On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
'Hello, do you have any utterly clueless commentators who'd like to appear on our show?'
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
'Hello, do you have any utterly clueless commentators who'd like to appear on our show?'
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
I'm surprised you're surprised, Sunday Politics usually has 2 of the 3 panellists from the Guardian.
What I've never understood is why so many liberal types seem to loathe what you'd loosely call British culture and continually appease the people that want to destroy everything they believe in.
Off the radar, the government is starting to run into problems.
More dreadful deficit numbers for Continuity Osbrowne today despite record tax receipts and decent growth.
Truly? It all seems to have been a waste of time. The public seem like they won't much more cuts (not in the only area of substance left at any rate), and yet it is needed if the gov is to meet it's already long delayed targets, such that even if it is a good idea to delay even further, politically they look like crap.
That is to be expected (in fact thinking it would be even less important to people than it was was one reason I was so sure Labour would come top in May) I guess, but it is looking increasingly possible Osborne cannot make his 5 year target in 10 years. More difficult than expected or not, and whether or not people think that target is a good thing or not, that's pathetic. People may not care enough about balancing the books to accept the sort of cuts we need to do it, so slowing is politically necessary, and they accepted that for the extention from 5 years, but failing again? Again, pathetic, even if one didn't want them to succeed.
Osborne and Cameron really started to lose me in the mid late portion of the last parliament with just a lack of competence (if not being outright incompetent), and it really looks as though, with the possibility of further problems on the horizon (always a possibility), their key self set goal they are unable to unwilling to achieve.
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
Conservatives seem to be very good at coming through the middle.
A robust tory performance to derail UKIP in Oldham...???
Was just looking at an (vaguely) plausible route to Con victory in Oldham following those by-election results... Would have to be something like Con 24%, Lab 23%, UKIP 23%, LD 20%, Grn 9%, OMRLP 1%. Don't see it myself, as I can't see LD or Grn doing that well but would be amusing.
Mr. Betting, the lunatic Williams is the same woman who thinks there is a magic money tree and that spitting is an acceptable form of protest. Baffled as to why anyone would take her seriously.
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
I'm surprised you're surprised, Sunday Politics usually has 2 of the 3 panellists from the Guardian. What I've never understood is why so many liberal types seem to loathe what you'd loosely call British culture and continually appease the people that want to destroy everything they believe in.
Perhaps because most of their teachers, lecturers and professors have all had those views? Indoctrination.
I've got friends who in person are awesome fun. But on FB they are part of that 'virtue-signaller' brigade; not particularly educated or abreast of the facts, but knowing they can get cheap likes by making the sharing the same inane, far lefty stuff. I always - just for the craic - get involved and state the opposite. They look like nailed-on Labour supporters but I bet hardly any of them vote. It's one of the reasons why the centre of politics looks outnumbered online but never is in practice.
I have a few Britain First friends too; equally as misinformed and looking for cheap likes.
The polarisation is annoying online and in politics generally. If I were a terrorist in Syria and I wanted to mount an attack in Europe I'd think hiding myself among refugees and smuggling myself into Europe is a good idea. That's just common-sense and everybody (deep down) knows it. Why the refugee/terrorist thing has become a hot political football (see QT) is bizarre. If I were a politician I'd say we desperately need to help the poor refugees but it's likely terrorists will try to hide among them so we need to be super careful.
Conservatives seem to be very good at coming through the middle.
A robust tory performance to derail UKIP in Oldham...???
Was just looking at an (vaguely) plausible route to Con victory in Oldham following those by-election results... Would have to be something like Con 24%, Lab 23%, UKIP 23%, LD 20%, Grn 9%, OMRLP 1%. Don't see it myself, as I can't see LD or Grn doing that well but would be amusing.
It's a by-election, so anyone but Labour winning would have to have a huge swing with all the others being squeezed. The Tories were less than 2% behind UKIP in third place. If they were in opposition they would have been contenders.
I might have a cheeky fiver on Con gain Oldham West and Royton
5th to 1st - that even puts the Welsh Valleys and Liverpool in-play ;-)
The bastards won't come near Ystrad Mynach
I'll come to Wrexham, I used to have a girlfriend from there. I love a good weekend up the Wrexham
Nearly fell off my chair on election night when there was speculation on here that Wrexham was too close to call between Lab and Tory, which I dismissed, but then saw it repeated on the BBC programme a few minutes later.
Although Lab held, the result was surprisingly close IIRC...
I didn't believe my Clwyd dwelling cousin when he said the constituency that contains Rhyl, my maternal homeland, had gone Tory. I thought it must be a typo.
I used to joke about moving there and staying with relatives to run an election campaign. Cutting teeth in a hopeless seat in anticipation of getting a safer one. Glad I didn't ever actually do anything about it. Would have to live there....
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
Mr Navabi, there are plenty of people who don't think the crisis was caused by bankers, they absolutely know.
I am not really sure why people find this a source of amusement. In the latest unemployment figures, which were really good for the UK as a whole, unemployment went up in Scotland by 11,000.
The knock on consequences for the Scottish economy are increasingly severe not just in the direct job losses but also in the lost earnings from many of what were the best paid jobs in the economy. Wages for contractors have been falling very fast, even for those lucky enough to keep their jobs, and it is affecting everything else. Sales figures in Scottish shops are very poor at the moment.
UKplc should gain from the glut but Scotland has and will continue to suffer significantly from this. One is tempted to observe, yet again, that Doctors just don't seem to have a clue how lucky they are.
David, then these smug southern idiots have the cheek to wonder why Scottish people think they are arseholes
At the risk of being controversial, let's replace Muslim with gay or black.
Do heterosexual or white spokesbods have much effect on them as trusted sources? I'd doubt it.
The difference is that these Muslims believe in an ideology where non-Muslims are not human, where non-Muslim culture is unacceptable and must be destroyed and where all non-Muslim states exist in a perpetual state of war and no punishment exists for destroying non-Muslims.
There is no gay or black agenda to equate to Kafir, Haraam and Dar al-Harb.
And these concepts are not obscure interpretations of the text. They are explicit and referenced frequently in the Q'ran. Personally, I find the idea that only 27% of Muslims sympathise with Daesh to be far too low a number.
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
I'm surprised you're surprised, Sunday Politics usually has 2 of the 3 panellists from the Guardian. What I've never understood is why so many liberal types seem to loathe what you'd loosely call British culture and continually appease the people that want to destroy everything they believe in.
Perhaps because most of their teachers, lecturers and professors have all had those views? Indoctrination.
Very probably. It's the ultimate irony though, under the Islamists they're defending Guardian readers would be first in line for hanging.
The polarisation is annoying online and in politics generally. If I were a terrorist in Syria and I wanted to mount an attack in Europe I'd think hiding myself among refugees and smuggling myself into Europe is a good idea. That's just common-sense and everybody (deep down) knows it. Why the refugee/terrorist thing has become a hot political football (see QT) is bizarre. If I were a politician I'd say we desperately need to help the poor refugees but it's likely terrorists will try to hide among them so we need to be super careful.
I've got friends who in person are awesome fun. But on FB they are part of that 'virtue-signaller' brigade; not particularly educated or abreast of the facts, but knowing they can get cheap likes by making the sharing the same inane, far lefty stuff. I always - just for the craic - get involved and state the opposite. They look like nailed-on Labour supporters but I bet hardly any of them vote. It's one of the reasons why the centre of politics looks outnumbered online but never is in practice.
I have a few Britain First friends too; equally as misinformed and looking for cheap likes.
The polarisation is annoying online and in politics generally. If I were a terrorist in Syria and I wanted to mount an attack in Europe I'd think hiding myself among refugees and smuggling myself into Europe is a good idea. That's just common-sense and everybody (deep down) knows it. Why the refugee/terrorist thing has become a hot political football (see QT) is bizarre. If I were a politician I'd say we desperately need to help the poor refugees but it's likely terrorists will try to hide among them so we need to be super careful.
Well, better than discussing Nicola's potential U-Turn on Syria, from
Sturgeon said that UK airstrikes would “simply add to already unimaginable human suffering”, and that “the SNP will oppose UK airstrikes on Syria”. No ifs or buts.
The black and blue one with the fern and southern cross seems like a great choice. I do hope it wins this round as I think it would beat the current flag.
The Butchers Apron needs consigned to the dustbin of history.
Bit early to be so obvious with the trolling isn't it?
Still, if that's the way. Ahem - I think Scottish people should be slaves.
There, that should give you something to get pretend angry at.
None. It has the global recognition of the 'Stars and Stripes' without the unpopular connotations that go with American power.
Only to Irish Republicans and embittered Scottish Nationalists is it the 'Butchers Apron' - if it was, why would it be used in the State Flag of Hawaii, or form the basis for the Ikurriña, or appear in the coat of arms of Coquimbo in Chile, let alone earlier versions in the flags of various US cities from Baton Rouge to New England counties?
Its an icon - and if Scotland does separate, it won't change.....
Such a rose tinted, patriarchal view. Quite what one would expect from Loyalists.
The Butcher's Apron is a despised symbol of oppression throughout Africa and Asia, it may be iconic but only as an icon of colonialism and pillage.
There is a reason why British firms find it so hard to crack India and China. Britain is despised.
Posts like this explain why I simply ignore you on this blog.
You are fanatic and, like every fanatic, harbour a secret doubt which is why you resort to broadcasting such ridiculous hyperbole like this.
If I were a terrorist in Syria and I wanted to mount an attack in Europe I'd think hiding myself among refugees and smuggling myself into Europe is a good idea. That's just common-sense and everybody (deep down) knows it.
Do we know it? I mean, since it's a big, lengthy, unreliable pain in the arse to get to Europe and be recognized as a refugee that can result in drowning or sent back or being stuck the wrong side of a fence, and most of the fighting is in Syria/Iraq, it would seem more sensible to stay in Syria/Iraq and blow things up there, and get somebody who was already in Europe and knows their way around to blow themselves up closer to home rather than leaving Europe and coming to join you in Syria/Iraq.
Maybe there's some evidence that this is a useful or attractive strategy somewhere, but there wasn't much in the last attack (if it's a good strategy, why alert your adversary to it by placing a passport somewhere it won't get blown up?) and in any case it's not something you can tell with your gut.
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
Schengen is one really popular EU policy, so the politicians involved are loath to scrap it. If you think about the reverse - introducing border checks between London and Birmingham, say - you can see why people find it convenient not to have to. The argument that one can curb terrorism by introducing more internal borders is a bit weak - OK, terrorist X in France has to think twice before going to Belgium or vice versa, but it's not likely to seriously reduce his activities.
How much routine information-sharing is available across the EU and indeed more widely? If I'm a cop in London and wonder if X is a suspect anywhere, can I just look on the computer, or do I need to send 27 requests to different national police bodies, or does Interpol do the job? (Yes, there are civil liberties implications if information is too easily shared, but most of us probably feel they are less salient than they were - anyway, I'm just curious rather than arguing for or against.)
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
What was Lehmans, the biggest bank to collapse, other than an investment bank?
That piece, and several others, are the reason you were right to start penning your real name to them, rather than some obscure moniker. This is one of a string of analytical pieces that currently shames many of the broadsheets. If they were smart, they would be signing up yourself and several others on here. But their loss is our gain.
Cyclefree is another who has a succinct point of view, whose take on moral dilemmas in particular is worth digesting every time. Sharp legal minds, again.
It kinda goes without saying that people backing up their opinions with their money does rather require either deep pockets - or the need to be at the forefront of political prediction. But this site is so often so far ahead of the commentariat in picking future trends that anyone interested in politics should consider pb.com their first port of call....
Mr Mark: you are very kind. Thank you.
PB has a very high level of debate - and on a wide range of topics. Plus, as someone else said, the insults are of are of good quality.
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
I still don't feel I truly have my head around all that happened in 2008 but I did think a simple property bubble was a rather bigger part of it all than given credit, as evidenced by the number of nice small ex and still mutuals that needed helping out - a big portion of that sector got bailed out by 'stronger' players in the space of a couple of years.
Fundamentally, money and banking remains to me just a means of extending the where, what and who capabilities of barter - that bit of work you put in 1973 helps you pay your heating bill in 2020, that bit of work you did in 2010 allowed you a mortgage in 1995. To my eye, demographic change was a big part of the underlying cause of why that value transport broke down - there weren't enough good vehicles for the amount of value that needed to be transported globally, so we used increasingly inappropriate vehicles.
In what world were immovably domestic assets like UK houses the answre for dealing with Chinese longevity improvements or 25 year investments funded by 2 year fixes?
Now, I'm a layman in this, and my contribution as ever should be pro-rated to my knowledge and reading, so if I'm shot down in the course of progressing the discussion, I don't mind one bit.
breaking: Islamists seize up to 170 Air France staff and members of French military at Mali hotel...
People who can recite the Koran are freed.
I got into argument with a friend of mine on Facebook last night and this morning who denied any link between Islam and ISIS and felt the word Islamist was inflammatory.
When I politely pointed out there was a link, and we mustn't deny it, he said: "You are just wrong. Plain and simple." and made the usual points about it being linked to racism and intolerance, which was then 'liked' by his adoring crowd of following Guardianistas.
Why do I bother? What on earth is wrong with the British Left?
Send him that Maajid Nawaz article.
Though I doubt it will make much difference.
Lots of people of people don't think for themselves. They use big, important words loosely strung together. It's a sentence (sometimes). But it's not thought in any sense.
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
I still don't feel I truly have my head around all that happened in 2008 but I did think a simple property bubble was a rather bigger part of it all than given credit, as evidenced by the number of nice small ex and still mutuals that needed helping out - a big portion of that sector got bailed out by 'stronger' players in the space of a couple of years.
Fundamentally, money and banking remains to me just a means of extending the where, what and who capabilities of barter - that bit of work you put in 1973 helps you pay your heating bill in 2020, that bit of work you did in 2010 allowed you a mortgage in 1995. To my eye, demographic change was a big part of the underlying cause of why that value transport broke down - there weren't enough good vehicles for the amount of value that needed to be transported globally, so we used increasingly inappropriate vehicles.
In what world were immovably domestic assets like UK houses the answre for dealing with Chinese longevity improvements or 25 year investments funded by 2 year fixes?
Now, I'm a layman in this, and my contribution as ever should be pro-rated to my knowledge and reading, so if I'm shot down in the course of progressing the discussion, I don't mind one bit.
It was credit default swaps which brought down many investment banks
On BBC DP now BBC2. 3 outside media folk from the Economist, Guardian and France. None of whom states that Schengen has to go....... Guardian's Zoe sees it as madness to end Schengen. They all switch to the line that terrorists are home grown... and ignore the problem of guns. The Economist bloke say that more can be done with "spot checks".
Amazing how the Beeb finds them.
I'm surprised you're surprised, Sunday Politics usually has 2 of the 3 panellists from the Guardian. What I've never understood is why so many liberal types seem to loathe what you'd loosely call British culture and continually appease the people that want to destroy everything they believe in.
Perhaps because most of their teachers, lecturers and professors have all had those views? Indoctrination.
Albert Camus explained it very well:-
"Mistaken ideas always end in bloodshed but in every case it is someone else's blood. That is why some of our thinkers feel free to say just about anything."
Tony Judt, a marvellous (and, sadly, late) historian also described the phenomenon:-
"Totalitarianism of the Left, much like an earlier totalitarianism of the Right, was about violence and power and control, and it appealed because of these features, not in spite of them."
I think that we have to face the fact that for some on the Left, Islamism has precisely this attraction, even if the Left deludes itself into thinking this is all about them being against racism and intolerance.
Just as Islamism seems to have perverted Islam or is a perversion of it, so the Left, by claiming the word "liberal" has perverted what liberalism truly is. It is time for the rest of us to wrest liberal values - real liberal values - back from the left.
Comments
They all know the line they are supposed to take.
What I've never understood is why so many liberal types seem to loathe what you'd loosely call British culture and continually appease the people that want to destroy everything they believe in.
Osborne and Cameron really started to lose me in the mid late portion of the last parliament with just a lack of competence (if not being outright incompetent), and it really looks as though, with the possibility of further problems on the horizon (always a possibility), their key self set goal they are unable to unwilling to achieve.
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2015/11/20/we-cant-blame-the-bankers-for-the-hbos-collapse-there-werent-any-bankers-there
In much of Europe, including the UK, and especially Ireland and Spain, the crisis was to a large extent caused by old-fashioned over-lending on property, by boring banks which had little or no involvement with investment banking.
Indoctrination.
I've got friends who in person are awesome fun. But on FB they are part of that 'virtue-signaller' brigade; not particularly educated or abreast of the facts, but knowing they can get cheap likes by making the sharing the same inane, far lefty stuff. I always - just for the craic - get involved and state the opposite. They look like nailed-on Labour supporters but I bet hardly any of them vote. It's one of the reasons why the centre of politics looks outnumbered online but never is in practice.
I have a few Britain First friends too; equally as misinformed and looking for cheap likes.
The polarisation is annoying online and in politics generally. If I were a terrorist in Syria and I wanted to mount an attack in Europe I'd think hiding myself among refugees and smuggling myself into Europe is a good idea. That's just common-sense and everybody (deep down) knows it. Why the refugee/terrorist thing has become a hot political football (see QT) is bizarre. If I were a politician I'd say we desperately need to help the poor refugees but it's likely terrorists will try to hide among them so we need to be super careful.
Why that's so hard is beyond me.
The Tories were less than 2% behind UKIP in third place. If they were in opposition they would have been contenders.
I used to joke about moving there and staying with relatives to run an election campaign. Cutting teeth in a hopeless seat in anticipation of getting a safer one. Glad I didn't ever actually do anything about it. Would have to live there....
There is no gay or black agenda to equate to Kafir, Haraam and Dar al-Harb.
And these concepts are not obscure interpretations of the text. They are explicit and referenced frequently in the Q'ran. Personally, I find the idea that only 27% of Muslims sympathise with Daesh to be far too low a number.
Maybe there's some evidence that this is a useful or attractive strategy somewhere, but there wasn't much in the last attack (if it's a good strategy, why alert your adversary to it by placing a passport somewhere it won't get blown up?) and in any case it's not something you can tell with your gut.
How much routine information-sharing is available across the EU and indeed more widely? If I'm a cop in London and wonder if X is a suspect anywhere, can I just look on the computer, or do I need to send 27 requests to different national police bodies, or does Interpol do the job? (Yes, there are civil liberties implications if information is too easily shared, but most of us probably feel they are less salient than they were - anyway, I'm just curious rather than arguing for or against.)
PB has a very high level of debate - and on a wide range of topics. Plus, as someone else said, the insults are of are of good quality.
Kudos to OGH and team for all that they do.
Fundamentally, money and banking remains to me just a means of extending the where, what and who capabilities of barter - that bit of work you put in 1973 helps you pay your heating bill in 2020, that bit of work you did in 2010 allowed you a mortgage in 1995. To my eye, demographic change was a big part of the underlying cause of why that value transport broke down - there weren't enough good vehicles for the amount of value that needed to be transported globally, so we used increasingly inappropriate vehicles.
In what world were immovably domestic assets like UK houses the answre for dealing with Chinese longevity improvements or 25 year investments funded by 2 year fixes?
Now, I'm a layman in this, and my contribution as ever should be pro-rated to my knowledge and reading, so if I'm shot down in the course of progressing the discussion, I don't mind one bit.
Though I doubt it will make much difference.
Lots of people of people don't think for themselves. They use big, important words loosely strung together. It's a sentence (sometimes). But it's not thought in any sense.
"Mistaken ideas always end in bloodshed but in every case it is someone else's blood. That is why some of our thinkers feel free to say just about anything."
Tony Judt, a marvellous (and, sadly, late) historian also described the phenomenon:-
"Totalitarianism of the Left, much like an earlier totalitarianism of the Right, was about violence and power and control, and it appealed because of these features, not in spite of them."
I think that we have to face the fact that for some on the Left, Islamism has precisely this attraction, even if the Left deludes itself into thinking this is all about them being against racism and intolerance.
Just as Islamism seems to have perverted Islam or is a perversion of it, so the Left, by claiming the word "liberal" has perverted what liberalism truly is. It is time for the rest of us to wrest liberal values - real liberal values - back from the left.