from frontline services, Barnardo's has claimed. The children's charity says new findings reveal up to a third of victims are male.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28935733 An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric. Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
No they are really really worried about male partners telling females they are fat. Beyond parody in the list of priorities.
It's the fact they blatantly ignore the fact that boys get abused, and men can suffer from domestic violence (both from male or female partners).
Labour's new appointment reinforces the stereotype that only females are victims. I find that utterly horrendous.
(And as a side issue: do we really need new laws to protect children, or are existing laws enough if they were to be applied correctly?)
Comments
Case for Scottish independence has not been made, say business leaders
More than 130 Scottish business leaders sign open letter urging Scots to vote no in next month's referendum
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/27/case-scottish-independence-not-made-business-leaders
Yet.
I am sure you know about the boy that cried wolf too often.
IN Japan, Ronald McDonald is Donald McDonald for some reason
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=mh17&tbm=nws
Speaking at a briefing organised by the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Professor Ronald MacDonald of Glasgow University, said Alex Salmond's proposal to share the pound after a Yes vote was doomed to fail because an "oil effect" would create a huge mismatch between the Scottish and UK economies.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/top-economist-currency-union-would-collapse.25052847
Also the political tide has turned for the Kiev regime and its US backers too. Nudelman Kagan and her clan have presided over another foreign policy debacle.
http://euobserver.com/foreign/125331
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault
Just have to hope the peoples of the East are given free and fair elections to decide where they see their future.
Did you know that lads from the SBS covertly conducted operations on the Swedish coast in the 1980s and 1990s, leaving "evidence" for the Swedes that they were in fact the Russians?
Just wondered.
Ha Ha Ha , we are going to be so rich we cannot use the pound.
We've also stupidly reduced our military far too much.
Edited extra bit: just read a chapter on the second Emperor Andronicus, who also slashed his military budget. Didn't have a great impact on the Roman Empire's long-term prospects.
Fingers crossed, eh, Malky.
sod it. I'm off palagriding
- the other brass plate doesn't.
Which would you choose?
Not necessarily reliable news sources but that would put them on a par with British newspapers.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/MH-17-Investigation--Sec-by-Eric-Zuesse-Obama-Administration_Peace_War_President-Barack-Obama-POTUS_Russia-140824-786.html
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/09/mala-a09.html
the lack of a quote from prof. Ham Bugler of Glasgow Caley is proof of media bias
Assad uses chemical weapons.
Assad then agrees the chemical weapons he does not have should be destroyed.
The international community destroys those weapons.
Assad uses other chemical weapons.
And you support Assad.
The question then is whether he can find the support of one-third (+1) of Conservative MPs to make it that far. I don't think he is as popular with MPs as he is with the members, but he's a proven winner and he may be able to straddle the line between not being a continuity Cameroon and not being an IDS-like right winger.
2. The Ukrainian government is not "a regime", it was democratically elected in free and fair elections, unlike Russia.
3. The US Assistant Secretary of State is called Victoria Nuland. Only anti-Semitic cranks call her by her family's older name. But it doesn't surprise me you're an anti-Semite since you've openly admitted you prefer the values of the US during the Jim Crow era.
4. The people of Eastern Ukraine are the same as the people of Western Ukraine: Ukrainians
5. There's no chance they will get free and fair elections under Russian control. You only need to look at the fixed referendum in Crimea to see the abuses to democracy in that vote.
http://www.espn.co.uk/ferrari/motorsport/story/172719.html
*It's not a full freeze, but development is limited and become more so each year.
Edited extra bit: just read an interesting comment on Joe Saward's blog suggesting the 'point' Rosberg was making was that if Hamilton could ignore team orders (as per Hungary) then so could he. That could be true.
I am British, I am loyal to this country and this one alone, I don't care about Assad.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/08/24/isis-made-in-washington-riyadh-and-tel-aviv/
2. Ukrainian elections free and fair? Hahahaha. Not even included the votes of the Donbass region they purport to represent.
3. Why change your name? Must always understand the motivations of those involved in provoking these crises.
4. They aren't, as even someone with a cursory knowledge of the region knows.
5. I don't think anyone disputes the Crimea referendum was a reflection of the will of the people. I don't see any rebels in Crimea.
Plan A: a currency union.
rUK says no. There are no obvious benefits to them and substantial detriments so this is a rational position. Just not going to happen.
Plan B: using Sterling without a currency union.
Means no lender of last resort and the departure of most of our financial services industry which currently produces 8% of Scotland's GDP. Makes it very difficult and expensive to borrow. Simply catastrophic for the economy. Works for small countries with basic economies but not for a sophisticated economy like Scotland.
Plan B2. Use the Euro.
So we can be treated with the same care and consideration as Greece, Portugal and Ireland presumably. Not something Alec really wants to talk about given the state of the EZ.
Plan B3 Have our own currency.
Frankly inevitable if we are daft enough to vote for independence. Not without risks of course and there is that small matter of negotiating membership of the EU... A Scottish Pound will be more volatile than the rUK pound because of our vulnerability to the price of oil. It will demonstrate the transaction costs to our exporters for whom rUK is by far the largest market. It frankly shows what a bad idea independence is which is why Alec doesn't want to talk about this either.
So there are no good options really...except of course being Better Together.
Mr. L, a good summary.
The ST article has been discussed on several special forces websites. Or check with author Pelle Neroth or navy minister Keith Speed, whom the ST reference as acknowledging that the ops took place.
Maybe reallocate some of the time you spend concocting tone-heavy imaginative parodies of 'conspiracy theories'?
If so, it has to be either Assad's regime, one of the various Islamic groups at the time, or the FSA. Look at where the attacks were, who had access, who had the delivery mechanisms, and who had most to gain from the attacks. The best-fit to all of these questions is the Assad regime.
However, that does not necessarily mean that Assad ordered them; it could have been a localised decision by a Syrian Army commander. But it is still Assad's responsibility.
The latest chemical attacks are of chlorine (I won't reproduce the links again, as you don't believe them). If you're saying Assad and Syria doesn't have access to chlorine then you're being rather silly.
You seem to support Russia and Assad more than you do Britain. Perhaps you need to retune your tinfoil hat. Or perhaps take it off ...
Get a life or a vote.
However it doesn't excuse what Rosberg did as his action cost Mercedes 25 points.
You could join the D&G Tories at their Champagne Brunch celebration on the 19th, I am sure there are plenty of the £35 tickets available, though you will likely be attending your local one.
Instead we've got this car crash of being dependent on a foreign country which has said it will say no and whose voters are overwhelmingly opposed. As you write, not going to happen.....
The uncharitable might think that despite 80 years of preparation they hadn't thought this through.....
An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric.
Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
The downside of moving is that the Mercedes is a monster of a car, whereas the prancing horse is more of a lame donkey.
Mr. Eeek, jein. They've actually been managing the situation much better than I expected, until very recently. I did predict they'd miss Ross Brawn and the last race (and maybe Hungary) confirmed that, I feel. Brawn's experience and gravitas far exceeds that of Wolff and Lowe (and Lauda), and he was, as he put it, the single point of reference (ie sole boss).
I agree with you entirely that team orders should be sent via the boss himself (as Lowe did in Bahrain), not by a race engineer.
2. Ukrainian elections were indeed free and fair: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/ukraine/119078?download=true
Yes, it was sad that the people of Donetsk didn't get their votes included. Sadly, the place has been plunged into a warzone, but even if everyone in the region unanimously voted against Poroshenko, he still would have won.
3. Victoria Nuland never changed her name. Her father did. I guess you think her credibility is tarnished by her Jewish ancestral guilt?
4. The people of eastern Ukraine are indeed majority Ukrainian:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine#mediaviewer/File:Ethnicukrainian2001.PNG
This is unchanged from 1914:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Ethnic-Ukrainians.jpg
5. Yeah, that's why the Russian-appointed PM of Crimea received 4% in the previous free and fair election. There wasn't even an option in the Crimean referendum on the status quo. The most recent opinion poll carried out prior to the Russian military occupation of the presence, after which pro-Ukrainian protesters were beaten up on the streets, showed that 53% wanted autonomy in Ukraine, with just 29% wanting secession to join Russia. There were more voters in Sevastopol than residents!
People who have never been politically engaged in the slightest appear certain to vote, what stunned me was how strong the tide to "yes" was esp amongst the very poor.
It was explained to me that the poorer you are, the less potency the scare stories have; they have nothing to lose and are willing to take a chance on change.
Turnout is going to be massive, esp amongst the very poor
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/crimea-ukraine-pro-ukrainian-demonstrators-show-their-support-n47906
An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric.
Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
A good Minister for Children would help. Tim Loughton was on Newsnight last night and was very impressive. A shame he was sacked by Cameron; one of the latter's more stupid decisions.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/ukip-britains-tea-party-11127
Rosberg engineer: Can you ask Hamilton to move over, Rosberg is on a different strategy
Hamilton engineer: no
R Engineer: You have to
H Engineer: no point he'll just say no
R Engineer: you have to
H Engineer: ok then, Hamilton let him through
Hamilton: No
H Engineer: Told ya
It's bloody weird, whatever the reason.
But if you read anything anyone else wrote, instead of just reacting with bile and invective, you'd know that.
He is correct and it is fairly common elsewhere. I posted a video recently of Jim Murphy in Motherwell, Tories on here tut tutted but ignored the point. In what was previously solid 100% labour territory , their supposed big beast was booed by almost the whole crowd and was unable even with loudspeaker to have one word heard. Poor people , working class people are not happy, and they are not concerned about what currency we will have, as someone said this week they just want something.
People are in for a shock.
Listening to one girl's testimony on R5L last night while driving, I could hardly believe what I was hearing.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/yes-campaigner-who-tweeted-descendant-4111682
Because of the strategy choices I think they didn't want Hamilton hold Rosberg up. And they probably said something like that to Hamilton.
However, because the circuit's a bit rubbish letting someone past actually costs a fair bit of time (2-3s, perhaps). So he said he wouldn't hold Rosberg up but he couldn't just pull over and lose so much time.
Rosberg was told Hamilton would let him through. This didn't happen and Hamilton very narrowly finished ahead of Rosberg.
In Malaysia last year, I think, Rosberg reluctantly agreed not to pass Hamilton (even though he was faster) after Brawn got on the radio and laid down the law. The fallout? None whatsoever.
It is cowardly Tories trying to get Labour to do their dirty work that has scuppered both of them. Tories are a busted flush but creepy enough to have taken Labour patsies to the cleaners. Throw in the Lib Dumbs and you have a full set of rogues.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/08/i-didnt-want-to-appear-racist-is-the-i-was-only-obeying-orders-of-our-age/
Is it not allowed or something daft like that?
Not like the Record to not have it headlined as BLOW TO SALMOND , random tweet incorrect.
Let's hope there's no abuse over the general election next year then.
An issue I've been mentioning on here from time to time. And one that makes yesterday's announcement by Labour of appointing a shadow minister for preventing violence against women and girls seem rather misandric.
Do Labour care for boys, or is it just girls they want to protect?
No they are really really worried about male partners telling females they are fat. Beyond parody in the list of priorities.
Net "no" (excl DK)
Con: +82
Lab: +50
There aren't many Tories left to persuade to vote no......
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/08/dont-listen-to-rob-lowes-burger-king-opinions.html
Luckily there's never any abuse thrown about on that topic I suppose.
"R********"
Jehovah, Jehovah.
They start out as Libertarians and end up attracting opponents of same sex marriage.
It's the fact they blatantly ignore the fact that boys get abused, and men can suffer from domestic violence (both from male or female partners).
Labour's new appointment reinforces the stereotype that only females are victims. I find that utterly horrendous.
(And as a side issue: do we really need new laws to protect children, or are existing laws enough if they were to be applied correctly?)