BBC reporting 3000 applications rejected so far - this could increase further as the vetting process continues. Now the nerves of the selectorate on my betting position...
@Tyson – “So why do you think Cameron decided to serve notice?”
I suspect there are many factors involved; I claim no privy knowledge to the man or his thoughts, but suspect the top three order of priority would be (a) Spending more time with his relative young and large family. (b) After 15 years as party leader and 10 as PM, he has little more to achieve within politics (c) the temptation to leave at one’s own choosing must be rather tempting.
The pleas of the NYT for subs/personalise your Apocalypse - the weather on the Guardian, what Vice are now doing on Twitter - it doesn't miss a single trick.
Even the mickey taking about England being destroyed - I'm trying to remember what the original story was about that mistake - sure someone will remind me.
Ha Ha. Someone's cranked up the anger volume to 11.
C'mon, tim, we need you back (until Sept 10th). Tell us what you really feel.
Actually I DO wish tim would come back. He was a curmudgeonly old bastard, but he was often astute, and sometimes very funny. He'd be good value on Corbyn.
Oh, I completely agree...I might e-mail him (we occasionally keep in touch)...but I'm sure he's still reading pb if no longer contributing. And he pays all his bets at once and no complaints.
ALL his bets? Unless he has paid the equivalent into pb coffers as I suggested as a Plan B, tim still owes me a gold sovereign. I don't think there can be any doubt that Labour didn't achieve 34% at the General Election....
Hi MM, on two separate occasions I've offered to write to him on your behalf but had no reply from you. Not complaining. I'm happy to do so again - I'm sure he will pay.
Good Sir, I apologise that both of those occasions appear to have passed me by. I will be happy for him to top up site coffers.
It was never about the gold....
Could you drop me an e-mail at john-oreilly@tiscali.co.uk with the details and I will forward it on to tim. For the unititiated, how much is a gold sovereign?
John, many thanks, will do.
A gold sov today is about £170. (Sadly, didn't specify an Edward VIII sovereign - that would be heading towards half a million today...!)
Good afternoon, non-purged members and affiliates of pb.com.
Three thousand and counting is a very high number. Now the question becomes: if Corbyn loses, is the margin of defeat larger or smaller than the number of purged would-be voters?
The Conservatives fought the last election on the basis that they would be the "Continuation Coalition" Government. Now that they have been able to worm their way into an overall majority, they are coming out in their true colours. They can´t play that particular trick twice. And the moderate Tory MPs - I need reminding which ones they are - are being contaminated by the policies of the Tory hardliners. No first time incumbency there, I think!
It's a possibility. It really does depend how hardline the Tories as a whole go, particularly if they feel the next election is already in the bag and get incautious. But it is not a certainty they will be so foolish, and it requires a big shift for the LDs to get back to where they were. Not impossible, granted, but being reliant on the Tories messing up by going too hardline is risky for them as it is out of their own hands.
How do you mean, Mr Kle, "get incautious"? They became incautious from Day One. All the good Lib Dem environmental policies, for example, which were implemented by the Coalition Government, making it the greenest government ever, have been scrapped. And Osborne has given the green light for international fracking businesses to over-ride the interests of ordinary citizens and proper planning, so that they can make a quick buck and blow the consequences.
I do not believe environmental policies, on their own, would be enough to dent the 'probably ok' impression the Tories currently have with swathes of voters in places like the SW. I don't think enough people care about such things, at least not so much they ignore the other bits they might like, or at least prefer to the other governing option alternative. By 'get incautious' I mean do enough - and dropping those policies may well be a part of it - to shift their image significantly enough in the region that those who abandoned the LDs a) desert the Tores and b) see the LDs as the best alternative in the area.
It could happen. I cannot see it happening under Cameron however - his reputation as a moderate is pretty well established, even as some argue that is his greatest strength, making significant changes seem less significant.
Mr. Clipp remains very bitter about the GE result and studiously ignores the continued extension of the personal allowance to levels way beyond those imagined by his own party. The LDs chose to try to be in coalition and opposition at the same time - it was always doomed to failure and they are now left to the irrelevance their efforts merited.
'No doubt Mr Cameron seems very moderate to all the hard-line Tories, Mr Kle, but the people I mix with regard him as a total sham and a fraud. The reputation which he worked so hard to conjure up before 2005, now lies in tatters. '
Guess they must also feel that Clegg,Laws,Cable & co are also shams & frauds ?
Love the idea of publishing something through Shouty Trappist Press.
Plato, some good ones there. Re-posting this from Bad Lip Reading of the GOP debate. Posted it earlier but it seems no-one looked at it. I find it hilarious.
The Danish (centre-right) Government has announced a referendum in December proposing slightly more closer integration with the EU - they're proposing to abolish the reservations that Denmark to opt out of EU integration of police and justice issues, specifically the Europol police. The proposal has support from most parties, though the People's Party on the right and the Unity List on the Left are against. It's expected to pass fairly easily because Europol is seen as a good thing, but there is widespread ignorance of exactly what's involved so it's hard to be sure.
The Danish (centre-right) Government has announced a referendum in December proposing slightly more closer integration with the EU - they're proposing to abolish the reservations that Denmark to opt out of EU integration of police and justice issues, specifically the Europol police. The proposal has support from most parties, though the People's Party on the right and the Unity List on the Left are against. It's expected to pass fairly easily because Europol is seen as a good thing, but there is widespread ignorance of exactly what's involved so it's hard to be sure.
It has to be said they've got a bit of a cheek making this proposal. They (Venstre) polled 19% at the election and have 100% of the cabinet minister poisitions, whereas the People's Party got 21% and effectively allowed them to take office. Now they make a proposal which the PP is against.
I agree with something Owen Jones said. "If they're excluding people for voting Green in May then they're undermining the whole point of trying to reach out to these people with the £3 process".
Miss Plato, mildly amused by Owen Jones giggling about childish Tories. Mention of Greens too. But the far left, SWP and so forth, warrant no mention. [Bloodworth did mention Communists, but said there were only a few hundred in the UK].
If the purging fails to stop Corbyn it may embolden him to retaliate against the Labour mainstream.
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
Miss Plato, mildly amused by Owen Jones giggling about childish Tories. Mention of Greens too. But the far left, SWP and so forth, warrant no mention. [Bloodworth did mention Communists, but said there were only a few hundred in the UK].
If the purging fails to stop Corbyn it may embolden him to retaliate against the Labour mainstream.
I'm torn in the Labour Deputy vote. Caroline Flint is IMO the best politician in the field by a mile, but I fear she might just be too right-wing. Tom Watson is OK but hardly inspiring. I have mixed feelings on Stella Creasy, on the one hand she's one of the few in Labour who's actually willing to take a firm stance and to hell with the "credibility" consequences (e.g. Wonga), but on the other I fear she might be a bit too obsessed with the identity politics which makes the Left look a bit weird and cultish.
I'm torn in the Labour Deputy vote. Caroline Flint is IMO the best politician in the field by a mile, but I fear she might just be too right-wing. Tom Watson is OK but hardly inspiring. I have mixed feelings on Stella Creasy, on the one hand she's one of the few in Labour who's actually willing to take a firm stance and to hell with the "credibility" consequences (e.g. Wonga), but on the other I fear she might be a bit too obsessed with the identity politics which makes the Left look a bit weird and cultish.
I agree with something Owen Jones said. "If they're excluding people for voting Green in May then they're undermining the whole point of trying to reach out to these people with the £3 process".
I feel dirty.
he's right though, eh. making the election rules, then changing then when you're not getting the result you want sounds like something a stalinist extreme left wing regime might do..
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
As a Tory for Stay I'm also heartened as I'd expect a swing to the status quo of In. I'd expected we'd have started from behind with Leave being in the lead in early polls, but still be able to overcome that.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
The lack of a coherent alternative plan, let alone one which they all agree on, is a really serious issue for the Out side, as I've been saying for years. Even now there is no sign that they are actually doing anything to address the issue, yet the referendum is now at most just over two years away, and may be a lot sooner.
The big problem with this plan is if Cameron claims this window dressing will make immigration acceptable to the public, and it doesn't, then he is going to get a right kicking at the 2020 election. What is he doing to say and do when immigration is 400,000 in 2019 ? After the no-ifs-no-buts problems he is starting on a sticky wicket. There are a fair few people who only voted Tory for the referendum, you wont have that over them in 2020, and they are going to be furious as well.
"The idea we would be stronger or more secure by leaving Nato, as Jeremy Corbyn suggests, or by comparing American soldiers to Isil, I think this is absolutely the wrong approach that will make Britain less secure,” Mr Cameron told Sky News.
He added that a similar approach would “never happen under my watch”.
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
As a Tory for Stay I'm also heartened as I'd expect a swing to the status quo of In. I'd expected we'd have started from behind with Leave being in the lead in early polls, but still be able to overcome that.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
OTOH, in the Scottish independence referendum the campaign produced a big swing to Leave.
The big question is whether the AV Referendum swing was caused by a natural swing to the status quo, or whether it was caused by people wanting to give Nick Clegg a kicking.
Entryists would be wise to vote Kendall as first choice and Corbyn as second choice.
This puts the censors off the scent but allows a second preference for Corbyn to count since Kendall will be eliminated at the first stage.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
Sorry if I missed something, but I thought that the ballot was being run by an arm of the Electoral Reform Society. If so it will be proof against any sort of tampering.
Quite. With so many micro hard-left groups - I find that anything beyond the Greenies can be all grouped together under Very Strange Indeed.
Greenies are just strange for a variety of reasons that kludge together all manner of conflicting policies and don't like humans.
I'm not sure exactly whose quote this is - Plato or Morris Dancer. so sorry if I quoted wrongly.
Anyhow, as I strange greenie, I would like to say that personally I love humans very much (globally and locally) although I will admit there is a strand of green thought (prince charles/countryside alliance) who do indeed seem to regret that humans have existed.
Not me, tho. Tho, possibly i wouldn't fit easily into a green party as, although I'm pretty much a lefty, I am strongly in favour of nuclear (and new nuclear) and would favour increased whaling as a method of reducing the impact of cow-rearing on the world's environment.
I guess it is mostly the same for everyone. it's hard to agree with any one political party
Entryists would be wise to vote Kendall as first choice and Corbyn as second choice.
This puts the censors off the scent but allows a second preference for Corbyn to count since Kendall will be eliminated at the first stage.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
Sorry if I missed something, but I thought that the ballot was being run by an arm of the Electoral Reform Society. If so it will be proof against any sort of tampering.
What you may have missed, is that they have said that people can be excluded (purged) after they've voted if evidence of free thinking comes to light. This can be done by pulling out the ballot paper with the appropriate serial number. They may argue that no-one will look how the ballot was cast but if one were a suspicious type....
I'm torn in the Labour Deputy vote. Caroline Flint is IMO the best politician in the field by a mile, but I fear she might just be too right-wing. Tom Watson is OK but hardly inspiring. I have mixed feelings on Stella Creasy, on the one hand she's one of the few in Labour who's actually willing to take a firm stance and to hell with the "credibility" consequences (e.g. Wonga), but on the other I fear she might be a bit too obsessed with the identity politics which makes the Left look a bit weird and cultish.
Quite. With so many micro hard-left groups - I find that anything beyond the Greenies can be all grouped together under Very Strange Indeed.
Greenies are just strange for a variety of reasons that kludge together all manner of conflicting policies and don't like humans.
I'm not sure exactly whose quote this is - Plato or Morris Dancer. so sorry if I quoted wrongly.
Anyhow, as I strange greenie, I would like to say that personally I love humans very much (globally and locally) although I will admit there is a strand of green thought (prince charles/countryside alliance) who do indeed seem to regret that humans have existed.
Not me, tho. Tho, possibly i wouldn't fit easily into a green party as, although I'm pretty much a lefty, I am strongly in favour of nuclear (and new nuclear) and would favour increased whaling as a method of reducing the impact of cow-rearing on the world's environment.
I guess it is mostly the same for everyone. it's hard to agree with any one political party
Asa Tory I agree with you on nuclear energy and whaling but that might indeed make us "Very Strange Indeed".
Entryists would be wise to vote Kendall as first choice and Corbyn as second choice.
This puts the censors off the scent but allows a second preference for Corbyn to count since Kendall will be eliminated at the first stage.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
Sorry if I missed something, but I thought that the ballot was being run by an arm of the Electoral Reform Society. If so it will be proof against any sort of tampering.
What you may have missed, is that they have said that people can be excluded (purged) after they've voted if evidence of free thinking comes to light. This can be done by pulling out the ballot paper with the appropriate serial number. They may argue that no-one will look how the ballot was cast but if one were a suspicious type....
Do you have a link? Would the ERS hand over the ballot papers? Would it not be counterproductive to exclude people once the result was known? It seems to me that they'd have to exclude people before they send them a ballot paper. There's suspicious, then there's paranoid...
Internet polling is perhaps not familiar to some Swedish political commentators:
"Some Swedish political commentators downplayed the poll, questioning YouGov’s internet polling techniques. “The problem with YouGov is that they don’t use randomly selected people,” Andreas Johansson Heinö from the Timbro think tank, told the Expressen newspaper. “This is a self-recruited panel where we don’t know in what way respondents differ from the population as a whole.”
Entryists would be wise to vote Kendall as first choice and Corbyn as second choice.
This puts the censors off the scent but allows a second preference for Corbyn to count since Kendall will be eliminated at the first stage.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
Sorry if I missed something, but I thought that the ballot was being run by an arm of the Electoral Reform Society. If so it will be proof against any sort of tampering.
What you may have missed, is that they have said that people can be excluded (purged) after they've voted if evidence of free thinking comes to light. This can be done by pulling out the ballot paper with the appropriate serial number. They may argue that no-one will look how the ballot was cast but if one were a suspicious type....
Do you have a link? Would the ERS hand over the ballot papers? Would it not be counterproductive to exclude people once the result was known? It seems to me that they'd have to exclude people before they send them a ballot paper. There's suspicious, then there's paranoid...
"Officials said that, even after registered supporters have cast a vote, their vote can be discounted if subsequent investigations reveal that they back another party." from here:
OT: Excellent economic dashboard from FT for the UK. Comprehensive and lets you follow the successes/failures of the long term economic plan - http://ig.ft.com/sites/uk/economic-dashboard/
The cat is fast asleep in a shady spot in the garden. Herself has decided that this would be an ideal time to give him a groom and has gone out there armed with brush and comb. There may be trouble ahead.... I think I'll check the stocks of Dettol.
On another note the latest spat in the Koreas is looking li it won't end without some military action, even if its just another exchange of artillery. One of the joys of following what is going on is one can enjoy the invective. Kim Il Un and his gang may be barking mad but they do a great line in political insults, which would liven up debates no end if copied over here.
"The Right Honorable Lady, is a crafty prostitute"
"Mr. Speaker what Rt Hon Member for Dunny-in-the-Wold should do for the nation is to leave her office, the doghouse of the U.S., shut her unshapely mouth and get her crime-ridden body buried in the ceremony at an early date."
"When will the Prime Minister admit that he is a "A rat who should be struck by lightning, and Obama's pimp?"
Perhaps this is an area that Mr. Corbyn could develop if he becomes LOTO.
Quite. With so many micro hard-left groups - I find that anything beyond the Greenies can be all grouped together under Very Strange Indeed.
Greenies are just strange for a variety of reasons that kludge together all manner of conflicting policies and don't like humans.
I'm not sure exactly whose quote this is - Plato or Morris Dancer. so sorry if I quoted wrongly.
Anyhow, as I strange greenie, I would like to say that personally I love humans very much (globally and locally) although I will admit there is a strand of green thought (prince charles/countryside alliance) who do indeed seem to regret that humans have existed.
Not me, tho. Tho, possibly i wouldn't fit easily into a green party as, although I'm pretty much a lefty, I am strongly in favour of nuclear (and new nuclear) and would favour increased whaling as a method of reducing the impact of cow-rearing on the world's environment.
I guess it is mostly the same for everyone. it's hard to agree with any one political party
Asa Tory I agree with you on nuclear energy and whaling but that might indeed make us "Very Strange Indeed".
Interesting Tory/Green policy of substituting whalemeat for steak. How would that work?
Also worth noting that the ballot is being run by Electoral Reform Services the for profit arm of the Electoral Reform Society. So they're as beholden to their clients as any for profit.
Also worth noting that the ballot is being run by Electoral Reform Services the for profit arm of the Electoral Reform Society. So they're as beholden to their clients as any for profit.
Quite. With so many micro hard-left groups - I find that anything beyond the Greenies can be all grouped together under Very Strange Indeed.
Greenies are just strange for a variety of reasons that kludge together all manner of conflicting policies and don't like humans.
I'm not sure exactly whose quote this is - Plato or Morris Dancer. so sorry if I quoted wrongly.
Anyhow, as I strange greenie, I would like to say that personally I love humans very much (globally and locally) although I will admit there is a strand of green thought (prince charles/countryside alliance) who do indeed seem to regret that humans have existed.
Not me, tho. Tho, possibly i wouldn't fit easily into a green party as, although I'm pretty much a lefty, I am strongly in favour of nuclear (and new nuclear) and would favour increased whaling as a method of reducing the impact of cow-rearing on the world's environment.
I guess it is mostly the same for everyone. it's hard to agree with any one political party
Asa Tory I agree with you on nuclear energy and whaling but that might indeed make us "Very Strange Indeed".
Interesting Tory/Green policy of substituting whalemeat for steak. How would that work?
I never said it would work; I've just been arguing it for fun and to upset vegetarians/animal rights types for so long that I've almost convinced myself. Imagine the vast whale farms in the Atlantic, water spouts as far as the eye can see......
Also worth noting that the ballot is being run by Electoral Reform Services the for profit arm of the Electoral Reform Society. So they're as beholden to their clients as any for profit.
That's a disgraceful comment.
I've worked in the not-for profit sector my whole career for a reason.....
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
As a Tory for Stay I'm also heartened as I'd expect a swing to the status quo of In. I'd expected we'd have started from behind with Leave being in the lead in early polls, but still be able to overcome that.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
OTOH, in the Scottish independence referendum the campaign produced a big swing to Leave.
The big question is whether the AV Referendum swing was caused by a natural swing to the status quo, or whether it was caused by people wanting to give Nick Clegg a kicking.
The swing in the Scottish Referendum was entirely due to the Independence argument winning quite massively and only being stopped from crossing the line by a wide scale and quite nasty intimidation campaign by Loyalists including violence.
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
As a Tory for Stay I'm also heartened as I'd expect a swing to the status quo of In. I'd expected we'd have started from behind with Leave being in the lead in early polls, but still be able to overcome that.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
OTOH, in the Scottish independence referendum the campaign produced a big swing to Leave.
The big question is whether the AV Referendum swing was caused by a natural swing to the status quo, or whether it was caused by people wanting to give Nick Clegg a kicking.
The swing in the Scottish Referendum was entirely due to the Independence argument winning quite massively and only being stopped from crossing the line by a wide scale and quite nasty intimidation campaign by Loyalists including violence.
What a bunch of fanny turnips Scots are if they get intimated like that.
I remember when unarmed Scots kicked terrorists in the knackers.
I would pay absolutely no attention whatsoever to the polling, because what will determine the result in 2016 or 2017 will be the renegotiation events.
Will the Eurozone periphery continue to recover, resulting in emigration of Spaniards, Irish etc.? If so, benefit for "In".
Will Greece elect SYRIZA (splinter), go into financial meltdown, and cause a renewed Eurozone crisis? If so, big benefit for "Out".
Will Europe start turning back boats in the Mediterranean, thus significantly defusing the asylum crisis? If so, benefits "In".
Mr. Llama, Kim Jong-Un*. Report immediately to your local re-education centre.
You know I knew it was wrong as I was typing it but I couldn't work out why. Apologies. Kim Jung-Un vs Tom Watson in a pie eating contest would be worth seeing.
Also worth noting that the ballot is being run by Electoral Reform Services the for profit arm of the Electoral Reform Society. So they're as beholden to their clients as any for profit.
That's a disgraceful comment.
I've worked in the not-for profit sector my whole career for a reason.....
A friend of mine is very senior at Amazon. He sometimes jokes that it is a not for profit organisation. (He never says this in the earshot of Mr Bezos.)
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
As a Tory for Stay I'm also heartened as I'd expect a swing to the status quo of In. I'd expected we'd have started from behind with Leave being in the lead in early polls, but still be able to overcome that.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
OTOH, in the Scottish independence referendum the campaign produced a big swing to Leave.
The big question is whether the AV Referendum swing was caused by a natural swing to the status quo, or whether it was caused by people wanting to give Nick Clegg a kicking.
The swing in the Scottish Referendum was entirely due to the Independence argument winning quite massively and only being stopped from crossing the line by a wide scale and quite nasty intimidation campaign by Loyalists including violence.
What a bunch of fanny turnips Scots are if they get intimated like that.
I remember when unarmed Scots kicked terrorists in the knackers.
Where did it all go so wrong for Scotland?
Plenty of Scots did stand up to the violence such as
But with a constant barrage of lies from the State Broadcaster and the pliant media, the violence of Loyalist thugs (when I voted there were around 20 of these animals from the adjacent Masonic Lodge standing outside the polling station) it only took a few to be swayed,
"Peak Kipper" is irrelevant. They spoke in May and 12%/4m of them said: no to EU and no to too much immigration.
All parties have listened and will frame future policy on this potential support group (perhaps one out of two for Jezza).
So job done. Kippers can relax until 2020 when they will make their voices heard again. As I said (many many times...) - they are a pressure group, no more no less. All this nonsense about being a political party was and is ridiculous.
Entryists would be wise to vote Kendall as first choice and Corbyn as second choice.
This puts the censors off the scent but allows a second preference for Corbyn to count since Kendall will be eliminated at the first stage.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
Sorry if I missed something, but I thought that the ballot was being run by an arm of the Electoral Reform Society. If so it will be proof against any sort of tampering.
What you may have missed, is that they have said that people can be excluded (purged) after they've voted if evidence of free thinking comes to light. This can be done by pulling out the ballot paper with the appropriate serial number. They may argue that no-one will look how the ballot was cast but if one were a suspicious type....
Do you have a link? Would the ERS hand over the ballot papers? Would it not be counterproductive to exclude people once the result was known? It seems to me that they'd have to exclude people before they send them a ballot paper. There's suspicious, then there's paranoid...
"Officials said that, even after registered supporters have cast a vote, their vote can be discounted if subsequent investigations reveal that they back another party." from here:
Note the exclusion would be after voting and before the result was announced.
That's bloody amazing, I suspect that someone was talking out of turn. If you ask ERS to run the election, they'll run it fairly - that's their USP. Their reputation is worth more than one Labour Party election. I would also expect the ERS to make statements to make that clear, if pushed.
He must be in turmoil right now, for several perfectly understandable reasons including being a member of a party that is in the process of disintegrating, personally and as a party losing on May 7th, and subjecting himself to the wits of PB.
Little wonder he turns to certainty in a horribly uncertain Labour Party world. And no one can doubt that Jezza is the only one providing that right now.
I am going to allow him this one mis-step knowing that when his mind clears he will be as horrified as anyone else at his professed support for Jezza.
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
If those figures are worth anything, and as they are a YouGov poll that must be doubtful, then as a confirmed BOOer I am quietly heartened. It could be doable.
Mr. Dair, I dare say that's a one-eyed view of the situation, although one that helpful coincides entirely with your political perspective.
Mr. Smith, and Mr. Llama, must say I disagree. The vast majority of established voices will be for the EU. Farage is discredited due to his leadership idiocy, and who then is to make the argument for Out?
It's not a foregone conclusion, but I think In will won, and comfortably.
How can this possibly be considered a fair electoral system when the party is looking which way your vote goes before deciding to exclude you from the ballot?
I don't believe they (the Party) know who casts their votes which way, but rather they identify a query against a member of the Electorate, check them out, and instruct ERS that that person was included by error.
Obviously they can make assumptions about eg Greenies supporting Corbyn, but I very much doubt that they see the votes cast.
I believe it is incompetent, but not corrupt at the election process administration level.
If there are shenanigans, then they are at the "who gets excluded from the electorate due to evidence of opposition to Labour" stage.
I can quite believe that there are nasty little vendettas going on in who gets reported as a hostile, and that the Unions have been biased in the promotion of the poll to individuals (following on from the bending-the-rules-to-breaking-point putting Milliband on the envelopes last time), and that external parties are seeking to manipulate it without admitting they are doing so.
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
"Parents warned kissing children on the lips is 'too sexual' and could confuse them
A doctor has warned parents against kissing their children on the lips, arguing it is “too sexual”. Many parents will see it as a simple sign of parental affection, but Dr Charlotte Reznick has warned the mouth is an erogenous zone which “can be stimulating” and subsequently cause confusion for children."
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You have absolutely no idea about my level of knowledge or involvement in NI so please why don't you go back to telling us about these sectarian murder gangs that are apparently holding the Scottish people in fear?
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You have absolutely no idea about my level of knowledge or involvement in NI so please why don't you go back to telling us about these sectarian murder gangs that are apparently holding the Scottish people in fear?
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You are absolutely right that the Stormont government was a disgrace, and that Northern Ireland Catholics were horrendously discriminated against.
Where I think you are wrong, is to fail to realise that British governments in London tried to remedy that; Heath deserves a great deal of credit for his attempt to start the peace process in the 1970s. And the introduction of direct rule was not an attempt to subjugate the Catholics in Northern Ireland, but to deal with the iniquities of the Stormont government.
Someone posted a table yesterday or the day before putting the loyalist gangs top, to be honest, it doesn't matter who was the worst, they were both bad and the link between loyalist paramilitaries and certain groups in Scotland is very strong and continues to this day.
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You have absolutely no idea about my level of knowledge or involvement in NI so please why don't you go back to telling us about these sectarian murder gangs that are apparently holding the Scottish people in fear?
Have you noticed how important it is to the left to polarise opinion? The emergence of the Corbynites with their history is bringing it all back.
"Parents warned kissing children on the lips is 'too sexual' and could confuse them
A doctor has warned parents against kissing their children on the lips, arguing it is “too sexual”. Many parents will see it as a simple sign of parental affection, but Dr Charlotte Reznick has warned the mouth is an erogenous zone which “can be stimulating” and subsequently cause confusion for children."
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You are absolutely right that the Stormont government was a disgrace, and that Northern Ireland Catholics were horrendously discriminated against.
Where I think you are wrong, is to fail to realise that British governments in London tried to remedy that; Heath deserves a great deal of credit for his attempt to start the peace process in the 1970s. And the introduction of direct rule was not an attempt to subjugate the Catholics in Northern Ireland, but to deal with the iniquities of the Stormont government.
I agree with that but it was far too late. The withdrawl of the UUP whip by the Tories and the interventions of the 70s were set against a system which had been in place for 50 years and had already factionalised (and ghetoised) the population which was ready for Insurgency.
Doing the right thing after 50 years of being part of the wrong thing isn't a good basis to paint yourself as the good guys.
Someone posted a table yesterday or the day before putting the loyalist gangs top, to be honest, it doesn't matter who was the worst, they were both bad and the link between loyalist paramilitaries and certain groups in Scotland is very strong and continues to this day.
Just under 60% of all deaths in the Troubles are attributable to Republican gangs. It takes quite some statistical manipulation to come to any other conclusion. This is the normal way that the information is presented:
Killings by Military and Paramilitary Groups 1969-2001 Republicans: 2060 (58.6 percent) Loyalists: 1016 (29.2 percent) British Forces: 363 (10 percent) Others – Unknown: 89 (2.2 percent) Total: 3528
What a "steaming pile of nonsense" Andy Burnham's letter is regarding Tory infiltration. Of course, it has guaranteed headlines on all the news channels, which was the objective.
This Labour leadership contest is a complete farce.
(It's the main story on BBC five o'clock news). zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
"Parents warned kissing children on the lips is 'too sexual' and could confuse them
A doctor has warned parents against kissing their children on the lips, arguing it is “too sexual”. Many parents will see it as a simple sign of parental affection, but Dr Charlotte Reznick has warned the mouth is an erogenous zone which “can be stimulating” and subsequently cause confusion for children."
O/T = Over the Top? Perhaps more thoughtful childen will associate it with the latest outbreak of paedomaniac scare stories.
One notes that Charlotte Reznick is based in California.
Suspect that this stuff needs to be confined to the back of conflake packets, written in Aequian.
And I seem to recall 25 years of feminists telling me that the breast feeding relationship between mother and child was in some ways erotic. I think that that is perhaps partly rhetoric designed to justify a sectarian feminist position, but don't anyone tell Dr R or she might try and ban it.
What a "steaming pile of nonsense" Andy Burnham's letter is regarding Tory infiltration. Of course, it has guaranteed headlines on all the news channels, which was the objective.
This Labour leadership contest is a complete farce.
(It's the main story on BBC five o'clock news). zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
It's certainly not reached that stage.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
You need to tune into the North Korean news agencies a little more, Mr. Dair. You seem to have close to the right level of removal from reality but your powers of invective need sharpening. Studying how the DPRK do it will help you in both areas.
The irony here, is that you appear to believe the British State propaganda over how The Troubles developed and what caused the conflict.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
You have absolutely no idea about my level of knowledge or involvement in NI so please why don't you go back to telling us about these sectarian murder gangs that are apparently holding the Scottish people in fear?
Have you noticed how important it is to the left to polarise opinion? The emergence of the Corbynites with their history is bringing it all back.
There are certainly a lot of attitudes and arguments appearing in public that we haven't seen for many, many years, Mr. Path. Most of them seem to be as abhorrent and/or flawed as when they were first in vogue amongst certain groups in the 1970s. That said sectarian murder gangs running around in Scotland in 2014 and fixing elections is a new one.
They've plenty of money if they shop for smalls at Agent Provocateur unless it's gone very down market.
Loved this bit
As well as having a penchant for risqué panties, Corbyn fans are online for 50 hours a week, tune in to Radio 4, shop at the Co-op, watch Channel 4 News and read the Guardian – naturally – whilst listening to B.B. King. They are most likely to describe themselves as “ethical” and “miserable”…
Comments
I suspect there are many factors involved; I claim no privy knowledge to the man or his thoughts, but suspect the top three order of priority would be (a) Spending more time with his relative young and large family. (b) After 15 years as party leader and 10 as PM, he has little more to achieve within politics (c) the temptation to leave at one’s own choosing must be rather tempting.
Even the mickey taking about England being destroyed - I'm trying to remember what the original story was about that mistake - sure someone will remind me.
A gold sov today is about £170. (Sadly, didn't specify an Edward VIII sovereign - that would be heading towards half a million today...!)
Three thousand and counting is a very high number. Now the question becomes: if Corbyn loses, is the margin of defeat larger or smaller than the number of purged would-be voters?
'No doubt Mr Cameron seems very moderate to all the hard-line Tories, Mr Kle, but the people I mix with regard him as a total sham and a fraud. The reputation which he worked so hard to conjure up before 2005, now lies in tatters. '
Guess they must also feel that Clegg,Laws,Cable & co are also shams & frauds ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufGlBv8Z3NU
I feel objectified ;-)
(Will return to that discussion when the sitewide palpitations at yesterdays thread have subsided.)
Thanks.
I agree with something Owen Jones said. "If they're excluding people for voting Green in May then they're undermining the whole point of trying to reach out to these people with the £3 process".
I feel dirty.
If the purging fails to stop Corbyn it may embolden him to retaliate against the Labour mainstream.
Greenies are just strange for a variety of reasons that kludge together all manner of conflicting policies and don't like humans.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d144b594-4703-11e5-b3b2-1672f710807b.html#axzz3jSedyiYP
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11814498/Anti-immigrant-Sweden-Democrats-now-the-biggest-party-according-to-poll.html
Swedish Democrats 25.2%
Socialist Party 23.4%
Moderate Party 21.0%
Hmm...
Story from the phone bank:
"I gave the most votes to you"
"Most votes?"
"Yeah, five for you, four for Angela,three for..."
STOP THE PRESS.
Akin to the 2011 AV Referendum where change started in the lead by about 2-1 but lost by 2-1.
He added that a similar approach would “never happen under my watch”.
The big question is whether the AV Referendum swing was caused by a natural swing to the status quo, or whether it was caused by people wanting to give Nick Clegg a kicking.
Anyhow, as I strange greenie, I would like to say that personally I love humans very much (globally and locally) although I will admit there is a strand of green thought (prince charles/countryside alliance) who do indeed seem to regret that humans have existed.
Not me, tho. Tho, possibly i wouldn't fit easily into a green party as, although I'm pretty much a lefty, I am strongly in favour of nuclear (and new nuclear) and would favour increased whaling as a method of reducing the impact of cow-rearing on the world's environment.
I guess it is mostly the same for everyone. it's hard to agree with any one political party
Should have read up about AV on PB...
Would the ERS hand over the ballot papers?
Would it not be counterproductive to exclude people once the result was known?
It seems to me that they'd have to exclude people before they send them a ballot paper.
There's suspicious, then there's paranoid...
"Some Swedish political commentators downplayed the poll, questioning YouGov’s internet polling techniques.
“The problem with YouGov is that they don’t use randomly selected people,” Andreas Johansson Heinö from the Timbro think tank, told the Expressen newspaper. “This is a self-recruited panel where we don’t know in what way respondents differ from the population as a whole.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11814498/Anti-immigrant-Sweden-Democrats-now-the-biggest-party-according-to-poll.html
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/12/green-candidates-caught-trying-to-sign-up-to-vote-in-labour-party-leadership-contest
Note the exclusion would be after voting and before the result was announced.
On another note the latest spat in the Koreas is looking li it won't end without some military action, even if its just another exchange of artillery. One of the joys of following what is going on is one can enjoy the invective. Kim Il Un and his gang may be barking mad but they do a great line in political insults, which would liven up debates no end if copied over here.
"The Right Honorable Lady, is a crafty prostitute"
"Mr. Speaker what Rt Hon Member for Dunny-in-the-Wold should do for the nation is to leave her office, the doghouse of the U.S., shut her unshapely mouth and get her crime-ridden body buried in the ceremony at an early date."
"When will the Prime Minister admit that he is a "A rat who should be struck by lightning, and Obama's pimp?"
Perhaps this is an area that Mr. Corbyn could develop if he becomes LOTO.
I remember when unarmed Scots kicked terrorists in the knackers.
Where did it all go so wrong for Scotland?
I would pay absolutely no attention whatsoever to the polling, because what will determine the result in 2016 or 2017 will be the renegotiation events.
Will the Eurozone periphery continue to recover, resulting in emigration of Spaniards, Irish etc.? If so, benefit for "In".
Will Greece elect SYRIZA (splinter), go into financial meltdown, and cause a renewed Eurozone crisis? If so, big benefit for "Out".
Will Europe start turning back boats in the Mediterranean, thus significantly defusing the asylum crisis? If so, benefits "In".
etc etc etc
https://www.commonspace.scot/public/artarticle/71/08/0869_d5e7.jpg?c=762d); ?>
and
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/flegs.jpg
But with a constant barrage of lies from the State Broadcaster and the pliant media, the violence of Loyalist thugs (when I voted there were around 20 of these animals from the adjacent Masonic Lodge standing outside the polling station) it only took a few to be swayed,
"Peak Kipper" is irrelevant. They spoke in May and 12%/4m of them said: no to EU and no to too much immigration.
All parties have listened and will frame future policy on this potential support group (perhaps one out of two for Jezza).
So job done. Kippers can relax until 2020 when they will make their voices heard again. As I said (many many times...) - they are a pressure group, no more no less. All this nonsense about being a political party was and is ridiculous.
I know many in the SNP want to foster division and bitterness to advance their political desires, but your use of language is quite disturbing.
Mr. Llama, one suspects Mr. Toad would not survive the experience.
I would also expect the ERS to make statements to make that clear, if pushed.
Although in many cases, the violence was very much linked to the exact same murder gangs who killed the most during The Troubles.
I hope that never happens. For now, it's the product of a vivid imagination.
He must be in turmoil right now, for several perfectly understandable reasons including being a member of a party that is in the process of disintegrating, personally and as a party losing on May 7th, and subjecting himself to the wits of PB.
Little wonder he turns to certainty in a horribly uncertain Labour Party world. And no one can doubt that Jezza is the only one providing that right now.
I am going to allow him this one mis-step knowing that when his mind clears he will be as horrified as anyone else at his professed support for Jezza.
But there is no coherent difference between the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Northern Ireland and the violent thugs who were the footsoldiers of the British State in Scotland. Quite often, it's the same people and they share the exact same mindset.
For many, many years, Northern Ireland was subjugated through the use of intimidation and discrimination, the use of murder is a tiny part of a larger picture to which the British Government was not only a tacit supporter of but while UUP MPs took the Tory whip, it WAS the British Government running this sickening bigoted disgrace.
Mr. Smith, and Mr. Llama, must say I disagree. The vast majority of established voices will be for the EU. Farage is discredited due to his leadership idiocy, and who then is to make the argument for Out?
It's not a foregone conclusion, but I think In will won, and comfortably.
Obviously they can make assumptions about eg Greenies supporting Corbyn, but I very much doubt that they see the votes cast.
I believe it is incompetent, but not corrupt at the election process administration level.
If there are shenanigans, then they are at the "who gets excluded from the electorate due to evidence of opposition to Labour" stage.
I can quite believe that there are nasty little vendettas going on in who gets reported as a hostile, and that the Unions have been biased in the promotion of the poll to individuals (following on from the bending-the-rules-to-breaking-point putting Milliband on the envelopes last time), and that external parties are seeking to manipulate it without admitting they are doing so.
I do not believe that ERS have been nobbled.
Of course I could be wrong.
I said those responsible for the largest number of killings. The Loyalists.
The violence in Northern Ireland was caused by the actions of the permanent Loyalist government at Stormont and an institutionalised system of discrimination leading to a quality of life for the average NI Catholic which was unacceptable and whereby they would support an armed Insurgency against the British State which was giving their tacit and complicit backing for the system.
Of course, those successfully brainwashed by the British State will think we were the "good guys". And then argue the factually accurate view is in line with DPRK. Quite comical.
"Parents warned kissing children on the lips is 'too sexual' and could confuse them
A doctor has warned parents against kissing their children on the lips, arguing it is “too sexual”.
Many parents will see it as a simple sign of parental affection, but Dr Charlotte Reznick has warned the mouth is an erogenous zone which “can be stimulating” and subsequently cause confusion for children."
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/parents-warned-kissing-children-on-the-lips-is-too-sexual-and-could-confuse-them-10464862.html
You are absolutely right that the Stormont government was a disgrace, and that Northern Ireland Catholics were horrendously discriminated against.
Where I think you are wrong, is to fail to realise that British governments in London tried to remedy that; Heath deserves a great deal of credit for his attempt to start the peace process in the 1970s. And the introduction of direct rule was not an attempt to subjugate the Catholics in Northern Ireland, but to deal with the iniquities of the Stormont government.
Doing the right thing after 50 years of being part of the wrong thing isn't a good basis to paint yourself as the good guys.
Killings by Military and Paramilitary Groups 1969-2001
Republicans: 2060 (58.6 percent)
Loyalists: 1016 (29.2 percent)
British Forces: 363 (10 percent)
Others – Unknown: 89 (2.2 percent)
Total: 3528
This Labour leadership contest is a complete farce.
(It's the main story on BBC five o'clock news). zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
One notes that Charlotte Reznick is based in California.
Suspect that this stuff needs to be confined to the back of conflake packets, written in Aequian.
And I seem to recall 25 years of feminists telling me that the breast feeding relationship between mother and child was in some ways erotic. I think that that is perhaps partly rhetoric designed to justify a sectarian feminist position, but don't anyone tell Dr R or she might try and ban it.
Loved this bit