Hunt's proposal to damage private education is nothing but mean-spirited, and probably illegal, hypocritical nonsense.
Do you really think that something close to a level playing field for our 8 and nine year olds is such a bad thing. I think Hunt is the ideal advocate for 'damaging' public schools. If it is such a privileged education why should it only be available to the offspring of the rich? As for this idea that Hunt is pulling up the drawbridge after he himself has benefitted. It's only someone on the inside who can see the pernicious effects on all of us that buying privilege at such a young age brings.
So like a good Socialist you prefer a race to the bottom rather than give bright working class kids a chance by bringing back grammar schools.
and people wonder why Labour voters are turning to UKIP.
Theresa May would be for me the female equivalent of Michael Howard - good for the core vote (and perhaps for recapturing the UKIP defectors) but less good at cutting into the Labour support.
You don't know UKIP defectors very well if you think Theresa May, who is noted for rising immigration on her watch and handing powers over to the EU without a parliamentary vote, will recapture them. Hammond or Paterson would be best for that.
True. I'm not one myself. I do think it's very likely the Conservative Party will "target" UKIP in the aftermath of defeat next year. This will come in the form of parking the blue tanks directly on the purple lawn.
Although I still doubt any Conservative leader will publicly commit to leaving the EU, the anti-EU and anti-immigration rhetoric will be ramped up by the Opposition Conservatives as a form of "love bombing" of UKIP supporters.
There will of course be no mercy for Nigel Farage who will be vilified for letting Labour back into Government (or for the LDs if we join a Coalition with Labour which I consider improbable but not impossible).
Interesting to note Danny Alexander's comments yesterday.
The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric. They want hard, bankable commitments on their concerns. It's not enough to go round saying "we'll control immigration". Disaffected voters need to hear a concrete plan for getting there. What extra limits will be brought in? Which thresholds will be raised? Which caps will be lowered?
And this will become a greater issue with time. If the congestion on roads and transport hubs around the South East increases by the same extent it has done over the last ten-fifteen years, immigration's salience will increase, even among professional types who aren't voting UKIP yet. The mainstream parties can't do what they did in Scotland to the SNP-threat, carrying on with business as usual. Collapse will come slowly, and then all at once.
The US soldiers dishonourably discharged or imprisoned for the scandal at Abu Ghraib were doing what the CIA were doing elsewhere.
Don't tell me that didn't come from the very top.
Another reason for Donald Rumsfeld and George W Bush to spend eternity being riotously sodomised by fantastically well hung demons wearing Osama Bin Laden masks.
Theresa May would be for me the female equivalent of Michael Howard - good for the core vote (and perhaps for recapturing the UKIP defectors) but less good at cutting into the Labour support.
You don't know UKIP defectors very well if you think Theresa May, who is noted for rising immigration on her watch and handing powers over to the EU without a parliamentary vote, will recapture them. Hammond or Paterson would be best for that.
True. I'm not one myself. I do think it's very likely the Conservative Party will "target" UKIP in the aftermath of defeat next year. This will come in the form of parking the blue tanks directly on the purple lawn.
Although I still doubt any Conservative leader will publicly commit to leaving the EU, the anti-EU and anti-immigration rhetoric will be ramped up by the Opposition Conservatives as a form of "love bombing" of UKIP supporters.
There will of course be no mercy for Nigel Farage who will be vilified for letting Labour back into Government (or for the LDs if we join a Coalition with Labour which I consider improbable but not impossible).
Interesting to note Danny Alexander's comments yesterday.
The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric. They want hard, bankable commitments on their concerns.
Moon on a stick you mean. Its the LDs before 201.
What have Kippers achieved as MEPs or councillors ?
And I would like to give a warning: anyone found using the word "weatherbomb" in a non-ironic sense on PB.com will be banned.
I'm glad you wrote that. It would be nice to extend this to the BBC radio as well (I cannot speak for TV). They are always keen to latch onto jargon. Of late I've developed a nearly neurotic sensitivity to the phrase "thank you very much indeed". What's wrong with "thank you"?
Hunt's proposal to damage private education is nothing but mean-spirited, and probably illegal, hypocritical nonsense.
Do you really think that something close to a level playing field for our 8 and nine year olds is such a bad thing. I think Hunt is the ideal advocate for 'damaging' public schools. If it is such a privileged education why should it only be available to the offspring of the rich? As for this idea that Hunt is pulling up the drawbridge after he himself has benefitted. It's only someone on the inside who can see the pernicious effects on all of us that buying privilege at such a young age brings. </blockquote
If we want a truly level playing field, we should prevent parents from reading to their children, ensuring that they do their homework, buying them books, and taking them on educational trips. All these activities massively reinforce the advantages that children from wealthier backgrounds enjoy over children from poorer backgrounds.
Private schools are an irrelevance. If you live in a wealthy area, you can generally expect the State to provide a very good education for your children. If you live in a poor area, you can generally expect that the State won't.
Milliband is PM, Cameron is deposed and a modern Tory Party has to elect Sajid Javid. Milliband is an unmitigated disaster and is deposed mid term and replaced by Chukka.
Two identikit leaders of the two parties, similar ethnicity, both well heeled. Who is the winner there in the 2020 election?
The bus drivers son? As opposed to the grandson of an Irish High Court Judge - who went to the Independent St Dunstons College?
Thanks Socrates. That looks like a really good source. I will study it in full - it is many pages.
It is strange that the contribution from non-EU immigrants from1995 to 2001 is negative and then turns positive from 2001 to 2011. This includes the ratio of revenue to expenditure which is the point I was making. Odd. I will investigate the paper and try to find out why.
I don't have strong views on immigration. On the one hand I do think many immigrants make a positive contribution. On the other hand I take your point about the dislocation (which is rarely costed) if it goes too far or too fast. I'm quite agnostic on where the balance lies whcih is why I'm interested in the source you gave.
I only posted this morning because of the claim that the congestion on the M4 out of London on a Friday night was caused by immigration. It might have a very tiny grain of truth on the margin but the remark was driven by prejudice and doesn't help.
The 1995-2011 panel includes all immigrants, including those that came before 1995. The 2001-2011 panel only includes immigrants that came in that period. It is thus disproportionately a young demographic who haven't started to use higher levels of healthcare or draw pensions yet, but they will in time.
On the M4 congestion issue, I'm sure there are other effects going on, but the effects of a rising population (three quarters of which is caused by migration), are a major strain on the system. We simply can't build more roads fast enough.
I agree that many immigrants make a positive contribution, but our immigration policy should be tailored in a way to get as much bang for the buck as possible. We should restrict immigration only to those that bring the most benefit and least cost. If we are successful, we can get to a system like Canada, where immigration loses its salience as a worry, and as a result you can start letting more of the high quality ones in.
Theresa May would be for me the female equivalent of Michael Howard - good for the core vote (and perhaps for recapturing the UKIP defectors) but less good at cutting into the Labour support.
You don't know UKIP defectors very well if you think Theresa May, who is noted for rising immigration on her watch and handing powers over to the EU without a parliamentary vote, will recapture them. Hammond or Paterson would be best for that.
True. I'm not one myself. I do think it's very likely the Conservative Party will "target" UKIP in the aftermath of defeat next year. This will come in the form of parking the blue tanks directly on the purple lawn.
Although I still doubt any Conservative leader will publicly commit to leaving the EU, the anti-EU and anti-immigration rhetoric will be ramped up by the Opposition Conservatives as a form of "love bombing" of UKIP supporters.
There will of course be no mercy for Nigel Farage who will be vilified for letting Labour back into Government (or for the LDs if we join a Coalition with Labour which I consider improbable but not impossible).
Interesting to note Danny Alexander's comments yesterday.
The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric. They want hard, bankable commitments on their concerns.
Moon on a stick you mean. Its the LDs before 201.
What have Kippers achieved as MEPs or councillors ?
As an addendum, there are three more episodes of explosive cyclogenesis forecast for the Atlantic during the next ten days of the ECMWF forecast - so they're not as rare as the media's ridiculous use of that word implies.
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop. The opinions of people one way or another do not make it dishonest. It makes it realistic. The implication of your remark is that of there were a referendum under a UKIP govt then that too would be dishonest the opposite way.
I want a referendum and would not be particularly bothered if we left. I would have thought the overwhelming consideration under those circumstances is how we protect our inward investment, industries and financial services and how we continue to have unfettered access to our trading partners in the EU. It seems inconceivable under those circumstances that we would not join the EEA. We would nominally be sovereign but obey EU single market rules. Even the rather siilly notion of 'free trade' would have the same effect as being in the EEA.
The harsh reality is that assuming a continued successful economy we would see little difference in EU migration which is the bogyman UKIP are using to scare people into voting for them. According to circumstance there might be a flood of our own migrants returning.
Theresa May would be for me the female equivalent of Michael Howard - good for the core vote (and perhaps for recapturing the UKIP defectors) but less good at cutting into the Labour support.
You don't know UKIP defectors very well if you think Theresa May, who is noted for rising immigration on her watch and handing powers over to the EU without a parliamentary vote, will recapture them. Hammond or Paterson would be best for that.
True. I'm not one myself. I do think it's very likely the Conservative Party will "target" UKIP in the aftermath of defeat next year. This will come in the form of parking the blue tanks directly on the purple lawn.
Although I still doubt any Conservative leader will publicly commit to leaving the EU, the anti-EU and anti-immigration rhetoric will be ramped up by the Opposition Conservatives as a form of "love bombing" of UKIP supporters.
There will of course be no mercy for Nigel Farage who will be vilified for letting Labour back into Government (or for the LDs if we join a Coalition with Labour which I consider improbable but not impossible).
Interesting to note Danny Alexander's comments yesterday.
The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric. They want hard, bankable commitments on their concerns.
Moon on a stick you mean. Its the LDs before 201.
What have Kippers achieved as MEPs or councillors ?
Hard bankable deliverables ?
You talk as if you approve of modern politics (well, Blair onwards particularly) being at least 80% bullshit and spin. Politicians have always been economical with the actualité, thats part of the job, but we have moved into an era when the majority of the commitments are conspicuously impossible, and are revealed as such before the speaker has even sat down. The whole thing seems to be based on the hypothesis that 50% of voters will see the news headline or newspaper front page, but only 5% will see the climb down or repositioning a couple of days later (when it appears at the bottom of page 7). Politicians are grossly more cynical than they were a generation ago, and act all surprised when voters match their cynicism.
I always remember a sports day where the parents of one of our stupidest students arrived on the playing fields in his monogrammed helicopter blowing several of the stalls over and the marquee only being saved by some lusty guests holding the guide ropes. This student in a true meritocracy would now likely be on benefits
So where did I see him last week? Presenting the prime minister to his workforce as one of our leading buisiness men in the country (and a Tory donor) As someone said yesterday a fish rots from the head (or was it the tail) down and so it is with our class system. If we have any chance of making the country a better place the least we can do is give kids an equal start as soon as is possible
This torture report is a bit grim. I sort of expected the more medieval stuff - but wasn't really ready for force feeding someone hummus anally! FFS.
I wonder who came up with that awful idea. I'm pretty knowledgeable about torture techniques, but that's not one I've heard of before.
It is like reading about something from the 16th century (which is when torture really took off in Europe; some medieval societies were a good deal more scrupulous about using torture than we give them credit for).
She makes Ed seem accomplished, polished, smooth, erudite and nimble.
That is her true achievement, and as we recognise that in the event of Ed going she would be left in charge, I can see why Labour MPs are keen to keep him in place.
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop.
An example of a dishonest referendum would be something like:
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes - No
No, a dishonest referendum is
"HMG has successfully agreed the control of immigration to the UK, with no reduction in market access and freedom from EU legislation in the areas of X,Y and Z. On this basis do you support remaining in the EU"
and then a year later after the referendum is done and dusted, two or three EU countries refuse to ratify the required treaty changes, or are force by their own rules to hold referendums on the treaty changes, which their populations then refuse to ratify.
"O/T has anyone else read the report on CIA torture?"
The Bush administration had more of a problem, legally and morally, with gay Americans having consensual, non-violent sodomy than it had with its employees rectally violating suspected terrorists (ie, anyone handed over to the CIA on the strength of some Afghan tribesman's grudge). Let that sink in for a while.
"The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric ..."
The Conservatives will get some of their old voters who are currently supporting UKIP to vote for them at the GE, though I wouldn't like to say how many. However, most are lost for good. Not only will they no longer accept rhetoric and vague promises they will not accept specific promises from the Conservative Party. Why should they? A specific promise made by Cameron "no ifs or buts" was not only not kept when in office but on of his acolytes recently denied it a promise was even made - it was only a comment.
In opposition the Conservatives can say what they like but they can't do anything and not many of their old voters will believe anything they say.
I always remember a sports day where the parents of one of our stupidest students arrived on the playing fields in his monogrammed helicopter blowing several of the stalls over and the marquee only being saved by some lusty guests holding the guide ropes. This student in a true meritocracy would now likely be on benefits
So where did I see him last week? Presenting the prime minister to his workforce as one of our leading buisiness men in the country (and a Tory donor) As someone said yesterday a fish rots from the head (or was it the tail) down and so it is with our class system. If we have any chance of making the country a better place the least we can do is give kids an equal start as soon as is possible
Public school educated aristocratic idiot and Labour deputy leader, Harriet Harman, is currently adding weight to your argument. Dismal.
This torture report is a bit grim. I sort of expected the more medieval stuff - but wasn't really ready for force feeding someone hummus anally! FFS.
I wonder who came up with that awful idea. I'm pretty knowledgeable about torture techniques, but that's not one I've heard of before.
It is like reading about something from the 16th century (which is when torture really took off in Europe; some medieval societies were a good deal more scrupulous about using torture than we give them credit for).
Apparently the guy was on hunger strike, they weren't getting him to swallow and thought they could get some nutrients in him from the wrong end! So a deep colon hummus enema is what they came up with. I suspect that yer average Jihadi's rectum doesn't absorb alot into the bloodstream! 10/10 for inventiveness but, oh dear, 0/10 on every other measure moral and practical. I kind of imagine one of the perpetrators was beating off in the corner.
Mr. Eagles, for those of us working hard (ahem), could you provide a concise summary of the Clegg-Harman Q&A?
Harman: How many women have you appointed to the cabinet
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Sajid Javid, Phil Hammond, and Jeremy Hunt are all possibilities. Owen Paterson would represent a change of direction and might be the candidate to represent the BOOer wing of the party.
You can forget Michael Gove (not popular with councillors, and anyway not really suited to the role). You can also rule out David Davis, and probably Liam Fox; disloyal and troublesome, and, in the case of Fox, not a very good Defence Secretary.
On the contrary Fox did a good job at Defence and did what was necessary to react to Labour's black hole. He and the govt should have scrapped the aircraft carriers irrespective of the contract signed by Labour. So any failures are a group failure - and given the controversy inany cancellation it is understandable.
Patterson would be a good Eurosceptic choice but would simply set himself up for being the traitor once he faced up to reality.
The conservative party needs to be led from right of centre as Ken Clarke can readily testify.
Mr. Eagles, for those of us working hard (ahem), could you provide a concise summary of the Clegg-Harman Q&A?
Harman: How many women have you appointed to the cabinet
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Harman: "He talks the talk, but he walks through the lobby with the Tories.... That’s why people will never trust him.
Mr. Eagles, for those of us working hard (ahem), could you provide a concise summary of the Clegg-Harman Q&A?
Harman: How many women have you appointed to the cabinet
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Harman: "He talks the talk, but he walks through the lobby with the Tories.... That’s why people will never trust him.
LAB+LD Coalition anyone ?
Why not with Cable as leader. Harman's comments show why Clegg has wasted his time in govt trying to attack the tories. The reality is that Harman's comments are to Cleggs credit but he belittles his actions in his own words.
Mr. Eagles, for those of us working hard (ahem), could you provide a concise summary of the Clegg-Harman Q&A?
Harman: How many women have you appointed to the cabinet
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Harman: "He talks the talk, but he walks through the lobby with the Tories.... That’s why people will never trust him.
LAB+LD Coalition anyone ?
I expect that Ed Miliband will say the price for going into coalition with the Lib Dems, will be making Nick Clegg resign as Lib Dem leader.
On the contrary Fox did a good job at Defence and did what was necessary to react to Labour's black hole. He and the govt should have scrapped the aircraft carriers irrespective of the contract signed by Labour. So any failures are a group failure - and given the controversy in any cancellation it is understandable.
I was under the impression, that which ever genius had approved the carrier contracts had agreed to something which basically made it impossible to save any money by cancelling.
This is another area where I believe the last Government got it badly wrong. There is only one thing worse than spending money you don't have, and that is buying the wrong things with it-and doing so in the wrong way. The carriers they ordered were unable to work effectively with our key defence partners, the United States or France. They had failed to plan so carriers and planes would arrive at the same time. They ordered the more expensive and less capable version of the joint strike fighter to fly off the carriers. And they signed contracts, so we were left in a situation where even cancelling the second carrier would actually cost more than to build it. [Interruption.] I have this in written confirmation from BAE Systems.
Mr. Eagles, for those of us working hard (ahem), could you provide a concise summary of the Clegg-Harman Q&A?
Harman: How many women have you appointed to the cabinet
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Harman: "He talks the talk, but he walks through the lobby with the Tories.... That’s why people will never trust him.
LAB+LD Coalition anyone ?
I expect that Ed Miliband will say the price for going into coalition with the Lib Dems, will be making Nick Clegg resign as Lib Dem leader.
What happens then if the LDs tell him to take a running jump. Its not like they have other viable options for a coalition unless they fancy cancelling trident.
"The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric ..."
The Conservatives will get some of their old voters who are currently supporting UKIP to vote for them at the GE, though I wouldn't like to say how many. However, most are lost for good. Not only will they no longer accept rhetoric and vague promises they will not accept specific promises from the Conservative Party. Why should they? A specific promise made by Cameron "no ifs or buts" was not only not kept when in office but on of his acolytes recently denied it a promise was even made - it was only a comment.
In opposition the Conservatives can say what they like but they can't do anything and not many of their old voters will believe anything they say.
No ifs, no buts there will be a copper bottomed, cast iron guarantee for promises after the GE2015.
I expect that Ed Miliband will say the price for going into coalition with the Lib Dems, will be making Nick Clegg resign as Lib Dem leader.
Wouldn't it be more in Labour's interest to make the price Ed Miliband resigning as Labour leader?
Well yes, but this is the Labour party, who thought replacing Tony Blair with Gordon Brown was the greatest strategic move since Eisenhower was appointed Supreme Allied Commander
On the contrary Fox did a good job at Defence and did what was necessary to react to Labour's black hole. He and the govt should have scrapped the aircraft carriers irrespective of the contract signed by Labour. So any failures are a group failure - and given the controversy in any cancellation it is understandable.
I was under the impression, that which ever genius had approved the carrier contracts had agreed to something which basically made it impossible to save any money by cancelling.
This is another area where I believe the last Government got it badly wrong. There is only one thing worse than spending money you don't have, and that is buying the wrong things with it-and doing so in the wrong way. The carriers they ordered were unable to work effectively with our key defence partners, the United States or France. They had failed to plan so carriers and planes would arrive at the same time. They ordered the more expensive and less capable version of the joint strike fighter to fly off the carriers. And they signed contracts, so we were left in a situation where even cancelling the second carrier would actually cost more than to build it. [Interruption.] I have this in written confirmation from BAE Systems.
Heh. I love it whwn we have a carrier discussion on PB. :-)
In fact, it was worse than that. From memory, Labour said that the carriers were being designed so CATOBAR (catapults and arrestors) could be fitted onto them. When the coalition tries to move the project that way. it turns out that they hadn't made that a project requirement for ten years ...
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop.
An example of a dishonest referendum would be something like:
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes - No
No, a dishonest referendum is
"HMG has successfully agreed the control of immigration to the UK, with no reduction in market access and freedom from EU legislation in the areas of X,Y and Z. On this basis do you support remaining in the EU"
and then a year later after the referendum is done and dusted, two or three EU countries refuse to ratify the required treaty changes, or are force by their own rules to hold referendums on the treaty changes, which their populations then refuse to ratify.
I'm sure you could find 57 varieties of question that are equally pointless and unlikely. We will (or would if you voted Conservative) get the question as repeated by Mr Nabavi.
The question which everyone would be asking is, what would happen if we did leave? The more vague the answers to that question, which presumably would not be on the ballot paper, then the more likely we would get a NO answer.
None of this really mattters to kippers since their avowed intent is to put Labour in power.
Brilliant. Lets vote for the party that will give us a referendum.
Well that rules out cast iron Dave and and his phony conservatives.
No it does not. Cameron broke no promises and the only phony id Farage peddling his big lie about the EU. Not that bigoted you cares tuppence about truth.
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop.
An example of a dishonest referendum would be something like:
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes - No
No, a dishonest referendum is
"HMG has successfully agreed the control of immigration to the UK, with no reduction in market access and freedom from EU legislation in the areas of X,Y and Z. On this basis do you support remaining in the EU"
and then a year later after the referendum is done and dusted, two or three EU countries refuse to ratify the required treaty changes, or are force by their own rules to hold referendums on the treaty changes, which their populations then refuse to ratify.
I'm sure you could find 57 varieties of question that are equally pointless and unlikely. We will (or would if you voted Conservative) get the question as repeated by Mr Nabavi.
The question which everyone would be asking is, what would happen if we did leave? The more vague the answers to that question, which presumably would not be on the ballot paper, then the more likely we would get a NO answer.
None of this really mattters to kippers since their avowed intent is to put Labour in power.
I'm not a kipper.
And the last paragraph of my posting still applies even with Mr Nabavi's wording. Its possible Camerons hands might be more or less clean in this regard as well, but the net result is its still completely possible to have a referendum, and then not get what we sign up for.
They missed a trick by not taking a leaf out of the nats book: "Should the United Kingdom be an independent country?"
Indeed. Even "Should the United Kingdom be independent from the European Union?" would have been at least partially consistent. The way they've flipped the question for the first run already shows how they're trying to twist things. There's a fair chance it'll get twisted more in future too.
On the contrary Fox did a good job at Defence and did what was necessary to react to Labour's black hole. He and the govt should have scrapped the aircraft carriers irrespective of the contract signed by Labour. So any failures are a group failure - and given the controversy in any cancellation it is understandable.
I was under the impression, that which ever genius had approved the carrier contracts had agreed to something which basically made it impossible to save any money by cancelling.
This is another area where I believe the last Government got it badly wrong. There is only one thing worse than spending money you don't have, and that is buying the wrong things with it-and doing so in the wrong way. The carriers they ordered were unable to work effectively with our key defence partners, the United States or France. They had failed to plan so carriers and planes would arrive at the same time. They ordered the more expensive and less capable version of the joint strike fighter to fly off the carriers. And they signed contracts, so we were left in a situation where even cancelling the second carrier would actually cost more than to build it. [Interruption.] I have this in written confirmation from BAE Systems.
Then labour party commissioned the carriers and set the pathetic contact terms. This is the same Labour Party you are working to return to power. The effort should have been made to renegotiate the contracts and build something else. It seems to me that at every turn the carriers were badly designed and commissioned. Given we have them than we have to I think adjust our defence policy accordingly, but we are hugely reliant on the VTOL F35 working.
Hunt's proposal to damage private education is nothing but mean-spirited, and probably illegal, hypocritical nonsense.
Do you really think that something close to a level playing field for our 8 and nine year olds is such a bad thing. I think Hunt is the ideal advocate for 'damaging' public schools. If it is such a privileged education why should it only be available to the offspring of the rich? As for this idea that Hunt is pulling up the drawbridge after he himself has benefitted. It's only someone on the inside who can see the pernicious effects on all of us that buying privilege at such a young age brings.
So like a good Socialist you prefer a race to the bottom rather than give bright working class kids a chance by bringing back grammar schools.
and people wonder why Labour voters are turning to UKIP.
Incidentally, I see Cameron has strongly reaffirmed the Government's support for Turkish membership of the EU. I'm no Eurosceptic, as regular PBers will know, but well, hmm, I'm not sure about that.
So did Jack Straw, for the same reason, it's what the Americans want.
Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the former French president, correctly said that Turkey was not a European country and that inviting it into the European Union would mean "the end of Europe."
Turkey's history of Ottoman relationships in the eastern Mediterranean, Egypt and Arabia, its experience in resolving problems of the relationship between secular government and Islamic practices and belief, suggest a better role for Turkey in a Levantine association. A leadership role for Turkey in a Levantine association is also consistent with its relationship to Israel, brokered by the USA.
It is time for a new European relationship with Turkey and the Near and Middle East. Here is a better idea than Turkey in the EU.
A country that blocks twitter gets into the EU. A brutally repressive country engaged in a violent crackdown on dissent gets a British military base. But we're meant to be the world's good guys? So utterly farcical.
Hunt's proposal to damage private education is nothing but mean-spirited, and probably illegal, hypocritical nonsense.
Do you really think that something close to a level playing field for our 8 and nine year olds is such a bad thing. I think Hunt is the ideal advocate for 'damaging' public schools. If it is such a privileged education why should it only be available to the offspring of the rich? As for this idea that Hunt is pulling up the drawbridge after he himself has benefitted. It's only someone on the inside who can see the pernicious effects on all of us that buying privilege at such a young age brings.
So like a good Socialist you prefer a race to the bottom rather than give bright working class kids a chance by bringing back grammar schools.
and people wonder why Labour voters are turning to UKIP.
This is the same Labour Party you are working to return to power.
Enough of this crap. Unless you think Dan Hannan is also working to bring Labour in ? It is actually permissible to question the policy of one's party, especially when it lies through its teeth. Yes, I know Labour lie through their teeth as well, I dont care, I am not planning to vote for them. I also care that Tories that sit here, hurling abuse and refusing to countenance any criticism of their party, even when they are, for want of a better word, wrong, is just driving away more voters. Yes, you might feel them leaving is detoxifying the party, but a detoxified party with 25% of the vote is no use to anyone.
" its still completely possible to have a referendum, and then not get what we sign up for."
Actually it is impossible to have a referendum and to know what the alternatives are.
The terms of trade and the details of our relationship with the EU can only be settled after invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty but that can only be invoked after we have voted to leave.
It is therefore impossible for the electorate to be given what I would call a fair vote.
" its still completely possible to have a referendum, and then not get what we sign up for."
Actually it is impossible to have a referendum and to know what the alternatives are.
The terms of trade and the details of our relationship with the EU can only be settled after invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty but that can only be invoked after we have voted to leave.
It is therefore impossible for the electorate to be given what I would call a fair vote.
Just as long as the BOO campaign face up to the same responsibility, and detail what 'being our of the EU' means in terms of which bodies we will be part of and not part of, and the costs thereof.
Agreement on that might be just as difficult as Cameron's negotiations, both inside Britain and with the organisations themselves.
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop.
An example of a dishonest referendum would be something like:
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes - No
None of this really mattters to kippers since their avowed intent is to put Labour in power.
You have to accept that nearly 40% of the electorate favour neither the Conservatives nor Labour.
It's facile to say that not voting Conservative = putting Labour into power, just as it's facile to say that not voting Labour = putting the Conservatives into power.
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
Like there's some pathological British addiction to child abuse, with everyone from MPs to Rotherham taxi drivers engaging in it and then getting it covered up?
The problem here isn't "Americans". It's one particular faction that has grabbed control of one political party. This stuff hasn't been done since Obama came in, wasn't done under Clinton, and wasn't done under Bush Senior.
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
Torture is almost invariably described in euphemisms eg "put to the question", "sharp questioning" "enhance interrogation."
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
It's no different to what the Germans were up to in the 40's, boiling people alive and ripping off fingernails etc
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
Like there's some pathological British addiction to child abuse, with everyone from MPs to Rotherham taxi drivers engaging in it and then getting it covered up?
The problem here isn't "Americans". It's one particular faction that has grabbed control of one political party. This stuff hasn't been done since Obama came in, wasn't done under Clinton, and wasn't done under Bush Senior.
Blimey. Is there anything that you won't try and link to your strange obsession?
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
It's no different to what the Germans were up to in the 40's, boiling people alive and ripping off fingernails etc
What were people expecting went on at Gitmo ? Stern questioning and downgrading of tea bags from Twinings to Lidl if no cooperation ?
Incidentally, I see Cameron has strongly reaffirmed the Government's support for Turkish membership of the EU. I'm no Eurosceptic, as regular PBers will know, but well, hmm, I'm not sure about that.
So did Jack Straw, for the same reason, it's what the Americans want.
Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the former French president, correctly said that Turkey was not a European country and that inviting it into the European Union would mean "the end of Europe."
Turkey's history of Ottoman relationships in the eastern Mediterranean, Egypt and Arabia, its experience in resolving problems of the relationship between secular government and Islamic practices and belief, suggest a better role for Turkey in a Levantine association. A leadership role for Turkey in a Levantine association is also consistent with its relationship to Israel, brokered by the USA.
It is time for a new European relationship with Turkey and the Near and Middle East. Here is a better idea than Turkey in the EU.
A country that blocks twitter gets into the EU. A brutally repressive country engaged in a violent crackdown on dissent gets a British military base. But we're meant to be the world's good guys? So utterly farcical.
Banning Twitter and violently cracking down on dissent. Who else might be doing that?
You'd better vote Conservative, then. We could be on our way out by Xmas 2017.
Assuming an honest referendum takes place.
How would you get a dishonest referendum? Your remark is tiresome. There would be a referendum. Full stop.
An example of a dishonest referendum would be something like:
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes - No
None of this really mattters to kippers since their avowed intent is to put Labour in power.
You have to accept that nearly 40% of the electorate favour neither the Conservatives nor Labour.
It's facile to say that not voting Conservative = putting Labour into power, just as it's facile to say that not voting Labour = putting the Conservatives into power.
When did we last have a govt that was not Tory (led) or Labour? If in 2015 we do not have a tory govt - who will be PM? Which party will be in power? If we do not have a tory govt in 2015 will we get a referendum on the EU?
" its still completely possible to have a referendum, and then not get what we sign up for."
Actually it is impossible to have a referendum and to know what the alternatives are.
The terms of trade and the details of our relationship with the EU can only be settled after invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty but that can only be invoked after we have voted to leave.
It is therefore impossible for the electorate to be given what I would call a fair vote.
Just as long as the BOO campaign face up to the same responsibility, and detail what 'being our of the EU' means in terms of which bodies we will be part of and not part of, and the costs thereof.
Agreement on that might be just as difficult as Cameron's negotiations, both inside Britain and with the organisations themselves.
Apologies Mr Llama, I misunderstood your post. Please ignore my post. (cue laughter from other posters and lurkers) :-)
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
It's no different to what the Germans were up to in the 40's, boiling people alive and ripping off fingernails etc
While the US torture program is a terrible and horrific thing, it's clearly very different to what the Germans were up to in the 40s. US torture methods inadvertently caused one man to die. The Germans deliberately executed millions.
'Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality........"
Good post 007.
Has anyone ever done a cost analysis of our 'special relationship' with the US?
Since '45 they've brought us nothing but expensive trouble and shame. We should have adopted the French model years ago and only dealt with them with a very long spoon. .
I always remember a sports day where the parents of one of our stupidest students arrived on the playing fields in his monogrammed helicopter blowing several of the stalls over and the marquee only being saved by some lusty guests holding the guide ropes. This student in a true meritocracy would now likely be on benefits
So where did I see him last week? Presenting the prime minister to his workforce as one of our leading buisiness men in the country (and a Tory donor) As someone said yesterday a fish rots from the head (or was it the tail) down and so it is with our class system. If we have any chance of making the country a better place the least we can do is give kids an equal start as soon as is possible
Unusual to see an anecdote which fails on so many different levels. The student himself wasn't flying the helicopter, so what has this got to do with his intelligence? Whoever was flying the helicopter was presumably qualified to do so, and I imagine helicopter pilots are taught to think carefully when landing anywhere about the possible effects of turbulence. Why would "lusty" (do you mean "sturdy"?) guests need to hold on to the guy (not guide) ropes, which would already be anchored to the ground? Why would any school, even one as vulgar and awful as Millfield, give permission to anyone to land a helicopter on a playing field on sports day?
"The rectal 'feeding' sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?"
A lot of the rightwingers defending these torturing quasi-rapists are the same people who think consensual homosexuality should be recriminalised. Even Orwell, in his finest "We have always been at war with Eastasia" mode, couldn't make it up.
'Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality........"
Good post 007.
Has anyone ever done a cost analysis of our 'special relationship' with the US?
Since '45 they've brought us nothing but expensive trouble and shame. We should have adopted the French model years ago and only dealt with them with a very long spoon. .
What about imposing economic sanctions on Argentina after they invaded the Falklands, winning the Cold War for us, providing large funds for the establishment of democracies in Eastern Europe, liberating Kuwait to allow a continued energy supply, etc?
Re torture. They also chained a prisoner to a wall in such a way that he couldn't stand up; wearing only a sweatshirt he died of cold sitting on a concrete floor all night in an unheated cell in winter. It is just literally incredible, unthinkable brutality.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement, white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
It's no different to what the Germans were up to in the 40's, boiling people alive and ripping off fingernails etc
What were people expecting went on at Gitmo ? Stern questioning and downgrading of tea bags from Twinings to Lidl if no cooperation ?
CCHQ Press Office @CCHQPress · 6m 6 minutes ago Why did @andyburnhammp delete this Tweet? Because as usual, he's big on scaremongering, plain wrong on facts Embedded image permalink
Comments
If you were made King of the LDs after the 2015 election, what would you do to rebuild their support?
and people wonder why Labour voters are turning to UKIP.
Lets get that drawbridge up.
And this will become a greater issue with time. If the congestion on roads and transport hubs around the South East increases by the same extent it has done over the last ten-fifteen years, immigration's salience will increase, even among professional types who aren't voting UKIP yet. The mainstream parties can't do what they did in Scotland to the SNP-threat, carrying on with business as usual. Collapse will come slowly, and then all at once.
The US soldiers dishonourably discharged or imprisoned for the scandal at Abu Ghraib were doing what the CIA were doing elsewhere.
Don't tell me that didn't come from the very top.
Another reason for Donald Rumsfeld and George W Bush to spend eternity being riotously sodomised by fantastically well hung demons wearing Osama Bin Laden masks.
What have Kippers achieved as MEPs or councillors ?
Hard bankable deliverables ?
On the M4 congestion issue, I'm sure there are other effects going on, but the effects of a rising population (three quarters of which is caused by migration), are a major strain on the system. We simply can't build more roads fast enough.
I agree that many immigrants make a positive contribution, but our immigration policy should be tailored in a way to get as much bang for the buck as possible. We should restrict immigration only to those that bring the most benefit and least cost. If we are successful, we can get to a system like Canada, where immigration loses its salience as a worry, and as a result you can start letting more of the high quality ones in.
Labour will be hardest hit by the collapse of Westminster’s three party system
Why is the Labour party struggling to benefit from the unpopularity of the coalition government?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/12/labour-will-be-hardest-hit-collapse-westminster-s-three-party-system
I think the preferred technical term is "explosive cyclogenesis".
We really should stop Americans ruining our language.
I want a referendum and would not be particularly bothered if we left. I would have thought the overwhelming consideration under those circumstances is how we protect our inward investment, industries and financial services and how we continue to have unfettered access to our trading partners in the EU. It seems inconceivable under those circumstances that we would not join the EEA. We would nominally be sovereign but obey EU single market rules. Even the rather siilly notion of 'free trade' would have the same effect as being in the EEA.
The harsh reality is that assuming a continued successful economy we would see little difference in EU migration which is the bogyman UKIP are using to scare people into voting for them. According to circumstance there might be a flood of our own migrants returning.
I always remember a sports day where the parents of one of our stupidest students arrived on the playing fields in his monogrammed helicopter blowing several of the stalls over and the marquee only being saved by some lusty guests holding the guide ropes. This student in a true meritocracy would now likely be on benefits
So where did I see him last week? Presenting the prime minister to his workforce as one of our leading buisiness men in the country (and a Tory donor) As someone said yesterday a fish rots from the head (or was it the tail) down and so it is with our class system. If we have any chance of making the country a better place the least we can do is give kids an equal start as soon as is possible
Bah.
Do you support staying in the European Union, giving a mandate to the UK government to renegotiate our relationship with other EU states?
- Yes
- No
It is like reading about something from the 16th century (which is when torture really took off in Europe; some medieval societies were a good deal more scrupulous about using torture than we give them credit for).
She makes Ed seem accomplished, polished, smooth, erudite and nimble.
That is her true achievement, and as we recognise that in the event of Ed going she would be left in charge, I can see why Labour MPs are keen to keep him in place.
Small liabilities all round though.
"HMG has successfully agreed the control of immigration to the UK, with no reduction in market access and freedom from EU legislation in the areas of X,Y and Z. On this basis do you support remaining in the EU"
and then a year later after the referendum is done and dusted, two or three EU countries refuse to ratify the required treaty changes, or are force by their own rules to hold referendums on the treaty changes, which their populations then refuse to ratify.
Whenever Clegg does PMQs, you are reminded of how many obstacles there are to any kind of Clegg Miliband governing arrangement
The question will be:
“Do you think that the United Kingdom should be a member of the European Union?”
As already voted for (IIRC virtually unanimously) by Conservative MPs:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2013-2014/0063/14063.pdf
The Bush administration had more of a problem, legally and morally, with gay Americans having consensual, non-violent sodomy than it had with its employees rectally violating suspected terrorists (ie, anyone handed over to the CIA on the strength of some Afghan tribesman's grudge). Let that sink in for a while.
"The issue with attracting UKIP voters back is that most of these people are sick of empty rhetoric ..."
The Conservatives will get some of their old voters who are currently supporting UKIP to vote for them at the GE, though I wouldn't like to say how many. However, most are lost for good. Not only will they no longer accept rhetoric and vague promises they will not accept specific promises from the Conservative Party. Why should they? A specific promise made by Cameron "no ifs or buts" was not only not kept when in office but on of his acolytes recently denied it a promise was even made - it was only a comment.
In opposition the Conservatives can say what they like but they can't do anything and not many of their old voters will believe anything they say.
Clegg: We've done so much for women voters
Harman: Normally when he's asked about numbers of women he's quite forthcoming
Clegg: Recites a load of stats how things have become better for women since the coalition took over, Labour are in denial over their legacy, he then made Andy Burnham nearly explode by pointing he's the only person ever to privatise an NHS hospital.
Also, interesting to note that a Yes in Scotland meant independence, but a Yes for the proposed EU referendum means remaining in.
Patterson would be a good Eurosceptic choice but would simply set himself up for being the traitor once he faced up to reality.
The conservative party needs to be led from right of centre as Ken Clarke can readily testify.
LAB+LD Coalition anyone ?
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3490/2014-on-course-to-have-lowest-ever-combined-voting-shares-for-Conservative-and-Labour.aspx
and
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/dear-westminster-survey-topline-2014.pdf
Harman's comments show why Clegg has wasted his time in govt trying to attack the tories. The reality is that Harman's comments are to Cleggs credit but he belittles his actions in his own words.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101019/debtext/101019-0001.htm#10101928001163
Mr. Flightpath, indeed, by a much smaller than anticipated margin and with ongoing devolutionary and constitutional fallout.
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Deputy Prime Minister
In fact, it was worse than that. From memory, Labour said that the carriers were being designed so CATOBAR (catapults and arrestors) could be fitted onto them. When the coalition tries to move the project that way. it turns out that they hadn't made that a project requirement for ten years ...
We will (or would if you voted Conservative) get the question as repeated by Mr Nabavi.
The question which everyone would be asking is, what would happen if we did leave? The more vague the answers to that question, which presumably would not be on the ballot paper, then the more likely we would get a NO answer.
None of this really mattters to kippers since their avowed intent is to put Labour in power.
And the last paragraph of my posting still applies even with Mr Nabavi's wording. Its possible Camerons hands might be more or less clean in this regard as well, but the net result is its still completely possible to have a referendum, and then not get what we sign up for.
@CCHQPress
.@marycreagh_mp says Labour would "absolutely" use private sector in the NHS on #bbcdp - a departure from @andyburnhammp's scaremongering
@AaronBell80
@CCHQPress It seems Labour would use private sector when in Government but not when in Opposition. There's a word for that #opportunism
Parliament should undertake its' full function and MP's earn their salary without abrogating their responsibilities back to the electorate.
The effort should have been made to renegotiate the contracts and build something else.
It seems to me that at every turn the carriers were badly designed and commissioned. Given we have them than we have to I think adjust our defence policy accordingly, but we are hugely reliant on the VTOL F35 working.
Actually it is impossible to have a referendum and to know what the alternatives are.
The terms of trade and the details of our relationship with the EU can only be settled after invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty but that can only be invoked after we have voted to leave.
It is therefore impossible for the electorate to be given what I would call a fair vote.
It isn't UKIP that is preaching austerity and slashing services whilst handing over more than 20 billion a year to the EU and international aid.
Nobody is going to win an election outright acting like that. Nobody.
Agreement on that might be just as difficult as Cameron's negotiations, both inside Britain and with the organisations themselves.
There seems to be some pathological American addiction to euphemism. "Enhanced interrogation techniques" when they mean "Nazi-style torture", FFS. Specifically, "walling [smashing people into walls via a towel knotted around their neck], attention grasps, slapping, facial hold [physical assaults of one kind or another], stress positions, cramped confinement,
white noise and sleep deprivation" - the latter three often in combination for periods over a week.
The rectal "feeding" sounds like homosexual rape to me. Why aren't these people being jailed for 100 years?
This comic comes to mind:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/how_it_works.png
The problem here isn't "Americans". It's one particular faction that has grabbed control of one political party. This stuff hasn't been done since Obama came in, wasn't done under Clinton, and wasn't done under Bush Senior.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russia-speeds-up-law-to-ban-most-foreign-web-services/507820.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2012/12/2012121514617966234.html
Good post 007.
Has anyone ever done a cost analysis of our 'special relationship' with the US?
Since '45 they've brought us nothing but expensive trouble and shame. We should have adopted the French model years ago and only dealt with them with a very long spoon.
.
A lot of the rightwingers defending these torturing quasi-rapists are the same people who think consensual homosexuality should be recriminalised. Even Orwell, in his finest "We have always been at war with Eastasia" mode, couldn't make it up.
http://entertainment.time.com/2013/10/29/these-five-songs-have-all-been-used-to-torture-people/
CCHQ Press Office @CCHQPress · 6m 6 minutes ago
Why did @andyburnhammp delete this Tweet? Because as usual, he's big on scaremongering, plain wrong on facts
Embedded image permalink
CCHQ Press Office @CCHQPress · 12m 12 minutes ago
.@andyburnhammp @faisalislam @labourpress simply not true - last NHS bidder dropped out February 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/feb/19/hinchingbrooke-huntington-hospital-nhs-private …