Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
It's less intense because you've become desensitised to it. That isn't good news.
As for 'defeating' them, simply cut off their funding, and arm those who would flush them from their countries -namely Iraq and Syria. But we won't do that, because they're doing the work that we want them to do.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
I think those UKIP supporters need to have a rethink. Why would they want to merge themselves with a party that has been incapable of defeating Labour decisively for nearly a generation and who show no signs of reversing that situation, whose brand is trashed possibly irrevocably, who repeatedly demonstrates how ill-disciplined, divided and dysfunctional it is, who are virtually dead in much of Scotland and large parts of urban Britain and who by offering a Coalition with the Libdems facilitated the destruction of that party as a serious force in British politics for the foreseeable future. It doesn't make sense. If UKIP continue to grow then any relationship with the Tories would likely be damaging.
Part of the reason UKIP exists is because the Tories have failed to oppose Labour adequately. If anything UKIP would be wise not to consider mergers and if the Tories do collapse then look to fill the void created. Whatever they do though they should remain distinct because all the evidence suggests the Tory brand is toxic and it taints other parties it works with.
The Conservative Party will NOT cease to exist. At worst, it will be available as a significant bloc to be in future Coalition Govts.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
Schemes for Yes. Ya Bass
I am beginning to contemplate the very distinct possibility that the schemes might just win our country back for us. We will be forever grateful.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
I think those UKIP supporters need to have a rethink. Why would they want to merge themselves with a party that has been incapable of defeating Labour decisively for nearly a generation and who show no signs of reversing that situation, whose brand is trashed possibly irrevocably, who repeatedly demonstrates how ill-disciplined, divided and dysfunctional it is, who are virtually dead in much of Scotland and large parts of urban Britain and who by offering a Coalition with the Libdems facilitated the destruction of that party as a serious force in British politics for the foreseeable future. It doesn't make sense. If UKIP continue to grow then any relationship with the Tories would likely be damaging.
Part of the reason UKIP exists is because the Tories have failed to oppose Labour adequately. If anything UKIP would be wise not to consider mergers and if the Tories do collapse then look to fill the void created. Whatever they do though they should remain distinct because all the evidence suggests the Tory brand is toxic and it taints other parties it works with.
The Conservative Party will NOT cease to exist. At worst, it will be available as a significant bloc to be in future Coalition Govts.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
On their big two issues, the EU and immigration, they are more in line with the British public than any of the other three parties.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Strong men such as Assad ?
If the Conservatives win a majority next May will they have another vote on whether to bomb him ?
I very much doubt it. In any case, that talk did rid Assad of his chemical weapons, so some good came out of it.
As for 'getting our hands dirty' (Hugh), that would inflame the situation. Best left to be sorted by local hands rather than giving another excuse for hotheads to stir up resentment against Western imperialism etc. Assad can no doubt be facilitated, preferably in return for a quid pro quo.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
I'll admit you start to get a slightly rose tinted view of Saddam with these current Islamic State nutters.
@Hugh It might have of happened if there was a non sectarian government in Iraq, but we are where we are. Fighting bushfires and wondering where the hell they are all coming from.
Indeed. The people to blame for the hell in the Middle East, ISIS and everything else, are Bush, Blair, and those idiots who let them do it like David Cameron and the Tory Party.
At least major "wealth creating" nations like Saudi, and "strategic allies" like Israel are happy with the situation. But that was never the aim. Not at all. Oh no.
I'm not saying its scrapping would solve all our problems, but I am saying we cannot afford its replacement. I believe Trident to be detectable to enemies, and inoperable without American consent. Therefore at best it is an expensive bauble of a premier league state (which we aren't any more), and at worst it is an American asset that we pay for, but that contrary to keeping us safe, actively places us in danger.
I believe that retaining a tactical nuclear capability (warheads of different yields) is probably the most sensible solution (and a much more real deterrent), but if that isn't an option, we should just go non nuke.
Where to start?
Firstly Trident, the missile system and warheads, is not being replaced, at least not before about 2040. The submarines that carry them have, for reasons of physics if nothing else, a limited life and they will need to be replaced in the next decade or so. The cost of designing and building those submarines is up in the air, but probably in the region of a couple of a billion each, maybe, on some estimates, £4bn, though how they get to that when the Astutes (including all development and the costs of rebuilding the skills base to build them come out at about £1bn each I am not sure. That cost though is spread over more than a decade, even given the lumps that will inevitably happen in such a procurement, we are still talking about maybe a couple of billion a year. Sounds a lot until you think that the total treasury spend per year is about £700 billion in the time frame we are looking at. Can we afford that? Yes of course we can.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
Yup in spades.
I think those UKIP supporters need to have a rethink. Why would they want to merge themselves with a party that has been incapable of defeating Labour decisively for nearly a generation and who show no signs of reversing that situation, whose brand is trashed possibly irrevocably, who repeatedly demonstrates how ill-disciplined, divided and dysfunctional it is, who are virtually dead in much of Scotland and large parts of urban Britain and who by offering a Coalition with the Libdems facilitated the destruction of that party as a serious force in British politics for the foreseeable future. It doesn't make sense. If UKIP continue to grow then any relationship with the Tories would likely be damaging.
Part of the reason UKIP exists is because the Tories have failed to oppose Labour adequately. If anything UKIP would be wise not to consider mergers and if the Tories do collapse then look to fill the void created. Whatever they do though they should remain distinct because all the evidence suggests the Tory brand is toxic and it taints other parties it works with.
The Conservative Party will NOT cease to exist. At worst, it will be available as a significant bloc to be in future Coalition Govts.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
If Scotland votes No, but gets extra powers, then it's only fair we establish an English Parliament with similar powers.
You would still have the Westminster and London problem for those of us in the regions.The great wen's influence is pernicious across the rest of England so I would suggest a regionally based structure with powers devolved from London to the English regions.
The English regions are ridiculously defined. What the hell does Hertfordshire have to do with Norfolk? It's got far more connection to London and far more in common with Kent. I know the area well and no-one wants an East of England assembly.
Well then, redraw the boundaries. No reason why areas whose current boundaries don't fit the residents' preferences couldn't have Schleswig-Holstein type referendums to decide which region they'd prefer to be in.
Maybe they don't want to be in any region. Where would you put Cheshire or Cumbria or Buckinghamshire? I've tried doing this before and it's pretty hard to do. The best division that you could get that people would culturally recognise would be the North, the Midlands, East Anglia, the West Country and the South East, but even that isn't perfect.
The regions also have the problem that devolution to them prevents devolution to cities. London's system of government has been a huge success. We really need to just do that for Greater Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Greater Liverpool, Greater Sheffield and Greater Leeds.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
Thankyou for all the recommends about germanophone travel, to everyone.
I am indeed tempted by the idea of lake Konstanz. Either that or fly to geneva, rent a car, and do the whole byron, Rousseau thing.
If you do finish up in Lindau, try the restaurant in the Alte Post hotel in the Old Town - exquisite. We didn't stay in that hotel though it looked very good.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
Iraq was better off under Saddam. Libya better off under Gadaffi. Syria under a strong Assad.
However, Saudi and Israel are better off with all those countries in flames with small-arms wars.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
From the opposing side of the argument, I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
Thankyou for all the recommends about germanophone travel, to everyone.
I am indeed tempted by the idea of lake Konstanz. Either that or fly to geneva, rent a car, and do the whole byron, Rousseau thing.
St Gingolph near Geneva remains one of the oddest places I have ever been to, split in two by a tiny brook that demarcates the border between France and Switzerland. I visited about 25 years ago. In those days, smuggling was big business in the village, mostly of petrol, and meat.
Sadly it is Francophone so doesn't meet your criteria, but well worth a look if you are in Geneva anyway to pick up a car.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
I wonder, perchance, if you've given any thought to who this might me?
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
I love you too England, but I still intend to vote Yes in the Scottish Independence Referendum
... One after another large agency closed - Rex Steward, Riley, The Bridge, Faulds, Ogilvy & Mather, 1576, Barkers, Morgan Associates, Elmwood, Blue Peach, Navy Blue, Newhaven, McIlroy Coates...the list goes on and on. In fact, Scotland has the dubious distinction of being the very first market in the world where McCann-Erickson closed an office.
Clients too have vanished from the scene for one reason or another - Bells, Royal Bank, Bank of Scotland, TSB, Clydesdale, John Lewis, Standard Life, Wm Low, Kwik-Fit, British Midland and John Menzies Retail.
... in my view the marketing business remains a canary in the coal mind for the economy as a whole. If it coughs and splutters then the business sector itself is in peril.
I have listened to the No campaign arguments. I have read their websites and literature. But I can find no cohesive argument as to why a No vote would arrest this relentless decline.
So I have become convinced that Scotland's business community is in cardiac arrest. it needs a radical shock to the system if it stand any chance of revival. And in my view a Yes vote has more chance of delivering that.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
I wonder, perchance, if you've given any thought to who this might me?
Yes, the person has to have a great understanding of history, multi-lingual, who understands what it is to be Western, and what it means to be a (very bad) Muslim.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
I think the solution to middle-east problems is fusion and it would be good if all the money going into carbon reduction (and arming various warring factions) went into that.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
They don't share Miliband's worldview, but they perceive it as not being much further from their own than Cameron's. Kippers say this again and again, but the "Vote Nigel, get Ed" brigade always ignore it.
Ignoring somebody's argument can be a good way to "win" the argument in politics, but it's not so effective if what you're trying do is persuade the people who you're ignoring!
If Scotland votes No, but gets extra powers, then it's only fair we establish an English Parliament with similar powers.
You would still have the Westminster and London problem for those of us in the regions.The great wen's influence is pernicious across the rest of England so I would suggest a regionally based structure with powers devolved from London to the English regions.
The English regions are ridiculously defined. What the hell does Hertfordshire have to do with Norfolk? It's got far more connection to London and far more in common with Kent. I know the area well and no-one wants an East of England assembly.
Well then, redraw the boundaries. No reason why areas whose current boundaries don't fit the residents' preferences couldn't have Schleswig-Holstein type referendums to decide which region they'd prefer to be in.
Maybe they don't want to be in any region. Where would you put Cheshire or Cumbria or Buckinghamshire? I've tried doing this before and it's pretty hard to do. The best division that you could get that people would culturally recognise would be the North, the Midlands, East Anglia, the West Country and the South East, but even that isn't perfect.
The regions also have the problem that devolution to them prevents devolution to cities. London's system of government has been a huge success. We really need to just do that for Greater Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Greater Liverpool, Greater Sheffield and Greater Leeds.
It is bizarre that Gtr Manchester hasn't simply adopted the Gtr London mayoral model. It instead chose to recruit a mayor for Salford, which is just an arbitrary construct and a city in name only and even then only really recognised in the Manchester area. It would be like Ken or Boris being mayor of Westminster alone. Bonkers.
"The people to blame for the hell in the Middle East, ISIS and everything else, are Bush, Blair, and those idiots who let them do it like David Cameron and the Tory Party."
I don't know. I would have said that those who are responsible for dreadful acts are those that commit the dreadful acts. If you move from that to "it was someone else that made behave this way" where does that leave any hope of civilisation? Your rule of law is fucked for a start.
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
I wonder, perchance, if you've given any thought to who this might me?
Yes, the person has to have a great understanding of history, multi-lingual, who understands what it is to be Western, and what it means to be a (very bad) Muslim.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
No we mustn't. Several strong men in the Middle East must.
Except we kill the strong men in the Middle East. Saddam, Qaddafi.....
Only the ones that were doing something loopy (or had already done something loopy). One would also hope that lessons have been learned about the advisability of exporting democracy, namely that it doesn't necessarily equate to exporting liberal values.
Hopefully. But benevolent dictators seem to be in short supply in the Middle East. You seem to have the choice of pyscho-crazies, who keep the lid on the worst excesses of Islam by torturing and gassing all sides who get a bit uppity. We got a bit squeamish about them. Or you have anarchy, fuelled by ancient theological feuding, that spills out in unpredictable directions, but possibly onto our own High Streets.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
From the opposing side of the argument, I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
So, Scotland = Greece does it?
Too wee, too poor, too stupid. Yes, yes, yes, we have heard it all before. On several thousand occasions.
Have you never heard the one about the boy who cried "wolf" just once too often?
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
In Camilla Long's pee take of Disney loving tweeting jihardists - that was her entire point. These numpties lionise the West by aping their media, then using the West's media - totally contradict themselves.
She's as sharp as a tack >
Or at least a supporter of Isis named Abdullah, tweeting as @muhajid4life, somehow managed to stop declaring war on infidels and kaffirs for one second in order to respond to a tweet from a fellow jihadist about the sad death of the Popeye star. [Robin Williams]
“Shame,” said his friend. “I loved Jumanji.”
“Same,” answered Abdullah. “Loved it as a kid.” He went on to admit he also “liked all the Disney flicks” but enjoyed The Lion King the most and if his career as a jihadist didn’t “work out” he could probably make it as a film critic instead.
Personally I don’t know what’s more frightening — a man who likes killing people or one who loves Jumanji — but it did make me wonder who all these tweeting pop-culture fundamentalists were. Were they genuinely threatening or simply lazy, bored, confused, irritated and listless Jumanjihadists, like Joey from Friends but with more facial hair?
"The people to blame for the hell in the Middle East, ISIS and everything else, are Bush, Blair, and those idiots who let them do it like David Cameron and the Tory Party."
I don't know. I would have said that those who are responsible for dreadful acts are those that commit the dreadful acts. If you move from that to "it was someone else that made behave this way" where does that leave any hope of civilisation? Your rule of law is fucked for a start.
Responsibility isn't a finite quantity that has to be divided out among the people involved. One person being responsible for something doesn't mean somebody else can't be too.
If Scotland votes No, but gets extra powers, then it's only fair we establish an English Parliament with similar powers.
You would still have the Westminster and London problem for those of us in the regions.The great wen's influence is pernicious across the rest of England so I would suggest a regionally based structure with powers devolved from London to the English regions.
The English regions are ridiculously defined. What the hell does Hertfordshire have to do with Norfolk? It's got far more connection to London and far more in common with Kent. I know the area well and no-one wants an East of England assembly.
Well then, redraw the boundaries. No reason why areas whose current boundaries don't fit the residents' preferences couldn't have Schleswig-Holstein type referendums to decide which region they'd prefer to be in.
Maybe they don't want to be in any region. Where would you put Cheshire or Cumbria or Buckinghamshire? I've tried doing this before and it's pretty hard to do. The best division that you could get that people would culturally recognise would be the North, the Midlands, East Anglia, the West Country and the South East, but even that isn't perfect.
The regions also have the problem that devolution to them prevents devolution to cities. London's system of government has been a huge success. We really need to just do that for Greater Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Greater Liverpool, Greater Sheffield and Greater Leeds.
It is bizarre that Gtr Manchester hasn't simply adopted the Gtr London mayoral model. It instead chose to recruit a mayor for Salford, which is just an arbitrary construct and a city in name only and even then only really recognised in the Manchester area. It would be like Ken or Boris being mayor of Westminster alone. Bonkers.
Well, London does have a Mayor of Tower Hamlets, and that's a disaster too.
But yes, what we need is for these broader areas to have a mayor and an assembly, and then smaller boroughs to do the local stuff. Birmingham is a tricky one, because the city itself is so big, but they divide all the administrative stuff internally into different parts of the city so you could easily carve several boroughs out of it. It would also do wonders in terms of people having weight. Clearly a Mayor of Greater Manchester is going to have more authority than the regional leader of the North West.
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
In Camilla Long's pee take of Disney loving tweeting jihardists - that was her entire point. These numpties lionise the West by aping their media, then using the West's media - totally contradict themselves.
She's as sharp as a tack >
Or at least a supporter of Isis named Abdullah, tweeting as @muhajid4life, somehow managed to stop declaring war on infidels and kaffirs for one second in order to respond to a tweet from a fellow jihadist about the sad death of the Popeye star. [Robin Williams]
“Shame,” said his friend. “I loved Jumanji.”
“Same,” answered Abdullah. “Loved it as a kid.” He went on to admit he also “liked all the Disney flicks” but enjoyed The Lion King the most and if his career as a jihadist didn’t “work out” he could probably make it as a film critic instead.
Personally I don’t know what’s more frightening — a man who likes killing people or one who loves Jumanji — but it did make me wonder who all these tweeting pop-culture fundamentalists were. Were they genuinely threatening or simply lazy, bored, confused, irritated and listless Jumanjihadists, like Joey from Friends but with more facial hair?
To me, a man who likes killing people is substantially more frightening than one who likes Jumanji. Just a personal view.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
From the opposing side of the argument, I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
So, Scotland = Greece does it?
Too wee, too poor, too stupid. Yes, yes, yes, we have heard it all before. On several thousand occasions.
Have you never heard the one about the boy who cried "wolf" just once too often?
The boy who cried wolf was shown to be wrong before people started disbelieving him. Since Scottish independence hasn't happened yet, I'm not sure what parallel you're drawing.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
'The Americans make them, maintain them and provide the satellite intelligence to target them.'
'According to a US diplomatic telegram released by WikiLeaks last year, President Obama handed over the unique serial numbers of the UK's missiles to the Russians as part of an arms reduction deal, despite the strong objections of Her Majesty's Government. As a result the Russians now know exactly what we have got and what it can do. Sucking up to Putin is clearly more important than the 'independence' of the British deterrent.'
Crispin Black is hardly a lizard believer. Have some common sense -do you really think a country that treats our alliance as no more than a soundbite is going to give us the capability to destroy the world without its say so? The very idea is absurd.
What this country, and the Middle East needs is a Directly Elected Dictator.
I wonder, perchance, if you've given any thought to who this might me?
Yes, the person has to have a great understanding of history, multi-lingual, who understands what it is to be Western, and what it means to be a (very bad) Muslim.
Would a knowledge of 80s music also be of value?
Yes - One of my first acts as Directly Elected Dictator will be to set up a Ministry of Sound.
Only certain bands and artists would be allowed to played and perform.
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Ps just watched the vid of the latest ISIS beheading.
Oddly, the better production values, and repetition, detract from the horror impact. Like the hollywoodised version of The Haunting. ISIS are losing their mojo.
Jesus Christ. Why?
For shock value, so you could ponce round the internet saying you had, cultivate that Fearless Journalist thing you're trying to carve out a bit more?
Er, no. Cause I want to know the psychology of the nutters we face. The guys who want to kill is. I'm not sharing the vid. But I know I can take this shit, and I think it's my journalistic duty to observe.
So I watched it, and, oddly, it is much less intense than the Zarqawi vids from AQII. His vids had a cinema verite quality - grainy, eerie, scary - which was much more chilling. These news ones are slick and yet less horrifying.
And here I detect a weakness in ISIS. They secretly admire the west, they want to be Hollywood. They wear rolexes. They want to be Jack Bauer. They want to be James Bond. With daily prayers.
Thus we learn about our enemy and thus we learn how to defeat them. And they can be defeated. But to do that we must kill most of them.
In Camilla Long's pee take of Disney loving tweeting jihardists - that was her entire point. These numpties lionise the West by aping their media, then using the West's media - totally contradict themselves.
She's as sharp as a tack >
Or at least a supporter of Isis named Abdullah, tweeting as @muhajid4life, somehow managed to stop declaring war on infidels and kaffirs for one second in order to respond to a tweet from a fellow jihadist about the sad death of the Popeye star. [Robin Williams]
“Shame,” said his friend. “I loved Jumanji.”
“Same,” answered Abdullah. “Loved it as a kid.” He went on to admit he also “liked all the Disney flicks” but enjoyed The Lion King the most and if his career as a jihadist didn’t “work out” he could probably make it as a film critic instead.
Personally I don’t know what’s more frightening — a man who likes killing people or one who loves Jumanji — but it did make me wonder who all these tweeting pop-culture fundamentalists were. Were they genuinely threatening or simply lazy, bored, confused, irritated and listless Jumanjihadists, like Joey from Friends but with more facial hair?
They sound like the spoiled rich killers in the Genesis Secret.
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
Naw surely after Ruth telling us Russia have us in their sights, we'll all shit ourselves and vote no?
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Greetings from Arlanda
Is is worth going to California end of October/Start of November, what's the weather like?
If Scotland votes No, but gets extra powers, then it's only fair we establish an English Parliament with similar powers.
You would still have the Westminster and London problem for those of us in the regions.The great wen's influence is pernicious across the rest of England so I would suggest a regionally based structure with powers devolved from London to the English regions.
The English regions are ridiculously defined. What the hell does Hertfordshire have to do with Norfolk? It's got far more connection to London and far more in common with Kent. I know the area well and no-one wants an East of England assembly.
Well then, redraw the boundaries. No reason why areas whose current boundaries don't fit the residents' preferences couldn't have Schleswig-Holstein type referendums to decide which region they'd prefer to be in.
Maybe they don't want to be in any region. Where would you put Cheshire or Cumbria or Buckinghamshire? I've tried doing this before and it's pretty hard to do. The best division that you could get that people would culturally recognise would be the North, the Midlands, East Anglia, the West Country and the South East, but even that isn't perfect.
The regions also have the problem that devolution to them prevents devolution to cities. London's system of government has been a huge success. We really need to just do that for Greater Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Greater Liverpool, Greater Sheffield and Greater Leeds.
It is bizarre that Gtr Manchester hasn't simply adopted the Gtr London mayoral model. It instead chose to recruit a mayor for Salford, which is just an arbitrary construct and a city in name only and even then only really recognised in the Manchester area. It would be like Ken or Boris being mayor of Westminster alone. Bonkers.
Well, London does have a Mayor of Tower Hamlets, and that's a disaster too.
But yes, what we need is for these broader areas to have a mayor and an assembly, and then smaller boroughs to do the local stuff. Birmingham is a tricky one, because the city itself is so big, but they divide all the administrative stuff internally into different parts of the city so you could easily carve several boroughs out of it. It would also do wonders in terms of people having weight. Clearly a Mayor of Greater Manchester is going to have more authority than the regional leader of the North West.
Any idea why this has not happened? Managing GM must be nigh-on impossible without a strategic mayor. London was a total shambles before the mayoral model was introduced.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
'The Americans make them, maintain them and provide the satellite intelligence to target them.'
'According to a US diplomatic telegram released by WikiLeaks last year, President Obama handed over the unique serial numbers of the UK's missiles to the Russians as part of an arms reduction deal, despite the strong objections of Her Majesty's Government. As a result the Russians now know exactly what we have got and what it can do. Sucking up to Putin is clearly more important than the 'independence' of the British deterrent.'
Crispin Black is hardly a lizard believer. Have some common sense -do you really think a country that treats our alliance as no more than a soundbite is going to give us the capability to destroy the world without its say so? The very idea is absurd.
Some actual facts would make your argument more persuasive. What are the mechanisms that the USA has to stop the UK launching missiles from its own boats?
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
From the opposing side of the argument, I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
So, Scotland = Greece does it?
Too wee, too poor, too stupid. Yes, yes, yes, we have heard it all before. On several thousand occasions.
Have you never heard the one about the boy who cried "wolf" just once too often?
So Greece is 'too wee, too poor, too stupid' to be compared to Scotland is it? How charmingly xenophobic. No doubt poverty, debt, collapse, bail outs, austerity packages etc. can only happen to the feeble minded olive farmers of the southern states.
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Panic starting to kick in among the No camp. Just seen a bizarre posting on social media from a guy that I was at school with. Previously pretty quiet on the IndyRef, he is blaming "the great uneducated masses" for sinking the Union.
Perhaps if the Union had done a better job of befriending and assisting "the great uneducated masses" it wouldn't be in the mess it is in. And not calling them "the great uneducated masses" might be a nice start.
From the opposing side of the argument, I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
So, Scotland = Greece does it?
Too wee, too poor, too stupid. Yes, yes, yes, we have heard it all before. On several thousand occasions.
Have you never heard the one about the boy who cried "wolf" just once too often?
So Greece is 'too wee, too poor, too stupid' to be compared to Scotland is it? How charmingly xenophobic. No doubt poverty, debt, collapse, bail outs, austerity packages etc. can only happen to the feeble minded olive farmers of the southern states.
Be fair, Greece's problems are largely because of their currency union. And if there's one thing Yes voters can feel asbolutely confident, secure and certain about in an independent Scotland, it's currency.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Any idea why this has not happened? Managing GM must be nigh-on impossible without a strategic mayor. London was a total shambles before the mayoral model was introduced.
New Labour's big idea was regional devolution so they didn't care about cities. Once the regional referendum was rejected in the NE they decided they had become accustomed to central government and didn't want to give away power any more. The Tories big idea was elected mayors, but they did want to ruffle any feathers so just did it for smaller city limits and the idea was rightly rejected. It will surely happen sooner or later, it just needs a reformer with the willingness to see things through.
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
After she kissed her brother.
#GirlHasIssues
She wasn't aware he was her brother at the time.
The Force let Luke sense Vader was his father. I guess it has a sense of humour
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
Naw surely after Ruth telling us Russia have us in their sights, we'll all shit ourselves and vote no?
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
You assure multinational companies that you'll have a free trade deal and less regulation outside the EU, and after you leave, you implement an immigration policy that makes it easy for the highly skilled, English-speaking professionals to come here, but is very tough on the unskilled from the world's unstable areas.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
'The Americans make them, maintain them and provide the satellite intelligence to target them.'
'According to a US diplomatic telegram released by WikiLeaks last year, President Obama handed over the unique serial numbers of the UK's missiles to the Russians as part of an arms reduction deal, despite the strong objections of Her Majesty's Government. As a result the Russians now know exactly what we have got and what it can do. Sucking up to Putin is clearly more important than the 'independence' of the British deterrent.'
Crispin Black is hardly a lizard believer. Have some common sense -do you really think a country that treats our alliance as no more than a soundbite is going to give us the capability to destroy the world without its say so? The very idea is absurd.
Some actual facts would make your argument more persuasive. What are the mechanisms that the USA has to stop the UK launching missiles from its own boats?
What facts do you expect to be floating around -a colour coded diagram? The US has encirclement strategies for their strategic rivals, bases everywhere, gathers everyone's metadata, and for what? So they can let a random country have the power to blow them up? That's what you're suggesting -that the US would give us the power to destroy them. That they would fail to put in a simple mechanism or require a code that they held. Why exactly would they do that? For the love of good old blighty?
My entire position is based on a cool assessment of the reality. UKIP is helping Labour and may well put Ed Miliband into No 10. That's great if you share Ed Miliband's worldview, but I don't, and nor do those who support UKIP.
The argument which is put forward by the Kippers (apparently sincerely, at least in some cases) is that this is a price worth paying because a few years of Miliband will cause the Conservative Party to collapse and merge with UKIP, and this new coalition (which used to be called the 'Conservative Party' when Hague and IDS ran it) will triumphantly storm to victory, perhaps as early as 2020. The very best you can say about that is that it is unbelievably high-risk as a strategy. A more realistic assessment is that it is cloud-cuckoo-land, which will lead to a decade or more of disunity and a disastrous Labour government which we won't be able to shift, even though it will be very unpopular.
It's not as though we haven't seen the same thing before on the other side of the electoral divide, with the SDP. So you can't say I'm scaremongering on no evidence. I am speaking from experience (happy experience in the case of the SDP, of course).
Yup in spades.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore? Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
After she kissed her brother.
#GirlHasIssues
She wasn't aware he was her brother at the time.
Oh, come on! Luke, Leia, and Han are basically Jaime, Cersei and King Robert.
Easterross Even on today's yougov only 30% of Labour voters are voting Yes and that was after Salmond's bounce and before Labour wheeling out Brown today
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
It's cos SLab don't really, in their heart of hearts, believe in No. It is extraordinarily difficult to sell a product that you just don't believe in yourself.
What facts do you expect to be floating around -a colour coded diagram? The US has encirclement strategies for their strategic rivals, bases everywhere, gathers everyone's metadata, and for what? So they can let a random country have the power to blow them up? That's what you're suggesting -that the US would give us the power to destroy them. That they would fail to put in a simple mechanism or require a code that they held. Why exactly would they do that? For the love of good old blighty?
The US won't allow a "random country have the power to blow them up"? Yet somehow they're fine with France's nuclear deterrent. You completely dodged his question.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Any idea why this has not happened? Managing GM must be nigh-on impossible without a strategic mayor. London was a total shambles before the mayoral model was introduced.
New Labour's big idea was regional devolution so they didn't care about cities. Once the regional referendum was rejected in the NE they decided they had become accustomed to central government and didn't want to give away power any more. The Tories big idea was elected mayors, but they did want to ruffle any feathers so just did it for smaller city limits and the idea was rightly rejected. It will surely happen sooner or later, it just needs a reformer with the willingness to see things through.
Let's hope so – the current setup is barmy and is holding the Manchesters of this world back.
Any idea why this has not happened? Managing GM must be nigh-on impossible without a strategic mayor. London was a total shambles before the mayoral model was introduced.
New Labour's big idea was regional devolution so they didn't care about cities. Once the regional referendum was rejected in the NE they decided they had become accustomed to central government and didn't want to give away power any more. The Tories big idea was elected mayors, but they did want to ruffle any feathers so just did it for smaller city limits and the idea was rightly rejected. It will surely happen sooner or later, it just needs a reformer with the willingness to see things through.
Any idea why this has not happened? Managing GM must be nigh-on impossible without a strategic mayor. London was a total shambles before the mayoral model was introduced.
New Labour's big idea was regional devolution so they didn't care about cities. Once the regional referendum was rejected in the NE they decided they had become accustomed to central government and didn't want to give away power any more. The Tories big idea was elected mayors, but they did want to ruffle any feathers so just did it for smaller city limits and the idea was rightly rejected. It will surely happen sooner or later, it just needs a reformer with the willingness to see things through.
If that reformer decides to devolve powers down to counties that have endured for more than a thousand years an to cities then they will probably win home.
'Scots voting no to independence would be an astonishing act of self-harm'
Independence, as more Scots are beginning to see, offers people an opportunity to rewrite the political rules. To create a written constitution, the very process of which is engaging and transformative. To build an economy of benefit to everyone. To promote cohesion, social justice, the defence of the living planet and an end to wars of choice.
To deny this to yourself, to remain subject to the whims of a distant and uncaring elite, to succumb to the bleak, deferential negativity of the no campaign, to accept other people’s myths in place of your own story: that would be an astonishing act of self-repudiation and self-harm. Consider yourselves independent and work backwards from there; then ask why you would sacrifice that freedom.
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
It's cos SLab don't really, in their heart of hearts, believe in No. It is extraordinarily difficult to sell a product that you just don't believe in yourself.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
You assure multinational companies that you'll have a free trade deal and less regulation outside the EU, and after you leave, you implement an immigration policy that makes it easy for the highly skilled, English-speaking professionals to come here, but is very tough on the unskilled from the world's unstable areas.
Are there specific assurances to the multinationals you're thinking of? Because those points are already the gist of what anti-EU people are saying, and the companies on the whole don't seem convinced
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
funding
the metro non-conservatives have lots of money but few votes so their massively disproportionate influence comes from funding
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
After a decade trapped in the Westminster Bubble proper you have to expect a level of Stockholm Syndrome. Carswell's obviously not a lost cause though because he is pals with Dan Hannan who readily admits that the NHS model is a disaster that no one in their right mind would propose today. I'm sure Farage will rehabilitate Carswell in due course.
What facts do you expect to be floating around -a colour coded diagram? The US has encirclement strategies for their strategic rivals, bases everywhere, gathers everyone's metadata, and for what? So they can let a random country have the power to blow them up? That's what you're suggesting -that the US would give us the power to destroy them. That they would fail to put in a simple mechanism or require a code that they held. Why exactly would they do that? For the love of good old blighty?
The US won't allow a "random country have the power to blow them up"? Yet somehow they're fine with France's nuclear deterrent. You completely dodged his question.
I know nothing about France's nuclear deterrent. If it has -'the complexities of the US designed electronics and computer programmes embedded in every aspect' then exactly the same applies. If it's an entirely independent system then of course it wouldn't have such failsafes.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
'The Americans make them, maintain them and provide the satellite intelligence to target them.'
'According to a US diplomatic telegram released by WikiLeaks last year, President Obama handed over the unique serial numbers of the UK's missiles to the Russians as part of an arms reduction deal, despite the strong objections of Her Majesty's Government. As a result the Russians now know exactly what we have got and what it can do. Sucking up to Putin is clearly more important than the 'independence' of the British deterrent.'
Crispin Black is hardly a lizard believer. Have some common sense -do you really think a country that treats our alliance as no more than a soundbite is going to give us the capability to destroy the world without its say so? The very idea is absurd.
Some actual facts would make your argument more persuasive. What are the mechanisms that the USA has to stop the UK launching missiles from its own boats?
What facts do you expect to be floating around -a colour coded diagram? The US has encirclement strategies for their strategic rivals, bases everywhere, gathers everyone's metadata, and for what? So they can let a random country have the power to blow them up? That's what you're suggesting -that the US would give us the power to destroy them. That they would fail to put in a simple mechanism or require a code that they held. Why exactly would they do that? For the love of good old blighty?
The relationship in 1955 might have been different to the one in 1995.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
On ISIS - their desperate beheadings tell me that the US air strikes are being effective.
Yes. I agree with that.
Gabriel Gatehouse on newsnight backing that point up... The USA air strikes have stopped them taking Erbil and made them back off from amali which was under siege
Do, please, let me know the result of the taste test on the Chapel Down. I shan't hold my breath, firstly because they are a Kent company (and therefore their people are by definition an bit odd and smelly) and secondly because unlike Nyetimber, Ridgeview and Bolney they don't grow all their own grapes. Stil,l I am willing be shown as wrong.
Incidentally I am due to deliver to JohnO a bottle of Ridgeview. Do you have a losing bet with him coming up? If so you could send him a bottle of Nyetimber and, if we coordinated the type, he could act as a referee in our long running dispute.
The wine group of which I'm a member (the 'winos') held a tasting of English sparkling wines at the weekend.
Nyetimber, Ridgeview and Chapel Down were all represented.
The majority view of this (very experienced) group was that Ridgeview edged it, although a dissenting opinion favoured Nyetimber.
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
It's cos SLab don't really, in their heart of hearts, believe in No. It is extraordinarily difficult to sell a product that you just don't believe in yourself.
Socialism is antithetical to the nation state. They hate Britain, but they have no real love for Scotland. If Scotland goes indy, it will be more subject to the misery of socialism, not less.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Comments
Of course they admire the West -they're from the West. Look at the care packages of Lynx and Hollister pants: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/british-jihadis-beheading-prisoners-syria-isis-terrorism
As for 'defeating' them, simply cut off their funding, and arm those who would flush them from their countries -namely Iraq and Syria. But we won't do that, because they're doing the work that we want them to do.
Part of the reason UKIP exists is because the Tories have failed to oppose Labour adequately. If anything UKIP would be wise not to consider mergers and if the Tories do collapse then look to fill the void created. Whatever they do though they should remain distinct because all the evidence suggests the Tory brand is toxic and it taints other parties it works with.
The Conservative Party will NOT cease to exist. At worst, it will be available as a significant bloc to be in future Coalition Govts.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
On their big two issues, the EU and immigration, they are more in line with the British public than any of the other three parties.
As for 'getting our hands dirty' (Hugh), that would inflame the situation. Best left to be sorted by local hands rather than giving another excuse for hotheads to stir up resentment against Western imperialism etc. Assad can no doubt be facilitated, preferably in return for a quid pro quo.
But he was a butcher too...
http://history1900s.about.com/od/saddamhussein/a/husseincrimes.htm
As is Assad.
At least major "wealth creating" nations like Saudi, and "strategic allies" like Israel are happy with the situation. But that was never the aim. Not at all. Oh no.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by three points: CON 32%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 15%
Firstly Trident, the missile system and warheads, is not being replaced, at least not before about 2040. The submarines that carry them have, for reasons of physics if nothing else, a limited life and they will need to be replaced in the next decade or so. The cost of designing and building those submarines is up in the air, but probably in the region of a couple of a billion each, maybe, on some estimates, £4bn, though how they get to that when the Astutes (including all development and the costs of rebuilding the skills base to build them come out at about £1bn each I am not sure. That cost though is spread over more than a decade, even given the lumps that will inevitably happen in such a procurement, we are still talking about maybe a couple of billion a year. Sounds a lot until you think that the total treasury spend per year is about £700 billion in the time frame we are looking at. Can we afford that? Yes of course we can.
As to it being an American asset that cannot be launched without their permission. Well sorry but that is total bollocks. The missiles are a shared asset in as much as there is a pool of them which are built an maintained by the Septics. From which we draw as needed. The warheads are designed and built in the UK. Now you might want to argue that the Yanks have got some secret squirrel software that stops a launch unless they somehow give a special code to a foreign submarine operating underwater, but then you might as well go join Tapestry with his giant Lizards. Launch of the missiles on UK submarines is entirely within the control of the UK.
As for having tactical nukes instead, how many times do we need to go down that dead end? What nukes? What delivery systems? What failsafes? etc etc etc.
Now, if you say that the UK should not spend a couple of billion a year over the next decade or so building four new submarines because we cannot afford it. Then fine argue on that basis not that there is going to be a replacement for Trident.
"schemes might just win our country back for us. We will be forever grateful."
Odd thing is, that no matter who wins it, the same people will own it.
Plato returning to PB.com spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
The regions also have the problem that devolution to them prevents devolution to cities. London's system of government has been a huge success. We really need to just do that for Greater Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Greater Liverpool, Greater Sheffield and Greater Leeds.
Medieval Monarchy still seems to work - although I wonder how long before the first of those falls?
However, Saudi and Israel are better off with all those countries in flames with small-arms wars.
Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore?
Classy.
Unfortunately, the rot does not begin and end at Westminster, and cannot be 'left' in any meaningful sense by the 'independence' that you propose. Have you not seen the *real* austerity imposed on Greece by the EU? Pensions halved? Riots on the streets of Athens? Salmond is already planning to hand them the oh so precious oil in order to get back in.
Sadly it is Francophone so doesn't meet your criteria, but well worth a look if you are in Geneva anyway to pick up a car.
I wonder, perchance, if you've given any thought to who this might me?
Classy.
Your response spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.
... One after another large agency closed - Rex Steward, Riley, The Bridge, Faulds, Ogilvy & Mather, 1576, Barkers, Morgan Associates, Elmwood, Blue Peach, Navy Blue, Newhaven, McIlroy Coates...the list goes on and on. In fact, Scotland has the dubious distinction of being the very first market in the world where McCann-Erickson closed an office.
Clients too have vanished from the scene for one reason or another - Bells, Royal Bank, Bank of Scotland, TSB, Clydesdale, John Lewis, Standard Life, Wm Low, Kwik-Fit, British Midland and John Menzies Retail.
... in my view the marketing business remains a canary in the coal mind for the economy as a whole. If it coughs and splutters then the business sector itself is in peril.
I have listened to the No campaign arguments. I have read their websites and literature. But I can find no cohesive argument as to why a No vote would arrest this relentless decline.
So I have become convinced that Scotland's business community is in cardiac arrest. it needs a radical shock to the system if it stand any chance of revival. And in my view a Yes vote has more chance of delivering that.
http://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2014/09/02/i-love-you-too-england-i-still-intend-vote-yes-scottish-independence-referendum-0?fb_action_ids=792530474124246&fb_action_types=og.likes
One can live in hope.
Your first post tells everyone what they need to know .Ignore is the best option, you aren't even funny.
So we might say they 'ought' to be 10% ahead at this stage.
They don't share Miliband's worldview, but they perceive it as not being much further from their own than Cameron's. Kippers say this again and again, but the "Vote Nigel, get Ed" brigade always ignore it.
Ignoring somebody's argument can be a good way to "win" the argument in politics, but it's not so effective if what you're trying do is persuade the people who you're ignoring!
I don't know. I would have said that those who are responsible for dreadful acts are those that commit the dreadful acts. If you move from that to "it was someone else that made behave this way" where does that leave any hope of civilisation? Your rule of law is fucked for a start.
Would a knowledge of 80s music also be of value?
I'm that man, and I have the vote.
EICIPM
Too wee, too poor, too stupid. Yes, yes, yes, we have heard it all before. On several thousand occasions.
Have you never heard the one about the boy who cried "wolf" just once too often?
She's as sharp as a tack >
02/09/2014 22:08
The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
Did Han Shoot First?
But yes, what we need is for these broader areas to have a mayor and an assembly, and then smaller boroughs to do the local stuff. Birmingham is a tricky one, because the city itself is so big, but they divide all the administrative stuff internally into different parts of the city so you could easily carve several boroughs out of it. It would also do wonders in terms of people having weight. Clearly a Mayor of Greater Manchester is going to have more authority than the regional leader of the North West.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/45658/nonsense-heart-britains-independent-nuclear-defence
'The Americans make them, maintain them and provide the satellite intelligence to target them.'
'According to a US diplomatic telegram released by WikiLeaks last year, President Obama handed over the unique serial numbers of the UK's missiles to the Russians as part of an arms reduction deal, despite the strong objections of Her Majesty's Government. As a result the Russians now know exactly what we have got and what it can do. Sucking up to Putin is clearly more important than the 'independence' of the British deterrent.'
Crispin Black is hardly a lizard believer. Have some common sense -do you really think a country that treats our alliance as no more than a soundbite is going to give us the capability to destroy the world without its say so? The very idea is absurd.
Only certain bands and artists would be allowed to played and perform.
None of that bloody rap music, or Bieber shite.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Greetings from Arlanda
The indyref has delayed my normal holiday plans.
Hope you're well. Your first post on PB is a pisstake of a poster who barely posts on here anymore?
Classy.
Leia once called me scruffy looking. But she warmed to me eventually.
After she kissed her brother.
#GirlHasIssues
This from one who masquerades as a philosopher.
#GirlHasIssues
She wasn't aware he was her brother at the time.
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
http://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2014/09/if-carswell-still-loves-the-conservatives-why-did-he-leave-the-party.html
"The uk is like a neighbour who's just realised he's had a corpse rotting in the basement for years "
"Maybe the UK should put boots on the ground after all a lot of the Isis fighters are from the uk "
#shootthemessenger
The Force let Luke sense Vader was his father. I guess it has a sense of humour
Oh, come on! Luke, Leia, and Han are basically Jaime, Cersei and King Robert.
Independence, as more Scots are beginning to see, offers people an opportunity to rewrite the political rules. To create a written constitution, the very process of which is engaging and transformative. To build an economy of benefit to everyone. To promote cohesion, social justice, the defence of the living planet and an end to wars of choice.
To deny this to yourself, to remain subject to the whims of a distant and uncaring elite, to succumb to the bleak, deferential negativity of the no campaign, to accept other people’s myths in place of your own story: that would be an astonishing act of self-repudiation and self-harm. Consider yourselves independent and work backwards from there; then ask why you would sacrifice that freedom.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/scots-independence-england-scotland
the metro non-conservatives have lots of money but few votes so their massively disproportionate influence comes from funding
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
I can confirm every poll since I started using the phrase Ed is Crap is PM on 2/6/14 results in Ed is Crap is PM
I can confirm HanDodges does make me laugh though probably not as much as DH
Nyetimber, Ridgeview and Chapel Down were all represented.
The majority view of this (very experienced) group was that Ridgeview edged it, although a dissenting opinion favoured Nyetimber.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100247981/what-would-a-rational-immigration-system-look-like/