Apologies to everyone else for having to repeat myself.
Apologies to everyone else for interrupting James reverie with logic or argument....I know why you posted the article - he writes 'England' is a nuclear power....pity we keep them in Scotland!
So whatever seat in Huntingdonshire, is this the likeliest UKIP seat ? Is Farage going to stand there ?
Ramsey is just a small town within the Cambridgeshire NW constituency. Only about 50% of the constituency had local elections this year because the other half is part of Peterborough unitary council. UKIP did win the most votes in the half which was voting this year. I think Farage has said he will probably stand in a seat in the south-east somewhere so he probably won't contest this one:
"You said it was 'covered in the article' - it wasn't."
The question of yield was covered at length in the article. I wasn't referring to the issue of testing, because at that point I assumed you were knowledgeable enough to understand why that wasn't relevant, without needing someone to hold your hand. I promise to make concessions to your ignorance in future.
Now do stop being a wind-up merchant. I would normally indulge you, but hundreds of millions of lives are at stake over this issue.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I adored another movie by the same director (Kung Fu Hustle http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373074/reviews?start=10) which is LOL funny and one of my favourites. I'm no fan of martial arts films but this one is just fantastically shot, takes the pee out of the genre and the deliberate subtitle jokes are just great.
Does anyone have any reviews of power drills, I can't think of anything I know about politics or betting so I thought I'd ask. Or cash registers, are there any good cash registers out there that I may have missed?
could I interest you in a Ed\Nick\Dave\Salmond\Osborne\Balls* is crap thread ?
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I've clearly missed something re EdM and sardines - personally I like them in tomato sauce and on toast. What's going on? It sounds bizarre.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I've clearly missed something re EdM and sardines - personally I like them in tomato sauce and on toast. What's going on? It sounds bizarre.
Mr Moribund was citing Attlee banning sardines as evidence Labour could take tough decisions.
I really object to my post in response to Carlotta being deleted, without any trace of it ever having existed. It is totally unacceptable to censor debate in this one-sided way.
Please do not delete this post, because I will continue posting it however long it takes. If you ban me for continuing to post it, I will repost it as soon as my ban is lifted.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I've clearly missed something re EdM and sardines - personally I like them in tomato sauce and on toast. What's going on? It sounds bizarre.
Mr Moribund was citing Attlee banning sardines as evidence Labour could take tough decisions.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really? Tough decisions based on sardines? Cripes - that is truly stupendous. Perhaps he'd like to talk about why Cameron hasn't banned chocolate oranges again...
"Ed Miliband has attacked David Cameron for failing to stop the sale of cut-price Chocolate Oranges - something the PM complained about in opposition.
In 2006, Mr Cameron criticised WH Smith for discounting chocolate rather than fruit despite the UK's obesity crisis.
But the Labour leader told The House magazine the situation had not changed.
"If he can't sort out the chocolate orange, he's not going to sort out the train companies, the energy companies, the banks, is he?" Mr Miliband said..." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16750583 - this remains one of my favourite Labour leader outbursts, it's just so fantastically stupid, trivial and shouty.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I've clearly missed something re EdM and sardines - personally I like them in tomato sauce and on toast. What's going on? It sounds bizarre.
Mr Moribund was citing Attlee banning sardines as evidence Labour could take tough decisions.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really? Tough decisions based on sardines? Cripes - that is truly stupendous. Perhaps he'd like to talk about why Cameron hasn't banned chocolate oranges again...
"Ed Miliband has attacked David Cameron for failing to stop the sale of cut-price Chocolate Oranges - something the PM complained about in opposition.
In 2006, Mr Cameron criticised WH Smith for discounting chocolate rather than fruit despite the UK's obesity crisis.
But the Labour leader told The House magazine the situation had not changed.
"If he can't sort out the chocolate orange, he's not going to sort out the train companies, the energy companies, the banks, is he?" Mr Miliband said..." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16750583 - this remains one of my favourite Labour leader outbursts, it's just so fantastically stupid, trivial and shouty.
I suspect today hasn't been one of Ed's best. Three years spent rubbishing HMG policy and now he's saying he's signing up to it. Cameron should invite him into the Coalition.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
There's a story in the Times saying the raising of the speed limit on motorways to 80mph has been dropped because *female* drivers aren't keen on it - it appears that the polling says that the majority of drivers are in favour of it so I'm perplexed and appalled that something that's already common road behaviour is being settled on gender based polling FFS. The vast majority of deaths don't happen on M roads in any case.
"A source close to the Transport Secretary added: “This is not going to happen with Patrick McLoughlin as Transport Secretary. Safety is paramount to him and his view of how to run the roads and he would not be confident about how you would do it.”
Downing Street is understood to be wary of raising the speed limit for fear of alienating women voters. Polling suggests that a majority of drivers support 80mph limits, but many women are opposed. A survey of 13,000 drivers conducted for the AA found that 63 per cent of drivers were in favour, including 73 per cent of men and 53 per cent of women. However, 41 per cent of women drivers think that the limit should remain at 70mph.
David Bizley, technical director of the RAC, said: “We are disappointed because it is something that the majority of motorists would like. Our view was that a trial was the right way forward and a sensible decision could be made on the balance of considerations.”
"There's a story in the Times saying the raising of the speed limit on motorways to 80mph has been dropped because *female* drivers aren't keen on it - it appears that the polling says that the majority of drivers are in favour of it so I'm perplexed and appalled that something that's already common road behaviour is being settled on gender based polling FFS. The vast majority of deaths don't happen on M roads in any case."
Decisions on speed limits should be based on safety, not on opinion polls. If the Tories have finally realised that, they should be applauded. A speed limit of 80mph would be crazy.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
There's a story in the Times saying the raising of the speed limit on motorways to 80mph has been dropped because *female* drivers aren't keen on it - it appears that the polling says that the majority of drivers are in favour of it so I'm perplexed and appalled that something that's already common road behaviour is being settled on gender based polling FFS. The vast majority of deaths don't happen on M roads in any case.
"A source close to the Transport Secretary added: “This is not going to happen with Patrick McLoughlin as Transport Secretary. Safety is paramount to him and his view of how to run the roads and he would not be confident about how you would do it.”
Downing Street is understood to be wary of raising the speed limit for fear of alienating women voters. Polling suggests that a majority of drivers support 80mph limits, but many women are opposed. A survey of 13,000 drivers conducted for the AA found that 63 per cent of drivers were in favour, including 73 per cent of men and 53 per cent of women. However, 41 per cent of women drivers think that the limit should remain at 70mph.
David Bizley, technical director of the RAC, said: “We are disappointed because it is something that the majority of motorists would like. Our view was that a trial was the right way forward and a sensible decision could be made on the balance of considerations.”
completely daft, the motorway speed limit should have been raised years ago and then enforced.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
I've clearly missed something re EdM and sardines - personally I like them in tomato sauce and on toast. What's going on? It sounds bizarre.
Mr Moribund was citing Attlee banning sardines as evidence Labour could take tough decisions.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really? Tough decisions based on sardines? Cripes - that is truly stupendous. Perhaps he'd like to talk about why Cameron hasn't banned chocolate oranges again...
"Ed Miliband has attacked David Cameron for failing to stop the sale of cut-price Chocolate Oranges - something the PM complained about in opposition.
In 2006, Mr Cameron criticised WH Smith for discounting chocolate rather than fruit despite the UK's obesity crisis.
But the Labour leader told The House magazine the situation had not changed.
"If he can't sort out the chocolate orange, he's not going to sort out the train companies, the energy companies, the banks, is he?" Mr Miliband said..." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16750583 - this remains one of my favourite Labour leader outbursts, it's just so fantastically stupid, trivial and shouty.
I suspect today hasn't been one of Ed's best. Three years spent rubbishing HMG policy and now he's saying he's signing up to it. Cameron should invite him into the Coalition.
Len McCluskey has been very unhelpful to EdM today - these are a few of his quotes, courtesy of Dan Hodges
Len calls for mass industrial strike action. Breaking the law not enough apparently. Calls to "name the day ".
Len calls for civil disobedience.
"Pay your taxes you greedy bastards" says Len, in one of his more moderate passages...
Unite not coming out to play on Ed speech. No response planned for Len M's People's Parliament address.
Tony Benn just getting standing ovation.
and finally :^ )
Cheers of "Tony! Tony!". I used to do that. Different Tony of course...
"There's a story in the Times saying the raising of the speed limit on motorways to 80mph has been dropped because *female* drivers aren't keen on it - it appears that the polling says that the majority of drivers are in favour of it so I'm perplexed and appalled that something that's already common road behaviour is being settled on gender based polling FFS. The vast majority of deaths don't happen on M roads in any case."
Decisions on speed limits should be based on safety, not on opinion polls. If the Tories have finally realised that, they should be applauded. A speed limit of 80mph would be crazy.
80 mph on motorways is par for the course for most of Europe.
"But surely by the precautionary principle should have also applied to MMR?"
Absolutely, at least until the evidence in the other direction became overwhelming, which eventually it did.
In which case we would not have MMR, because there are always nut-jobs who will make money and/or influence from saying that the evidence is not overwhelming. Who do we believe?
Besides, when is evidence (and especially medical evidence) overwhelming? That is a very high hurdle to pass; after all, there are still some who doubt a link between tobacco smoking and cancer.
The LHC mini black hole nonsense was another case in point.
Worse: take AIDS and HIV drugs. In some places (especially southern Africa) the Duesberg Hypothesis (2) is still believed. This denial of a link between HIV and AIDS prevented some countries from giving out antiretroviral medication, and caused many thousands of deaths (1) (*).
By some reckonings, in South Africa alone the denialist convictions of former president Thabo Mbeki led to more than 300,000 premature fatalities and 35,000 preventable infant infections.
(3)
Under your mindset, they would be right to not give out antiretroviral medication because the evidence, in their eyes, is not overwhelming.
And it is not as if evidence thought of as being overwhelming is always right: take the believed causal factors of stomach ulcers over time as an example.
(*) Far more destructive were the claims that antiretroviral medication (particularly AZT) caused AIDS.
"Then why was that effect not produced during testing of much greater explosive force?"
Because cities were not destroyed by the tests, Carlotta. Apologies to everyone else for having to repeat myself.
Well, blame the CND-ers for that - they started the meme "the UK's nuclear forces are the equivalent of nnn Hiroshimas" donkeys years ago. Obviously a small bomb in a city will kill more people than a big bomb in the desert.
"Well, blame the CND-ers for that - they started the meme "the UK's nuclear forces are the equivalent of nnn Hiroshimas" donkeys years ago. Obviously a small bomb in a city will kill more people than a big bomb in the desert."
British hydrogen bombs are directed at cities, not at deserts. Are you pro-Trident, Alan? If so, why?
(Moderator - please do not delete this post. There is no justification for deleting it and I will continually repost if forced to do so.)
You don't appear to be listening, Josias. I said the precautionary principle should apply until the evidence in the other direction is overwhelming. It now is.
"Then why was that effect not produced during testing of much greater explosive force?"
Because cities were not destroyed by the tests, Carlotta. Apologies to everyone else for having to repeat myself.
Well, blame the CND-ers for that - they started the meme "the UK's nuclear forces are the equivalent of nnn Hiroshimas" donkeys years ago. Obviously a small bomb in a city will kill more people than a big bomb in the desert.
Ah CND - a stalwart of my teenage years, I was one of a handful who didn't have a CND or Nuclear Power No Thanks badge on my denim jacket...but you can still buy them...
You don't appear to be listening, Josias. I said the precautionary principle should apply until the evidence in the other direction is overwhelming. It now is.
And you pick one sentence out of my post to reply to, and you ignore the rest of my post. In particular, the bits in which I asked at what point the evidence becomes overwhelming.
As a matter of interest, if you look back truthfully, at what point did the evidence that MMR was safe become overwhelming in your eyes?
It took years for Wakefield's 'research' into MMR to be fully exposed: in the meantime, many people were taken in by him. Including me, for a few weeks after the infamous Private Eye article before I read the rebuttals.
Fortunately despite some mis-steps the government were made of firmer stuff.
Been a long term lurker and finally felt the need to sign up to make a single comment, before leaving the site.
I would just like to thank the three or four regular (obsessive?) contributors who have effectively wounded or possibly killed this site by making it such a hostile place. The lack of commenting recently will only get worse unless the mods take some decisive action. Hopefully things will be gripped, until then bye all.
Comments
Enfield North
Halesowen & Rowley Regis
Hornsey & Wood Green
Peaceful resolution.
He doesn't mention hamsters either. What is the relevance of that question?
Where?
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/cambridgeshirenorthwest/
Well, that's me & Josias you've failed to persuade - I guess you're just boring the rest....
The question of yield was covered at length in the article. I wasn't referring to the issue of testing, because at that point I assumed you were knowledgeable enough to understand why that wasn't relevant, without needing someone to hold your hand. I promise to make concessions to your ignorance in future.
Now do stop being a wind-up merchant. I would normally indulge you, but hundreds of millions of lives are at stake over this issue.
It's a good job Atlee wasn't in power now. Banning the import of sardines? Didn't he realise that they're highly nutritious - full of protein and omega-3-fatt acids?
There would be pressure groups being interviewed on the media denouncing this attack on the vulnerable. Depriving the poor of a subsistence food so that rich bankers could quaff quail's eggs instead.
Owen Jones would be in tears about this targeted attack on the poor. After two days, the ban would be dropped and the next day's headlines would be all about the U-turn.
Anyone seen it?
I adored another movie by the same director (Kung Fu Hustle http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373074/reviews?start=10) which is LOL funny and one of my favourites. I'm no fan of martial arts films but this one is just fantastically shot, takes the pee out of the genre and the deliberate subtitle jokes are just great.
And all the kippers would be going up in smoke.
* take your pick
This is a great site for comparing cash registers -
http://cash-registers.findthebest.com/
I've got my eye on the Sharp XE-A406.
Please do not delete this post, because I will continue posting it however long it takes. If you ban me for continuing to post it, I will repost it as soon as my ban is lifted.
"Ed Miliband has attacked David Cameron for failing to stop the sale of cut-price Chocolate Oranges - something the PM complained about in opposition.
In 2006, Mr Cameron criticised WH Smith for discounting chocolate rather than fruit despite the UK's obesity crisis.
But the Labour leader told The House magazine the situation had not changed.
"If he can't sort out the chocolate orange, he's not going to sort out the train companies, the energy companies, the banks, is he?" Mr Miliband said..." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16750583 - this remains one of my favourite Labour leader outbursts, it's just so fantastically stupid, trivial and shouty.
I hope its a Silly Season story and not true - if it is, I despair. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3797934.ece
"A source close to the Transport Secretary added: “This is not going to happen with Patrick McLoughlin as Transport Secretary. Safety is paramount to him and his view of how to run the roads and he would not be confident about how you would do it.”
Downing Street is understood to be wary of raising the speed limit for fear of alienating women voters. Polling suggests that a majority of drivers support 80mph limits, but many women are opposed. A survey of 13,000 drivers conducted for the AA found that 63 per cent of drivers were in favour, including 73 per cent of men and 53 per cent of women. However, 41 per cent of women drivers think that the limit should remain at 70mph.
David Bizley, technical director of the RAC, said: “We are disappointed because it is something that the majority of motorists would like. Our view was that a trial was the right way forward and a sensible decision could be made on the balance of considerations.”
"There's a story in the Times saying the raising of the speed limit on motorways to 80mph has been dropped because *female* drivers aren't keen on it - it appears that the polling says that the majority of drivers are in favour of it so I'm perplexed and appalled that something that's already common road behaviour is being settled on gender based polling FFS. The vast majority of deaths don't happen on M roads in any case."
Decisions on speed limits should be based on safety, not on opinion polls. If the Tories have finally realised that, they should be applauded. A speed limit of 80mph would be crazy.
Len calls for mass industrial strike action. Breaking the law not enough apparently. Calls to "name the day ".
Len calls for civil disobedience.
"Pay your taxes you greedy bastards" says Len, in one of his more moderate passages...
Unite not coming out to play on Ed speech. No response planned for Len M's People's Parliament address.
Tony Benn just getting standing ovation.
and finally :^ )
Cheers of "Tony! Tony!". I used to do that. Different Tony of course...
She represted Young Labour on the NEC a few years ago. She sits on the National Policy Forum.
Google Peacock and Tom Watson if you want some gossip.
No you are not. You are breaching it AGAIN. Good for you. Stupid "rules" should be broken, but it might be best not to be hypocritical about doing so.
Besides, when is evidence (and especially medical evidence) overwhelming? That is a very high hurdle to pass; after all, there are still some who doubt a link between tobacco smoking and cancer.
The LHC mini black hole nonsense was another case in point.
Worse: take AIDS and HIV drugs. In some places (especially southern Africa) the Duesberg Hypothesis (2) is still believed. This denial of a link between HIV and AIDS prevented some countries from giving out antiretroviral medication, and caused many thousands of deaths (1) (*). (3)
Under your mindset, they would be right to not give out antiretroviral medication because the evidence, in their eyes, is not overwhelming.
And it is not as if evidence thought of as being overwhelming is always right: take the believed causal factors of stomach ulcers over time as an example.
(*) Far more destructive were the claims that antiretroviral medication (particularly AZT) caused AIDS.
(1): http://briandeer.com/death-by-denial.htm
(2): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duesberg_hypothesis
(3): http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/02/the-duesberg-hypothesis-aids-denialism-and-death/
Obviously a small bomb in a city will kill more people than a big bomb in the desert.
Obviously a small bomb in a city will kill more people than a big bomb in the desert."
British hydrogen bombs are directed at cities, not at deserts. Are you pro-Trident, Alan? If so, why?
(Moderator - please do not delete this post. There is no justification for deleting it and I will continually repost if forced to do so.)
You don't appear to be listening, Josias. I said the precautionary principle should apply until the evidence in the other direction is overwhelming. It now is.
http://www.cnduk.org/shop/advanced_search_result.php?&pfrom=0&pto=10000000
'Len McCluskey has been very unhelpful to EdM today - these are a few of his quotes, courtesy of Dan Hodges'
Tim will be along in a minute to tell us how good that is for Ed.
As a matter of interest, if you look back truthfully, at what point did the evidence that MMR was safe become overwhelming in your eyes?
It took years for Wakefield's 'research' into MMR to be fully exposed: in the meantime, many people were taken in by him. Including me, for a few weeks after the infamous Private Eye article before I read the rebuttals.
Fortunately despite some mis-steps the government were made of firmer stuff.
I ignored the part I found of less interest. Governments being "made of firmer stuff" caused needless CJD deaths.
So I ask again: when did you personally believe that the precautionary principle no longer applied to MMR and that it could safely be used?
No, it was because it wasn't of interest. Sorry.
I would just like to thank the three or four regular (obsessive?) contributors who have effectively wounded or possibly killed this site by making it such a hostile place. The lack of commenting recently will only get worse unless the mods take some decisive action. Hopefully things will be gripped, until then bye all.
I'm just not interested in what you said.