Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What the parties should be looking for in Oldham

2

Comments

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited November 2015
    Greetings from Tokyo, where night is falling. We are running an event here starting tomorrow. It's at the Palace Hotel, which overlooks the Emperor's gaffe. As a result I get to stay at the hotel in one of their swankiest rooms. It is unbelievable. Just thought I'd share that :-)

    Below someone wrote that if labour lose this one it would finish them as a party. I completely disagree. Labour needs t lose a few in places like Oldham in order for NickP and the rest of the membership to snap out of their reverie and to understand that for as long as Corbyn and his mates are in charge Labour has no hope whatsoever of getting close to power.

    Losing Oldham would be very good for the long-term survivability of Labour. Sadly, it's probably too safe a seat - though UKIP could go close on a low turnout.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited November 2015
    2015 (Miliband): Lab 54.8 UKIP 20.6 Con 19 LD 3.7 Grn 1.9
    2010 (Brown):.... Lab 45.5 Con 23.7 LD 19.1 BNP 7.1 UKIP 3.2 Respect 1.5
    2005 (Blair):....... Lab 49.1 Con 21.3 LD 20.0 BNP 6.9 UKIP 2.6
    2001 (Blair): ...... Lab 51.2 Con 17.7 BNP 16.4 LD 12.4 Grn 2.3
    1997 (Blair):....... Lab 58.8 Con 23.4 LD 11.9 Socialist 2.9 Referendum 2.5 Natural 0.5
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited November 2015
    Sean_F said:

    The key to this seat is postal votes, labour will know exactly who voted for them by post last time and their activists will be out collecting the envelopes. As in Heywood last year, more people will vote ukip in the booths but that won't be enough. UKIP simply don't have the data, resources or infrastructure to win a seat such as this. Not enough people in the party have experience of not just running but winning campaigns, they are well meaning and enthusiastic but very amateurish. And I hate to say it, the fruitcakes love an opportunity when the cameras are around.

    Mr Herdson also touches on the fine line between appealing to the WWCs without opening yourself up to allegations of racism, Labour won't hesitate to play dirty if they have to whereas UKIP have to appear to be whiter than white ( that doesn't sound good).

    8/1 UKIP isn't value, I make Bickley 25/1 as much as I'd love to see him win.

    I agree. UKIP are pretty inept at by elections and GOTV. In May (apart from Essex) they were quite poor at identifying target seats, or knowing where their areas of strength are. The Faragist tendency just do not get it. Suzanne Evans put together a much more professional manifesto but seems sidelined as a threat to the glorious leader.

    Labour have picked a good candidate and should win comfortably, the interest will be in percentage shares. I think that the Con and LD parties would rather push UKIP into 3rd or 4th place than tacity support them. I forecast that they will fail to do so.
    I think UKIP's record is variable. I went to canvass in both Clacton and Rochester. I thought the Clacton campaign was excellent (which you'd expect with Carswell in charge) and Rochester was shambolic. By all accounts, Eastleigh and Heywood & Middleton were good, while Newark was another shambles.

    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.
    The person who ran the Clacton campaign was at my PPC interview, rather critical of the Rochester organisation and fearful we would lose.... I was telling her to get on the odds against, it should be 1/4!

    But that confirms your recollection. I thought at the time it may be a kind of in house rivalry.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,844

    ydoethur said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    If the weather's as bad as it was this morning, it'll need enormo-haddock activists to go round the streets. Suspect there'll be flooding in places.

    Indeed. Is there any example of a by-election where nobody bothered to vote at all?

    If it is as bad as this, it could easily be the first all-postal-vote election.
    David Davis' farce?
    If just all of the candidates had voted in that election, it would have topped the turnout in Manchester Central!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,535
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this :) ?

    It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.
    Are you thinking of the Libyan evacuation? Our planes were a day later than those of other nations to arrive in Tripoli, but when they did get there there were a few diplomats on board.

    From the Hereford branch of the Diplomatic Service, in green uniforms and with large bags!

    They turned up 3 or 4 days later in the middle of the desert, where there were a bunch of stranded Western oil workers. They'd cleared a runway in the sand for a Hercules sneak into the country past the bombed out Radar stations, land in the desert and pick them all up. Every single Brit in the country got out, and that last airlift took a load of other nations oil workers out with it too.

    There will probably be a book written about the mission in a few years' time, Britian again reminding the world that she is really good at stuff like this - as we see again this week in Egypt.
    So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.
  • Greetings from Tokyo, where night is falling. We are running an event here starting tomorrow. It's at the Palace Hotel, which overlooks the Emperor's gaffe. As a result I get to stay at the hotel in one of their swankiest rooms. It is unbelievable. Just thought I'd share that :-)

    Below someone wrote that if labour lose this one it would finish them as a party. I completely disagree. Labour needs t lose a few in places like Oldham in order for NickP and the rest of the membership to snap out of their reverie and to understand that for as long as Corbyn and his mates are in charge Labour has no hope whatsoever of getting close to power.

    Losing Oldham would be very good for the long-term survivability of Labour. Sadly, it's probably too safe a seat - though ULIP could go close on a low turnout.

    You need to realise, SO, that the reason Corbyn was elected is precisely because most left activists no longer want Labour to be a Party of government, allegedly capable of managing capitalism better than the Tories. They have 13 years' experience of the fallacy of that claim. So do you, for that matter. Quite what you want to regain office for, apart from the perks, I have absolutely no idea.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited November 2015

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Mortimer said:

    ydoethur said:

    Mortimer said:

    Given Russia has now stopped flights to Egypt, is the UK government going to receive any plaudits for having cancelled its flights a day earlier?

    I ask this, as Radio 4 gave a minister a very hard time yesterday over the cancellations.

    It'll be interesting to know the intelligence we obtained - and I doubt we ever will in detail. For instance, there has been talk about intercepted calls from the militants. Were these before or after the fact? And do they say anything specific about follow-ups, or about means, which might include something we need to increase our own airport security for?

    In the meantime, I just feel sorry for the average Egyptian. Their economy's going to be hurt by this. A consequence might be that the Egyptian government will go hard against the militants. Or not.

    These Islamist attacks have been going on against tourists in Egypt for nearly twenty years, the biggie being the barbarous Luxor attacks. How much more can the country stand?

    Not my period, or my area, but I seem to remember some Victorian gunboat diplomacy involving Egypt (Gladstone?). Seems to have had lawless elements since ever, really.

    I think you're referring to the blockade of 1840, after Mehmet Ali had declared independence from Turkey against the wishes of the Foreign Office. Palmerston was involved, but not Gladstone. Agadir was a later edition based on this earlier model.

    Essentially, a compromise was reached which allowed Ali to be the hereditary governor of a semi-independent Egypt (including the Sudan at that time) while the Ottomans officially controlled it for another 60 years. The only problem was, it was a mess.
    That was it. Mehmet Ali, thanks ydoethur!

    Incidentally, it is really quite tricky to get breakfast in Kensington on a Saturday before 8am....only place I could find open was a nice little cafe on Walton st.
    Try Fred's on Earl's Court Road. Looks completely unpreposessing (like a greasy spoon) but the food is excellent and not too expensive. (about £8 for a good full English). Or Cafe Phillies on Phillimore Walk
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,539

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    Anecdote alert:

    When I lived in London many year ago, I went to a small bonfire party organised by a social worker. Lots of teenagers were there, and she was giving drugs to, and taking drugs with, these kids who were nominally her 'professional' interest.

    My argument with her lost me a couple of mates. :(
  • Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    Anecdote alert:

    When I lived in London many year ago, I went to a small bonfire party organised by a social worker. Lots of teenagers were there, and she was giving drugs to, and taking drugs with, these kids who were nominally her 'professional' interest.

    My argument with her lost me a couple of mates. :(

    It was compulsory for SWP members in the 1970s...

  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited November 2015

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    Generally speaking, the working class don't like the idea of the welfare class, and Labour are perceived to be on the side of the latter.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:



    Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

    It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

    Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

    John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

    Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

    I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

    Someone who is allowed to write threads might consider a counterfactual on that premise re Ed Miliband losing one of labours northern strongholds?

    Maybe Donald Brind? He gets a lot of stick but he isn't the worst thread writer on here
    The problem with Donald's posts is he doesn't make an argument (like @DavidHerdson) or offer insight/betting tips (like the sadly missed @HenryManson). Interesting threads are more important than the party preferences of the writer

    He just writes screes of Labour propaganda. If I wanted to read that I'd buy the Mirror.

    May be @rcs1000 could enlighten us: given that most visitors don't go below the line, is there any difference between the number of total visitors on a Friday vs. other days an how does that compare to historical trends?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited November 2015
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this :) ?

    It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.
    Are you thinking of the Libyan evacuation? Our planes were a day later than those of other nations to arrive in Tripoli, but when they did get there there were a few diplomats on board.

    From the Hereford branch of the Diplomatic Service, in green uniforms and with large bags!

    They turned up 3 or 4 days later in the middle of the desert, where there were a bunch of stranded Western oil workers. They'd cleared a runway in the sand for a Hercules sneak into the country past the bombed out Radar stations, land in the desert and pick them all up. Every single Brit in the country got out, and that last airlift took a load of other nations oil workers out with it too.

    There will probably be a book written about the mission in a few years' time, Britian again reminding the world that she is really good at stuff like this - as we see again this week in Egypt.
    So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.
    The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

    I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

    To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

    Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    Didn't he want to be a Tory candidate and was denied as being not up to scratch?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    0_o

    Mr Fisher told a trade union fringe meeting in 2014: “I had the most excruciating half-hour of my life where I was sat in a room with James Purnell. I sometimes have very violent, bloody nightmares about it actually. Fantasies possibly.”
    Scott_P said:

    @dylsharpe: Suspended Corbyn advisor Andrew Fisher threatens to hit James Purnell in exclusive video. Top @MrHarryCole scoop > https://t.co/4VFhqetOJo



    What 0_o mean? you use it a lot
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited November 2015

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,597
    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    Generally speaking, the working class don't like the idea of the welfare class, and Labour are perceived to be on the side of the latter.
    I'd agree, but it doesn't stop them voting labour regardless, not in large numbers, and the latest measures seem to have run into public perception problems, in that they are seen as damaging people outside the welfare class.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    Charles said:

    0_o

    Mr Fisher told a trade union fringe meeting in 2014: “I had the most excruciating half-hour of my life where I was sat in a room with James Purnell. I sometimes have very violent, bloody nightmares about it actually. Fantasies possibly.”
    Scott_P said:

    @dylsharpe: Suspended Corbyn advisor Andrew Fisher threatens to hit James Purnell in exclusive video. Top @MrHarryCole scoop > https://t.co/4VFhqetOJo

    What 0_o mean? you use it a lot

    A helpful definition from the Urban Dictionary (not available in all good bookstores):
    0_o
    An expression of surprise used on Instant Messaging services.
    Person One: I got a sex change!
    Person Two: 0_o
    by Zak September 06, 2003
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited November 2015
    Charles said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    Didn't he want to be a Tory candidate and was denied as being not up to scratch?
    Who tim?!

    Blimey that's some deep seated rejection angst he is showing
  • isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    The key to this seat is postal votes, labour will know exactly who voted for them by post last time and their activists will be out collecting the envelopes. As in Heywood last year, more people will vote ukip in the booths but that won't be enough. UKIP simply don't have the data, resources or infrastructure to win a seat such as this. Not enough people in the party have experience of not just running but winning campaigns, they are well meaning and enthusiastic but very amateurish. And I hate to say it, the fruitcakes love an opportunity when the cameras are around.

    Mr Herdson also touches on the fine line between appealing to the WWCs without opening yourself up to allegations of racism, Labour won't hesitate to play dirty if they have to whereas UKIP have to appear to be whiter than white ( that doesn't sound good).

    8/1 UKIP isn't value, I make Bickley 25/1 as much as I'd love to see him win.

    If true it means UKIP won most votes on the day in both Eastleigh and Heywood.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited November 2015

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    It's raised eyebrow/WTF
    Charles said:

    0_o

    Mr Fisher told a trade union fringe meeting in 2014: “I had the most excruciating half-hour of my life where I was sat in a room with James Purnell. I sometimes have very violent, bloody nightmares about it actually. Fantasies possibly.”
    Scott_P said:

    @dylsharpe: Suspended Corbyn advisor Andrew Fisher threatens to hit James Purnell in exclusive video. Top @MrHarryCole scoop > https://t.co/4VFhqetOJo

    What 0_o mean? you use it a lot

  • I strongly expect a fairly comfortable Labour win and UKIP a creditable second. I can't see any betting angles here yet. I'll be looking closely at turnout when the result comes in.

    The Lib Dems are right to try to fight hard here. They need to regain relevance and by-elections are their best shot of doing this in the short term. They finished second in this seat in 2010 so there must be a fair few voters in this constituency who are at least vaguely in play for them. There's a danger on the downside too - the SDP were killed off by finishing behind the Monster Raving Loonies in a by-election.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..
  • isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there
    Ageing has its downside, true.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    I strongly expect a fairly comfortable Labour win and UKIP a creditable second. I can't see any betting angles here yet. I'll be looking closely at turnout when the result comes in.

    The Lib Dems are right to try to fight hard here. They need to regain relevance and by-elections are their best shot of doing this in the short term. They finished second in this seat in 2010 so there must be a fair few voters in this constituency who are at least vaguely in play for them. There's a danger on the downside too - the SDP were killed off by finishing behind the Monster Raving Loonies in a by-election.

    Labour could lose a lot of votes to the Lib Dems from non mental left wingers who cant have Corbyn... What price Lib Dem/Tory match bet?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I got really irked by a young couple bitching about the delay as they were desperately missing their baby daughter. She's 8 months old and they left her with granny.

    Well, they left her to go on holiday for two weeks FFS. It was pathetic.

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

  • isam said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups

    Yep, that's the right wing view. But, as I say, to replace Labour UKIP is going to have to develop a message for people who on the economic front are left wing. Telling working people they are beggars and punishing them (not their employers) for not being paid enough is not necessarily going to cut the mustard.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups

    Yep, that's the right wing view. But, as I say, to replace Labour UKIP is going to have to develop a message for people who on the economic front are left wing. Telling working people they are beggars and punishing them (not their employers) for not being paid enough is not necessarily going to cut the mustard.

    You are barely through stage one of deprogramming!
  • isam said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups

    Yep, that's the right wing view. But, as I say, to replace Labour UKIP is going to have to develop a message for people who on the economic front are left wing. Telling working people they are beggars and punishing them (not their employers) for not being paid enough is not necessarily going to cut the mustard.

    How much do you propose that employers pay people who think that the government doesn't want them to work over 16 hours per week?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    SO has always been a Closet Conservative..
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.



    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited November 2015

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups

    Yep, that's the right wing view. But, as I say, to replace Labour UKIP is going to have to develop a message for people who on the economic front are left wing. Telling working people they are beggars and punishing them (not their employers) for not being paid enough is not necessarily going to cut the mustard.

    How much do you propose that employers pay people who think that the government doesn't want them to work over 16 hours per week?
    Labour supporters were happy enough for lopeople on 11k pa to be paying tax on the first 6k under Brown... even if the tax credits are removed, they are no worse off than they were in 2009 because the coalition raised the threshold
  • isam said:

    antifrank said:

    I strongly expect a fairly comfortable Labour win and UKIP a creditable second. I can't see any betting angles here yet. I'll be looking closely at turnout when the result comes in.

    The Lib Dems are right to try to fight hard here. They need to regain relevance and by-elections are their best shot of doing this in the short term. They finished second in this seat in 2010 so there must be a fair few voters in this constituency who are at least vaguely in play for them. There's a danger on the downside too - the SDP were killed off by finishing behind the Monster Raving Loonies in a by-election.

    Labour could lose a lot of votes to the Lib Dems from non mental left wingers who cant have Corbyn... What price Lib Dem/Tory match bet?
    I'd need some fairly tasty prices to tempt me to the Lib Dem side of such a bet. I'd expect non mental left wingers, to use your description, would be more likely not to bother voting at all. If the Lib Dems aren't going to come anywhere near winning, why send a message through them?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    This seemed so odd as a story that initially I dismissed it.
    The missile that nearly struck the Thomson jet was also spotted by another of the carrier's planes as it approached Sharm El Sheikh, the source said.

    'The crew were told the rocket was from an Egyptian military exercise, but with what has happened there is a lot of fear,' they added. 'The incident left staff petrified.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307741/Rocket-attack-UK-tour-jet.html#ixzz3qnRHgCHo
  • Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    saddened..the world has turned to shit since 2010...bloody perfect before ..
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,748
    It's worth pointing out, even in the dark Corbynsanity that Labour has an astonishingly strong candidate in Jim McMahon, who also happens to be a local with a strong record as leader of the council and the antithesis to Corbyn.

    He was even profiled by The Economist recently and tipped as a possible future Labour leader (if he ever wanted to leave Oldham): http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21665072-revival-labours-moderates-will-come-local-government-jim-mcmahon-reluctant-maquisard

    Could be he gets as much of a personal vote as a Labour one by running on his own local record and telling the party's leadership, who seem as interested in purging the impure as anything else, to bog off.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there
    Ageing has its downside, true.
    Does it ever become tiresome looking down from your Olympian heights on the people who don't reach your level of humanity and perfectness?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    I strongly expect a fairly comfortable Labour win and UKIP a creditable second. I can't see any betting angles here yet. I'll be looking closely at turnout when the result comes in.

    The Lib Dems are right to try to fight hard here. They need to regain relevance and by-elections are their best shot of doing this in the short term. They finished second in this seat in 2010 so there must be a fair few voters in this constituency who are at least vaguely in play for them. There's a danger on the downside too - the SDP were killed off by finishing behind the Monster Raving Loonies in a by-election.

    Labour could lose a lot of votes to the Lib Dems from non mental left wingers who cant have Corbyn... What price Lib Dem/Tory match bet?
    I'd need some fairly tasty prices to tempt me to the Lib Dem side of such a bet. I'd expect non mental left wingers, to use your description, would be more likely not to bother voting at all. If the Lib Dems aren't going to come anywhere near winning, why send a message through them?
    I guess the perfect storm, and the only way I think UKIP could win, would be Libs taking Lab votes and Tories voting UKIP... is that an 8/1 shot? I don't know

    Hope so!
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    kle4 said:

    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    Generally speaking, the working class don't like the idea of the welfare class, and Labour are perceived to be on the side of the latter.
    I'd agree, but it doesn't stop them voting labour regardless, not in large numbers, and the latest measures seem to have run into public perception problems, in that they are seen as damaging people outside the welfare class.
    I agree with you about tax credits, and though the general budgetary aim with tax credit policy (and wages and tax) is entirely laudable, the communication and implementation have been poor.

    I do think elements of the working class - historically the WWC, but it is spreading - have been walking away from Labour for the best part of thirty years, with a special dislike of the kind of Britain people like Corbyn, Livingstone and Abbott wish to create.
  • isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    I strongly expect a fairly comfortable Labour win and UKIP a creditable second. I can't see any betting angles here yet. I'll be looking closely at turnout when the result comes in.

    The Lib Dems are right to try to fight hard here. They need to regain relevance and by-elections are their best shot of doing this in the short term. They finished second in this seat in 2010 so there must be a fair few voters in this constituency who are at least vaguely in play for them. There's a danger on the downside too - the SDP were killed off by finishing behind the Monster Raving Loonies in a by-election.

    Labour could lose a lot of votes to the Lib Dems from non mental left wingers who cant have Corbyn... What price Lib Dem/Tory match bet?
    I'd need some fairly tasty prices to tempt me to the Lib Dem side of such a bet. I'd expect non mental left wingers, to use your description, would be more likely not to bother voting at all. If the Lib Dems aren't going to come anywhere near winning, why send a message through them?
    I guess the perfect storm, and the only way I think UKIP could win, would be Libs taking Lab votes and Tories voting UKIP... is that an 8/1 shot? I don't know

    Hope so!
    I doubt it in 2015. Maybe in a by election circa 2018 if Corbyn is still there and a disaster then the Lib Dems could have recovered enough. But I think it's too soon yet.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,042
    Labour's vote will fall but they will simply blame the loss of Meacher's personal vote. I'm afraid that this is going to be dull.

    I wouldn't be quite so confident about UKIP coming second though. They have come a long way since the General and not in the right direction.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    DavidL said:

    Labour's vote will fall but they will simply blame the loss of Meacher's personal vote. I'm afraid that this is going to be dull.

    I wouldn't be quite so confident about UKIP coming second though. They have come a long way since the General and not in the right direction.

    That sounds like betting talk!

    What price?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,539
    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    I find myself thinking once more of the Israeli Operation Solomon:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Solomon

    Over 1,000 people in one 747. Allegedly there were more when it landed than when it took off, as several people gave birth!
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    ok..stuck in a hotel room in a rainswept Borehamwood..waiting to go and boost the local economy..in several different areas..but it will have to wait..meanwhile I shall amuse myself reading PB..or a script or may even start on The Ice Twins..or have another cuppa as I watch tourists being greeted at airports in the UK as if they are conquering heroes who have fought off the murderous hordes of waiters around the swimming pool..poor things...might be some horse racing on later..just to raise the excitement level....Just another bloody day on a film location..
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    edited November 2015

    Given Russia has now stopped flights to Egypt, is the UK government going to receive any plaudits for having cancelled its flights a day earlier?

    I ask this, as Radio 4 gave a minister a very hard time yesterday over the cancellations.

    It'll be interesting to know the intelligence we obtained - and I doubt we ever will in detail. For instance, there has been talk about intercepted calls from the militants. Were these before or after the fact? And do they say anything specific about follow-ups, or about means, which might include something we need to increase our own airport security for?

    In the meantime, I just feel sorry for the average Egyptian. Their economy's going to be hurt by this. A consequence might be that the Egyptian government will go hard against the militants. Or not.

    These Islamist attacks have been going on against tourists in Egypt for nearly twenty years, the biggie being the barbarous Luxor attacks. How much more can the country stand?

    The signals intelligence was found retrospectively or at least 2+2 was put together. The date of the actual take though is not clear. The difficulty for the government was that their estimate was that it was an inside job and that the indication was that this was not going to be a one off. IS operating methodology is not to do something then sit back and admire itself.

    As well as the citizen protection the other motivation here was one of the intelligence & international politics game. I will maybe get to post about that at some point but I have to godo some training.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited November 2015
    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
  • saddened said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there
    Ageing has its downside, true.
    Does it ever become tiresome looking down from your Olympian heights on the people who don't reach your level of humanity and perfectness?
    I know I can rely on you to cheer me up

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,750

    Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
    Sharm is safe, surely. Unless the guy who put the bomb on the planeI didn’t also get on, and is stillaround with his (probably) kit. Otherwise i’s getting to and from that’s the problem.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there

    Being opposed to working people having their incomes reduced by the government is not being welfare obsessed. Thinking it is may be another obstacle on UKIP's path to replacing Labour.

    Why should the government pay the wages of people in the private sector? They've already let them off paying any tax

    If the last Labour govt hadn't been the equivalent of a union that offers your job to anyone who will do it for less, people wouldn't have to go begging to the state for top ups

    Yep, that's the right wing view. But, as I say, to replace Labour UKIP is going to have to develop a message for people who on the economic front are left wing. Telling working people they are beggars and punishing them (not their employers) for not being paid enough is not necessarily going to cut the mustard.

    Of course, people's views are more nuanced than simply being "economically right wing" and "economically left wing". There are lots of people who support renationalisation while also opposing generous benefits. Certainly a message of "we'll force the private sector to pay better wages, stop low income immigrants undercutting your wages, while cutting government benefit spending" could work, if done right.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Agree completely. I thought the British ambassador was the most polite person in the airport yesterday.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
    Sharm is safe, surely. Unless the guy who put the bomb on the planeI didn’t also get on, and is stillaround with his (probably) kit. Otherwise i’s getting to and from that’s the problem.
    Wasn't it meant to be a baggage handler?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    I find myself thinking once more of the Israeli Operation Solomon:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Solomon

    Over 1,000 people in one 747. Allegedly there were more when it landed than when it took off, as several people gave birth!
    And the British tourists on that flight would have been complaining about the catering!

    I was involved in some disaster planning after the Arab Spring started over here. People in a real emergency often cease to act rationally, for example they prioritise going "Home" over going "Somewhere safe". There's around 150-200k Brits in the UAE at any time, mixture of workers and tourists. That would take a LONG time to get everyone out if it all kicked off. My plan would be to drive to Oman if it was safe there, or to take a flight East to somewhere like Singapore and figure out what to do from there. Much better than trying to be in a queue of 100k people wanting to go from Dubai to London.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    saddened said:

    isam said:

    Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    I remember winding up tim, when he was so smug about the damage UKIP was supposedly doing to the Tories, that UKIP 2.0* would be a bigger danger to Labour in the northern seats they have taken for granted for decades.

    I think there was something he used to say about pb.Tories...?

    (*I still think UKIP is fobbing us off with version UKIP 1.89....They won't deliver UKIP 2.0 until Farage fecks off though. He still gives the impression of having more interest in hurting the Tories than he does of making UKIP a Westminster electoral force.)

    To actually replace Labour - as opposed to winning the odd by-election on the back of protest votes - UKIP is going to have to move left on the economic front. Having an ex-Tory MP voting to reduce the incomes of working class people is not helpful on that front.
    The transition from Labour diehard to someone who accepts that Tories aren't all evil, and recognising that not all working class people are welfare obsessed Labour lemmings is tough... I have been there
    Ageing has its downside, true.
    Does it ever become tiresome looking down from your Olympian heights on the people who don't reach your level of humanity and perfectness?
    I know I can rely on you to cheer me up

    At least you haven't accused the Tories of wishing the poor dead yet, so that's something to be grateful for.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    A military response would involve taking out Egyptian air defences first. Since the authorities won't allow civilian aircraft to land, they're hardly going to let someone else's air force operate an unauthorised airlift.

    It will be interesting to see how the Russkies respond if their airlines are refused access.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
    Sharm is safe, surely. Unless the guy who put the bomb on the planeI didn’t also get on, and is stillaround with his (probably) kit. Otherwise i’s getting to and from that’s the problem.
    How hard would it be to get a few machine guns and a 4x4, and drive out over a week through the desert to get there, before doing a Tunisia style attack?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,539
    Y0kel said:

    Given Russia has now stopped flights to Egypt, is the UK government going to receive any plaudits for having cancelled its flights a day earlier?

    I ask this, as Radio 4 gave a minister a very hard time yesterday over the cancellations.

    It'll be interesting to know the intelligence we obtained - and I doubt we ever will in detail. For instance, there has been talk about intercepted calls from the militants. Were these before or after the fact? And do they say anything specific about follow-ups, or about means, which might include something we need to increase our own airport security for?

    In the meantime, I just feel sorry for the average Egyptian. Their economy's going to be hurt by this. A consequence might be that the Egyptian government will go hard against the militants. Or not.

    These Islamist attacks have been going on against tourists in Egypt for nearly twenty years, the biggie being the barbarous Luxor attacks. How much more can the country stand?

    The signals intelligence was found retrospectively or at least 2+2 was put together. The date of the actual take though is not clear. The difficulty for the government was that their estimate was that it was an inside job and that the indication was that this was not going to be a one off. IS operating methodology is not to do something then sit back and admire itself.

    As well as the citizen protection the other motivation here was one of the intelligence & international politics game. I will maybe get to post about that at some point but I have to godo some training.
    Thanks.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''It's worth pointing out, even in the dark Corbynsanity that Labour has an astonishingly strong candidate in Jim McMahon, who also happens to be a local with a strong record as leader of the council and the antithesis to Corbyn.''

    He will probably be asked whether he supports the leader's aims and policies, on immigration, defence etc.

    Wonder what the reply will be.
  • I went on holiday for my 30th in 2012 to Hurgada. We had an excursion to Luxor planned for my birthday but as it was the day of elections there Thomson cancelled the excursion at the last minute (rescheduled for a less contentious day before the end of our trip).

    I feel very sorry for the average Egyptian. During the rescheduled excursion to Luxor our tour guide said that 25% of the local Hurgada population work in tourism. A long term cancellation of tourism will be devastating to the economies of Sharm and Hurgada especially. And probably multiple other areas.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    I came through Gatwick Airport last week.. the usual long winding line for Passport checks..One woman simply walked down the snaking queue until one old girl told her to get to the back..her reply "I don't like queues...why should I have to wait " .and she didn't, she went straight to the front...and then security pulled her out and invited her into a small room at the side...I wonder how long they chatted to her...she was holding a British Passport....
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    I went on holiday for my 30th in 2012 to Hurgada. We had an excursion to Luxor planned for my birthday but as it was the day of elections there Thomson cancelled the excursion at the last minute (rescheduled for a less contentious day before the end of our trip).

    I feel very sorry for the average Egyptian. During the rescheduled excursion to Luxor our tour guide said that 25% of the local Hurgada population work in tourism. A long term cancellation of tourism will be devastating to the economies of Sharm and Hurgada especially. And probably multiple other areas.

    Footage of the next wave of migrants piling into Eastern European countries will be accompanied by The Bangles
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    This is horrific:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJHW-xQ4XgE

    I don't particularly think we can do much to improve the Middle East, but I certainly think we can just kill as many ISIS members as possible, so they face some sort of punishment for such appalling treatment of women.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AndyJS said:

    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Agree completely. I thought the British ambassador was the most polite person in the airport yesterday.
    Katie Price did a piece on Sharm the other day. The first time that I recall agreeing with her!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3305681/KATIE-HOPKINS-Hey-Sharm-sun-seekers-s-reason-holidays-Egypt-cheap-stop-moaning-stuck-grateful-coming-back.html
  • JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
    Sharm is safe, surely. Unless the guy who put the bomb on the planeI didn’t also get on, and is stillaround with his (probably) kit. Otherwise i’s getting to and from that’s the problem.
    How hard would it be to get a few machine guns and a 4x4, and drive out over a week through the desert to get there, before doing a Tunisia style attack?
    Probably harder than you imagine! One thing that freaked me out in my Hurgada holiday was that for any trip in or out you had to go through IIRC three armed checkpoints. It's not like driving though Surrey.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,539
    JEO said:

    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.

    Not that I was alive 50 years ago, but I disagree. Someone on here wrote that other Europeans were surprised to the GBP's reaction to the 7/7 bombings: just get on with things.

    The problem is that the people in Egypt are not really experiencing real adversity; they're experiencing inconvenience whilst staying in swanky hotels, they're not living in tents in the desert or in homes with bombs raining down. It's been a great British trait for generations to complain stubbornly about inconveniences. ;)

    Also, from what I've read the 'adversity with fortitude' displayed during WWII (for instance) is somewhat a myth created after the war.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited November 2015
    watford30 said:

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    A military response would involve taking out Egyptian air defences first. Since the authorities won't allow civilian aircraft to land, they're hardly going to let someone else's air force operate an unauthorised airlift.

    It will be interesting to see how the Russkies respond if their airlines are refused access.
    I think the Egyptian authorities won't have much choice soon if this escalates. There's 80k Russians wanting out too, if they don't agree soon to a civilian airlift then they're going to have a military one imposed on them. If they're faced with an RAF Hercules with Typhoon escort they'll either back down quickly or start a war against both the UK and Russia.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited November 2015
    isam said:

    I went on holiday for my 30th in 2012 to Hurgada. We had an excursion to Luxor planned for my birthday but as it was the day of elections there Thomson cancelled the excursion at the last minute (rescheduled for a less contentious day before the end of our trip).

    I feel very sorry for the average Egyptian. During the rescheduled excursion to Luxor our tour guide said that 25% of the local Hurgada population work in tourism. A long term cancellation of tourism will be devastating to the economies of Sharm and Hurgada especially. And probably multiple other areas.

    Footage of the next wave of migrants piling into Eastern European countries will be accompanied by The Bangles
    I suspect 99% of the Middle East population are not crazy extremists. But the inability of our and local authorities to get rid of the 1% of crazies is making life there unliveable.

    If I was a worker in Tourism in Egypt and lost my local life there while having a passable knowledge of English or German in order to give good service to tourists I know what I'd try and do.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    I went on holiday for my 30th in 2012 to Hurgada. We had an excursion to Luxor planned for my birthday but as it was the day of elections there Thomson cancelled the excursion at the last minute (rescheduled for a less contentious day before the end of our trip).

    I feel very sorry for the average Egyptian. During the rescheduled excursion to Luxor our tour guide said that 25% of the local Hurgada population work in tourism. A long term cancellation of tourism will be devastating to the economies of Sharm and Hurgada especially. And probably multiple other areas.

    Footage of the next wave of migrants piling into Eastern European countries will be accompanied by The Bangles
    I suspect 99% of the Middle East population are not crazy extremists. But the inability of our and local authorities to get rid of the 1% of crazies is making life there unliveable.

    If I was a worker in Tourism in Egypt and lost my local life there while having a passable knowledge of English or German in order to give good service to tourists I know what I'd try and do.
    Yeah me too
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,535
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this :) ?

    It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.
    Are you thinking of the Libyan evacuation? Our planes were a day later than those of other nations to arrive in Tripoli, but when they did get there there were a few diplomats on board.

    From the Hereford branch of the Diplomatic Service, in green uniforms and with large bags!

    They turned up 3 or 4 days later in the middle of the desert, where there were a bunch of stranded Western oil workers. They'd cleared a runway in the sand for a Hercules sneak into the country past the bombed out Radar stations, land in the desert and pick them all up. Every single Brit in the country got out, and that last airlift took a load of other nations oil workers out with it too.

    There will probably be a book written about the mission in a few years' time, Britian again reminding the world that she is really good at stuff like this - as we see again this week in Egypt.
    So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.
    The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

    I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

    To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

    Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.
    I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I went on holiday for my 30th in 2012 to Hurgada. We had an excursion to Luxor planned for my birthday but as it was the day of elections there Thomson cancelled the excursion at the last minute (rescheduled for a less contentious day before the end of our trip).

    I feel very sorry for the average Egyptian. During the rescheduled excursion to Luxor our tour guide said that 25% of the local Hurgada population work in tourism. A long term cancellation of tourism will be devastating to the economies of Sharm and Hurgada especially. And probably multiple other areas.

    In 92 I went on a Nile cruise and to Cairo (to see my great Great Grandfathers grave from WW1).

    It was one of the best holidays of my life, an amazing history, lovely people (though all the whining for Baksheesh is tiresome) and I was impressed how beautiful the Nile is.

    I would love to go back, but won't until the Egyptians start to realise that Islamism is the problem, not the solution. It is not a coincidence that most basket case countries in the world are Muslim majority.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Back in 2005 when we went out to Abu Simbel - we had armed guards accompanying us across the desert, in case we were car-jacked. I find it bizarre that anyone would go to Egypt on holiday nowadays.

    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tourists have been slaughtered in Egypt for many years..why do tourists who go there expect to be suddenly airlifted to safety..on the same day as tens of thousands of others..when the terrorists hit again..easy lesson..do not go there..

    Not an unreasonable point, but the British government will always move Heaven and Earth to get Brits out of a sticky situation. cf. the oil workers in Libya in 2011. Should we have just abandoned them because they knew it was dangerous and were being paid well to be there? No, of course not.
    Besides HMG gives advice on where it is safe and unsafe to holiday at. If classed as unsafe by the government then I belive flights can be cancelled etc. If you fly somewhere that the Foreign Office deems acceptable to fly to then why shouldn't HMG evacuate those of our own citizens who need evacuating?

    Sharm was reported as safe by the Foreign Office.
    Sharm is safe, surely. Unless the guy who put the bomb on the planeI didn’t also get on, and is stillaround with his (probably) kit. Otherwise i’s getting to and from that’s the problem.
    How hard would it be to get a few machine guns and a 4x4, and drive out over a week through the desert to get there, before doing a Tunisia style attack?
    Probably harder than you imagine! One thing that freaked me out in my Hurgada holiday was that for any trip in or out you had to go through IIRC three armed checkpoints. It's not like driving though Surrey.
  • AndyJS said:

    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Agree completely. I thought the British ambassador was the most polite person in the airport yesterday.
    Katie Price did a piece on Sharm the other day. The first time that I recall agreeing with her!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3305681/KATIE-HOPKINS-Hey-Sharm-sun-seekers-s-reason-holidays-Egypt-cheap-stop-moaning-stuck-grateful-coming-back.html
    Katie Price, Doc? I'll try not to read too much into that ;)
  • AndyJS said:

    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:


    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!

    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Agree completely. I thought the British ambassador was the most polite person in the airport yesterday.
    Katie Price did a piece on Sharm the other day. The first time that I recall agreeing with her!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3305681/KATIE-HOPKINS-Hey-Sharm-sun-seekers-s-reason-holidays-Egypt-cheap-stop-moaning-stuck-grateful-coming-back.html
    I remember an old Viz 'top tip':

    "Avoid paying tax by living in a politically unstable Middle Eastern country inhabited by religous bigots, ignore warnings to leave when tensions rise and then demand immediate rescue when fighting breaks out."

    Substitute 'living' for 'holidaying'.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.

    It goes back much further as we both know, which to me makes Cameron worse, how on earth he carried on the profligacy is stunning.



  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Ken Livingstone Do as I say, not as I did...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34755345

    What is worse for Corbyn, a defeat in Oldham or the election of another opponent in the PLP?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited November 2015

    AndyJS said:

    JEO said:

    Sandpit said:


    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!

    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Agree completely. I thought the British ambassador was the most polite person in the airport yesterday.
    Katie Price did a piece on Sharm the other day. The first time that I recall agreeing with her!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3305681/KATIE-HOPKINS-Hey-Sharm-sun-seekers-s-reason-holidays-Egypt-cheap-stop-moaning-stuck-grateful-coming-back.html
    I remember an old Viz 'top tip':

    "Avoid paying tax by living in a politically unstable Middle Eastern country inhabited by religous bigots, ignore warnings to leave when tensions rise and then demand immediate rescue when fighting breaks out."

    Substitute 'living' for 'holidaying'.
    It works for 'living' too! :tongue:
  • JEO said:

    Sandpit said:

    SANDPIT Of course we should provide assistance and as you rightly point out,we are very good at that..but removing something like 20,000 tourists takes a little time...but they all want to be at the front of the queue and they go into severe gimmme mode if there is the slightest delay..For the life of me I couldn't understand the anger the Ambassador got when he turned up..as if it was all his fault that some nutters brought down the Russian plane and upset their precious holiday plans....lesson.. keep away from unstable areas..

    You are completely right about the behaviour of the average Brit abroad, they should be looking to the Ambassador and his team for advice rather than trying to lynch him.

    As regards the airlift, they're trying the easiest way now, which is to get civvy planes in and evac the people directly to airports in the UK. A military response would involve a staging post probably in Cyprus, flying mil transports from there the 500 miles into Sharm to pick the people up and return them to regular planes for the trip to the UK. It wouldn't be pretty but it would get the job done, probably within 24 hours.

    In a real emergency a staging post in Jordan or Israel 100 miles from Sharm could get everyone out of Egypt even faster. Our military train for things like this and pride themselves on being able to execute it quickly and safely. They would also take no nonsense from any lippy tourists!
    Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic change in the British mentality for the worse over the last 50 years. After the war, we saw ourselves as being a resolute people that dealt with adversity with fortitude. Now, we are an entitled lot that gets hysterical when we do not get the things we want. I think of the poem If... by Kipling. How many people these days really aspire to "wait and not be tired by waiting" or to "force their heart and nerve and sinew, long after they have gone"?

    What's worse, arguing to retain such a thing is social conservatism, and social conservatism is widely derided by all and sundry. Better to indulge in materalistic entitlement than to be an old fuddy duddy. As a result, a crucial element of the British character has been lost, possibly forever.
    Its the "Because I'm worth it." and "Don't put it off, put it on." mentality.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098



    " ... that Islamism is the problem, not the solution. It is not a coincidence that most basket case countries in the world are Muslim majority.

    Cause of effect, Doc? Are they basket case countries because they are Muslim nations or is the rise of militant Islam because they are basket cases? One might equally notice that in England most of the really shitty areas have Labour councils and have had for decades.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    How long is it going to take to evacuate 80,000 Russians from Egypt? I hope there isn't someone very clever in ISIS who has already foreseen the chaos this might cause over the next few days and weeks.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    OT - saw this and thought of you spoiling kitty with prawns - this grizzly liked them too http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307881/Our-70st-teddy-bear-Told-enchanting-book-childless-British-couple-raised-beer-drinking-8ft-grizzly-son-death-left-huge-hole-lives.html



    " ... that Islamism is the problem, not the solution. It is not a coincidence that most basket case countries in the world are Muslim majority.

    Cause of effect, Doc? Are they basket case countries because they are Muslim nations or is the rise of militant Islam because they are basket cases? One might equally notice that in England most of the really shitty areas have Labour councils and have had for decades.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,750



    " ... that Islamism is the problem, not the solution. It is not a coincidence that most basket case countries in the world are Muslim majority.

    Cause of effect, Doc? Are they basket case countries because they are Muslim nations or is the rise of militant Islam because they are basket cases? One might equally notice that in England most of the really shitty areas have Labour councils and have had for decades.
    There are exceptions, such as Malaysia and Indonesia. Not necessarily always of light and peace, I admit but nowhere the problems that many ME countries have.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,535

    ok..stuck in a hotel room in a rainswept Borehamwood..waiting to go and boost the local economy..in several different areas..but it will have to wait..meanwhile I shall amuse myself reading PB..or a script or may even start on The Ice Twins..or have another cuppa as I watch tourists being greeted at airports in the UK as if they are conquering heroes who have fought off the murderous hordes of waiters around the swimming pool..poor things...might be some horse racing on later..just to raise the excitement level....Just another bloody day on a film location..

    If you watch channel 4 racing .... don't risk your shirt mind you
    Zarib 15:15 wincanton
    Upepito 15:05 Aintree
    The Ould Lad 14:05 Wincanton
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this :) ?

    It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.
    So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.
    The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

    I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

    To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

    Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.
    I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.
    It's hard to see why anyone should be complaining about HMG's actions so far. If people choose to take cheap holidays in unstable places, they should expect a little 'bother'. A few days waiting in an airport to fly back safely, whilst a diplomatic solution is bartered, is hardly the end of days.

    Meanwhile Malky cracks open another tinny, and directs an evacuation from his soiled armchair.

  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.
    It goes back much further as we both know, which to me makes Cameron worse, how on earth he carried on the profligacy is stunning.



    Brilliant.
  • saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.

    For example Surbiton's concern about manufacturing since 2010 but lack of interest in its decade long depression before that.

    On the other hand there was no shortage of PB Tories who whined incessantly about the wellbeing of military personal up until May 2010 but lost all interest afterwards. You don't often read the phrase 'military covenant' these days on PB.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited November 2015
    Some years ago when filming in Israel we had a box of six UZZI machine guns ,plus clips, in the vehicle and I carried a hand gun...just in case it all kicked off..Israel was actually at war in the Lebanon at the time..Motto... Go Muslim.. Go Armed..
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited November 2015
    isam said:



    Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

    It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

    Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

    John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

    Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

    I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning
    What was most important was winning the first seat, in the hopes that the floodgates might open after that. Also successfully protecting a defection was key to encouraging others. When UKIP had yet to win their first seat, there was a danger they could slide into irrelevance if their opinion polling headed south. With a seat, they become a more serious political party. So it's not clear to me this was such a poor choice of priorities, even though in retrospect getting a Northern seat off Labour would have opened up a whole bunch of promising opportunities.
  • saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.
    For example Surbiton's concern about manufacturing since 2010 but lack of interest in its decade long depression before that.

    On the other hand there was no shortage of PB Tories who whined incessantly about the wellbeing of military personal up until May 2010 but lost all interest afterwards. You don't often read the phrase 'military covenant' these days on PB.


    Because the military covenant is being respected far better than pre 2010 now. If it wasn't you'd hear it all the time by the many critics of the government here.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:



    Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

    It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

    Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

    John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

    Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

    I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning
    What was most important was winning the first seat, in the hopes that the floodgates might open after that. Also successfully protecting a defection was key to encouraging others. When UKIP had yet to win their first seat, there was a danger they could slide into irrelevance if their opinion polling headed south. With a seat, they become a more serious political party. So it's not clear to me this was such a poor choice of priorities, even though in retrospect getting a Northern seat off Labour would have opened up a whole bunch of promising opportunities.
    Of course, but the point was that Clacton was in the bag anyway. I guess you could say Heywood was a write off on the same basis, but to get almost half the votes in two by elections on the same day, win one by 35% and lose the other by 2% indicates something not quite right, especially when all the resources were poured into the easy win
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    saddened said:

    saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.
    It goes back much further as we both know, which to me makes Cameron worse, how on earth he carried on the profligacy is stunning.



    Brilliant.

    Everyone who posts on here is one eyed to a certain extent, but Blackburn 63 is the master of one eyedness/.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited November 2015



    " ... that Islamism is the problem, not the solution. It is not a coincidence that most basket case countries in the world are Muslim majority.

    Cause of effect, Doc? Are they basket case countries because they are Muslim nations or is the rise of militant Islam because they are basket cases? One might equally notice that in England most of the really shitty areas have Labour councils and have had for decades.
    There are exceptions, such as Malaysia and Indonesia. Not necessarily always of light and peace, I admit but nowhere the problems that many ME countries have.
    The economies of Indonesia and Malaysia are strong largely by reason of the Chinese minorities. Turkey is the most succesful Muslim economy because of its legacy of Ataturks secularism.

    Daniel Greenfield summarises the figures here:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/139155/islams-universal-economic-failure-daniel-greenfield
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,535
    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    @JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this :) ?

    It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.
    So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.
    The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

    I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

    To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

    Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.
    I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.
    It's hard to see why anyone should be complaining about HMG's actions so far. If people choose to take cheap holidays in unstable places, they should expect a little 'bother'. A few days waiting in an airport to fly back safely, whilst a diplomatic solution is bartered, is hardly the end of days.

    Meanwhile Malky cracks open another tinny, and directs an evacuation from his soiled armchair.

    Dear Dear what an odious creature
  • Sean_F said:


    I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

    All ???

    I remember saying on one of your old Friday articles that Labour was far more vulnerable in working class industrial areas than was believed and the issue driving that was immigration and the economic consequences of that immigration.

    Likewise the rise of UKIP in wwc Eastern England has been based on their gain of people who had previously voted Labour.


  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    saddened said:

    Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

    Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

    Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
    Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
    Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI
    I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

    This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

    Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.
    For example Surbiton's concern about manufacturing since 2010 but lack of interest in its decade long depression before that.

    On the other hand there was no shortage of PB Tories who whined incessantly about the wellbeing of military personal up until May 2010 but lost all interest afterwards. You don't often read the phrase 'military covenant' these days on PB.


    The military have never been better housed, Fed, equipped, trained or paid in their history. You may not believe it with the loud whining from a few attention seekers but it's true.
This discussion has been closed.