J124 What makes you think I don't have a conscience..and I am not a Tory..They are way too left wing for me..I run a charitable website for students globally..they pay nowt and I pick up all the running costs..suppose that makes me some sort of fascist.. fortunately I can also spot a fool when I see one and you fall into that category..but have a nice Christmas..
Miss DiCanio, it's believed (by some, at least) he used African forest elephants, which are a smaller variety of the African elephant and which, as you say, is thought to now be extinct.
That said, some people believe there are currently two species of elephant in Africa (confusingly, they may call one of these forest elephants).
After some naughtiness in the First Punic War, elephant-riders [I forget the technical term] in the Second were equipped with large nails and mallets, in case their steed started running amok.
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
To clarify that point somewhat as I have realised it is not very well phrased - what he meant was that you will never get the capital sum back because the margins are so small (especially now). However, it earns more than you would get from leaving the money in a bank if you have it already, unless interest rates rise extremely rapidly.
Justin, I have a doctorate in History. I have taught on Nazi Germany for several years. I speak German, admittedly not perfectly. I have run school trips to Germany. If I am not precisely an expert on Nazi Germany, I have a better then merely working knowledge of the context.
If somebody uses the phrase 'Arbeit macht Frei,' I would associate it primarily with Auschwitz. Which rather shoots your ignorance argument to pieces.
Of course, context should be added to this. Arbeit macht Frei is over the gate of Auschwitz, the majority of whose inmates were Polish, rather than Birkenau, which was a dedicated extermination camp mostly connected with Jews (the whole complex is called 'Auschwitz-Birkenau'). Because of course work did not make the Jews free - only death would make them free, and 'Starben macht frei' would have been a little too honest even for Himmler, who made no particular secret of what he was doing. (It's not as though it made anyone else free either, of course, but that's a different point and I haven't time to go into the reasons for the Nazi anxiety to lie on this point.)
Even if however your somewhat convoluted justification had merit, the premise is ridiculous. Within three months of taking power the Nazis had arrested 4000 political opponents, including trades unionists, and passed the Enabling Act to allow them to control many more - ultimately, they forcibly merged all labour movements into one grouping controlled by the SS, which was about as effectual in terms of labour rights as Ed Miliband's Labour party (that is, not at all). Telling the unions that they cannot automatically assume that their members wish to have their money used to prop up a moribund political party (led, in an ironic twist, by a man who voluntarily associates with Holocaust Deniers) falls an awfully long way short of that.
I am aware of everything you have said there - but it is really beside the point. I am not suggesting that we are living in a totalitarian state comparable to Nazi Germany in 1933.It does disturb me ,however, that there is something insidious about measures intended to make it very difficult for Trade Unions to effectively carry out their functions representing workers against their employers.The balance of power has already been shifted massively in favour of employers over the last 35 years and it is now proposed to take that even further by adding to the obstacles faced by unions when contemplating industrial action. A slave labour economy is what many - not all - Tories wish to bring about in which workers - deprived of rights and the ability to fight back - simply have to accept their lot and do as they are told. It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
Plato.. maybe we should do what the Yanks have done..kick em out... if they don't like it then eff off..I think the tolerance level in the normally placid UK is rapidly reaching tipping level..
You are instinctively anti-Muslim, aren't you ?
And you are a clueless shyte of the Wee-Timmy ilk. Why not take on a male-poster for once...?
The Platonistas here immediately bullies anyone daring to criticise Plato by calling him/her misogynist. Plato is probably the most un-feminist female [ assuming she is one ] in PB. She hardly represents the female sex. Her tirades makes it quite clear that she looks after number one.
I don't normally get involved in personal stuff on the internet but I will say this for you, total shit that you undoubtedly are, you are at least prepared to parade your ignorance and prejudices for everyone to point at laugh at.
J124 What makes you think I don't have a conscience..and I am not a Tory..They are way too left wing for me..I run a charitable website for students globally..they pay nowt and I pick up all the running costs..suppose that makes me some sort of fascist.. fortunately I can also spot a fool when I see one and you fall into that category..but have a nice Christmas..
I hope someone buys you a good mirror for Christmas.
Miss DiCanio, it's believed (by some, at least) he used African forest elephants, which are a smaller variety of the African elephant and which, as you say, is thought to now be extinct.
That said, some people believe there are currently two species of elephant in Africa (confusingly, they may call one of these forest elephants).
After some naughtiness in the First Punic War, elephant-riders [I forget the technical term] in the Second were equipped with large nails and mallets, in case their steed started running amok.
Thank you. I hope you hit the jack-pot in the New Year with your novelties.
I do have 12 solar panels on my new house but they were put in as a freebie (by the previous owner, not me) so I get the power but not the feed-in tariff. Given how often I am out during the day that's not a great deal from my point of view, but equally they do seem to kick off quite a lot of power even in the winter - they will run some heavy stuff (washing machine) and have power left over. For somebody who is likely to spend more time at home in the hours of light I would have thought they would be a shrewd investment if you have the money.
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
Hope that is of use. Merry Christmas thinking it over.
Thanks, Doc, I wasn't really thinking of external finance for the installation, though by using equity release it might be a viable option.
Wishing you a merry Christmas and looking forward to more of your erudite posts in 2016.
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
To clarify that point somewhat as I have realised it is not very well phrased - what he meant was that you will never get the capital sum back because the margins are so small (especially now). However, it earns more than you would get from leaving the money in a bank if you have it already, unless interest rates rise extremely rapidly.
You might get some of the capital cost back through adding value to the house.
Nothing says Christmas spirit like discussing concentration camps and Nazi slogans
I know! I love a good scrap, but I think we should lay aside calling each other Nazis (or whatever) until after the festivities.
Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches — that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism.
Promulgated by American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990, Godwin's Law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions. It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and blog comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric.
In 2012, "Godwin's Law" became an entry in the third edition of the Oxford English Dictionary
I am aware of everything you have said there - but it is really beside the point. I am not suggesting that we are living in a totalitarian state comparable to Nazi Germany in 1933.
It came across that way. So you need to think about how you phrase things.
It does disturb me ,however, that there is something insidious about measures intended to make it very difficult for Trade Unions to effectively carry out their functions representing workers against their employers. The balance of power has already been shifted massively in favour of employers over the last 35 years and it is now proposed to take that even further by adding to the obstacles faced by unions when contemplating industrial action
There is a reason for that. It is that in 1980 the unions had massive power which they were using very unwisely. To give only the classic example, the steel strike of 1980-81 did more damage to the British steel industry than every mistake made by every politician in Britain since the industry was first nationalised. True, the unions have less power than they did. That is not necessarily at all a bad thing. They still have freedom of association, freedom of bargaining, freedom to strike and freedom to campaign. As long as they have those, if they are even halfway competent they should be able to do a decent job in standing up for their workers.
A slave labour economy is what many - not all - Tories wish to bring about in which workers - deprived of rights and the ability to fight back - simply have to accept their lot and do as they are told.
That would, if you associated it with somebody's name, actually be a libellous comment. Do you have any evidence to support it? I cannot think of a single Conservative who has ever advocated such a thing, or even suggested that such a thing would be desirable - certainly not since the early nineteenth century. Even the Taff Vale ruling had nothing like that effect.
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
To clarify that point somewhat as I have realised it is not very well phrased - what he meant was that you will never get the capital sum back because the margins are so small (especially now). However, it earns more than you would get from leaving the money in a bank if you have it already, unless interest rates rise extremely rapidly.
You might get some of the capital cost back through adding value to the house.
As I understand it, if they are part of the house they are sold separately (mine weren't included in the sale because they are leased rather than owned). So that probably wouldn't help. Of course, you could sell them the way you do bits of furniture - but what if the purchaser doesn't want them?
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
To clarify that point somewhat as I have realised it is not very well phrased - what he meant was that you will never get the capital sum back because the margins are so small (especially now). However, it earns more than you would get from leaving the money in a bank if you have it already, unless interest rates rise extremely rapidly.
You might get some of the capital cost back through adding value to the house.
That is a good point though one likely to be of more interest to my son than directly to me. A house with free energy ought to be worth more than one that comes with bills.
However, I do recall when solar panels were the new thing stories about financial institutions refusing to give mortgages on houses that were equipped with them. That was a fair while ago and I never paid much attention at the time. Given the massive growth in the number of such houses I assume that panels are not still seen as a bad thing.
There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
Justin, I have a doctorate in History. I have taught on Nazi Germany for several years. I speak German, admittedly not perfectly. I have run school trips to Germany. If I am not precisely an expert on Nazi Germany, I have a better then merely working knowledge of the context.
....
Of course, context should be added to this. Arbeit macht Frei is over the gate of Auschwitz, the majority of whose inmates were Polish, rather than Birkenau, which was a dedicated extermination camp mostly connected with Jews (the whole complex is called 'Auschwitz-Birkenau'). Because of course work did not make the Jews free - only death would make them free, and 'Starben macht frei' would have been a little too honest even for Himmler, who made no particular secret of what he was doing. (It's not as though it made anyone else free either, of course, but that's a different point and I haven't time to go into the reasons for the Nazi anxiety to lie on this point.)
Even if however your somewhat convoluted justification had merit, the premise is ridiculous. Within three months of taking power the Nazis had arrested 4000 political opponents, including trades unionists, and passed the Enabling Act to allow them to control many more - ultimately, they forcibly merged all labour movements into one grouping controlled by the SS, which was about as effectual in terms of labour rights as Ed Miliband's Labour party (that is, not at all). Telling the unions that they cannot automatically assume that their members wish to have their money used to prop up a moribund political party (led, in an ironic twist, by a man who voluntarily associates with Holocaust Deniers) falls an awfully long way short of that.
I am aware of everything you have said there - but it is really beside the point. I am not suggesting that we are living in a totalitarian state comparable to Nazi Germany in 1933.It does disturb me ,however, that there is something insidious about measures intended to make it very difficult for Trade Unions to effectively carry out their functions representing workers against their employers.The balance of power has already been shifted massively in favour of employers over the last 35 years and it is now proposed to take that even further by adding to the obstacles faced by unions when contemplating industrial action. A slave labour economy is what many - not all - Tories wish to bring about in which workers - deprived of rights and the ability to fight back - simply have to accept their lot and do as they are told. It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
I shall be sure to bang on about various books as and when they're released.
Surely not, Mr. D.! In the world of PB people only "Bang on" about the EU. Indeed, it is actually impossible to some for someone to offer a mild criticism of the EU without being accused of "banging on" about it.
What I think you meant to say was that you would be offering mature, yet witty, fair criticism of books (and I hope games) as they come to your attention.
With that, I am off, and will probably be off for a few days over the festive season. A Merry Christmas everybody, and a happy and prosperous new year to you all.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
It's no surprise that Sartre came up with his famous maxim " hell is other people " in France. Elsewhere it's inconceivable but locally it's empirically true.
Just watching the Dam Busters on Channel 5 and every time they come back from adverts we're being told it contains offensive language. I appreciate they are covering themselves from numpties writing into OFCOM, but is it really necessary?
On that, a note of caution - a friend of mine who is very interested in all this kind of thing (he used to run a group called Transition for the local area) told me that solar panels were very good financially too, as long as you had the capital sum to put down for them. He reckoned he got about a 4% return on them under the old tariff, which was not bad. However, he added that if he had had to borrow, it would certainly not have been worth it unless interest rates remained ridiculously low for approximately 20 years.
To clarify that point somewhat as I have realised it is not very well phrased - what he meant was that you will never get the capital sum back because the margins are so small (especially now). However, it earns more than you would get from leaving the money in a bank if you have it already, unless interest rates rise extremely rapidly.
You might get some of the capital cost back through adding value to the house.
That is a good point though one likely to be of more interest to my son than directly to me. A house with free energy ought to be worth more than one that comes with bills.
However, I do recall when solar panels were the new thing stories about financial institutions refusing to give mortgages on houses that were equipped with them. That was a fair while ago and I never paid much attention at the time. Given the massive growth in the number of such houses I assume that panels are not still seen as a bad thing.
We have solar panels, not sure if its a 100% wise investment so am not evangelical about it, but the return on the money compared with leaving it in the bank was the main driver. Someone who may be in receipt of a pension pot has a choice of how to get a return on the lump sum. I'm told that you get your original investment back in 7 or 8 years. I guess as long as the house (in particular the roof) and panel installation are sound then there ought to be some ultimate capital benefit. However I presume that a new buyer taking put a new FIT tariff would get a later (and lower) tariff and so the capital value would maybe be not that high. Our house seems well insulated and I think that is the first thing people should think about.
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
The biggest problem trade unions face is a surfeit of cheap labour, it's an employer's market, the reason why big businesses are pro EU and Bob Crow was vehemently against it.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? I've been there dozens of times, admittedly I prefer Italians but I've always found the French very hospitable.
The French are a mix of Celt, Teuton, and Latin. They've inherited every deplorable trait of those peoples while the virtues have vanished. They're a dysgenic disaster.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? I've been there dozens of times, admittedly I prefer Italians but I've always found the French very hospitable.
The French are a mix of Celt, Teuton, and Latin. They've inherited every deplorable trait of those peoples while the virtues have vanished. They're a dysgenic disaster.
They seem ok to me but in general I find the food overrated. That said, some fresh bread with Brie and wine on a blanket is heavenly.
Miss Plato, I prefer the headline from Giles Fraser (SoMuchGuardian Twitter account) about the virgin birth running against the grain of, er, Christianity.
Incidentally, the same fool had his say in a BBC article about the cost of maintaining churches. As you might expect, he didn't really care about that.
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
The biggest problem trade unions face is a surfeit of cheap labour, it's an employer's market, the reason why big businesses are pro EU and Bob Crow was vehemently against it.
Big Business? Like the big businesses of Renault/Nissan and BMW and Honda and Toyota which you are adamant will not flee the UK if we leave the EU? Why would they stay when instead of the Bulgarians coming here they could go to Bulgaria?
The EU migrants I see are not 'big business' anyway. They serve me coffee.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
He mentions Trots thinking Tory voters will choose them instead, cultural appropriation outrage [like yoga] and prosecuting the dead as some of most egregious examples of 2015. So far...
@Plato_Says It's when I read rubbish like that from Corbyn's admirers that I realise his is a religious rather than a political cult. It's as bad as reading some of the freaky apologetics stuff from an American fundie. Who cares about things like facts and the evidence when you can have 'faith of the heart'?
Very appropriate for Christmas though - how about 'wie schönen leuchtet den Morgenstern' as their new motto? Only thing is nobody would accuse Milne, McDonnell and the Jezziah of being three wise men...
Now let's be fair, Henry V prosecuted the dead as well. It's not exactly a new thing.
The slight difference was that Henry V prosecuted the corpse of (I think) Oldcastle after he was reminded that Oldcastle was entitled to a fair trial - and hadn't received one before being hanged.
My personal favourite in that oeuvre is that after the battle of Sedgemoor, the Duke of Monmouth was executed. They subsequently realised that there was no official portrait of him, which - as a nephew of the King - was clearly unacceptable, so they sewed his head back on an painted him (with a fetching red scarf to cover the stitches)
Just watching the Dam Busters on Channel 5 and every time they come back from adverts we're being told it contains offensive language. I appreciate they are covering themselves from numpties writing into OFCOM, but is it really necessary?
Probably not but I find it amusing to see how many times the N word is used especially just before the poor dog is run over. I think Patrick MaGoohan has a small part as a guard in that section.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it s bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
The biggest problem trade unions face is a surfeit of cheap labour, it's an employer's market, the reason why big businesses are pro EU and Bob Crow was vehemently against it.
Big Business? Like the big businesses of Renault/Nissan and BMW and Honda and Toyota which you are adamant will not flee the UK if we leave the EU? Why would they stay when instead of the Bulgarians coming here they could go to Bulgaria?
The EU migrants I see are not 'big business' anyway. They serve me coffee.
You have a habit of getting excited quite quickly, 6th form economics will tell you that if you have a surplus of labour wages are compressed. If you'd like to explain how that's wrong I'm happy to listen.
UKIP in the European Parliament is in a very tough tough position. Is it their view - the one that they espouse in their speeches - that the European Parliament has no democratic legitimacy? (This is the view of Sinn Fein, for example, regards to the UK parliament.) Or is it their view that that they were elected to prevent the increase of EU power?
Their speeches - millions of YouTube views! - proclaim the former; yheir votes the latter.
As it happens, I think it is wrong for the EU to interfere in this space at all. This is market place with many, many competitors. With or without government interference, roaming charges are on the way out. (Why should someone who does not travel have to subsidise someone who does?)
(There is an argument that I have sympathy with that - for data - people have no idea how much a kilobyte is, and sometimes have no control over whether their phone, tablet or laptop decides that now is the right time to download an update from Apple, Google or whoever. In this case, some kind of default daily cap would be appropriate rather than slapping someone with an unexpected £2,000 bill.)
I quite like Vodafone's solution - I pay £3 on those days when I use data to access my UK package. I realise that I am basically giving them £3 extra given that I'm mainly using their networks in Europe, but the cost is relatively small in the scheme of things & allows me a degree of certainty
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
We haven't always been friends with the Germans but they seem ok, there's been times when I was concerned about my feelings towards Jurgen Klinsman, his dive after scoring away at Sheffield Weds on his debut for Spurs still gives me a warm glow inside.
He mentions Trots thinking Tory voters will choose them instead, cultural appropriation outrage [like yoga] and prosecuting the dead as some of most egregious examples of 2015. So far...
@Plato_Says It's when I read rubbish like that from Corbyn's admirers that I realise his is a religious rather than a political cult. It's as bad as reading some of the freaky apologetics stuff from an American fundie. Who cares about things like facts and the evidence when you can have 'faith of the heart'?
Very appropriate for Christmas though - how about 'wie schönen leuchtet den Morgenstern' as their new motto? Only thing is nobody would accuse Milne, McDonnell and the Jezziah of being three wise men...
Now let's be fair, Henry V prosecuted the dead as well. It's not exactly a new thing.
The slight difference was that Henry V prosecuted the corpse of (I think) Oldcastle after he was reminded that Oldcastle was entitled to a fair trial - and hadn't received one before being hanged.
My personal favourite in that oeuvre is that after the battle of Sedgemoor, the Duke of Monmouth was executed. They subsequently realised that there was no official portrait of him, which - as a nephew of the King - was clearly unacceptable, so they sewed his head back on an painted him (with a fetching red scarf to cover the stitches)
Miss Plato, trivia is apparently given the name because people used to be hanged where three roads (tri-via) met, and this was also the place notices were put up.
Mind you, there were three subjects which formed the early learning of a doctorate in the Elizabethan era, and these were therefore judged 'trivial'.
I don't think I know any husbands who don't do their fair share of Christmas wrapping, even in a jokey 'I'm so useless at it the wife does it all, lol' way.
He mentions Trots thinking Tory voters will choose them instead, cultural appropriation outrage [like yoga] and prosecuting the dead as some of most egregious examples of 2015. So far...
@Plato_Says It's when I read rubbish like that from Corbyn's admirers that I realise his is a religious rather than a political cult. It's as bad as reading some of the freaky apologetics stuff from an American fundie. Who cares about things like facts and the evidence when you can have 'faith of the heart'?
Very appropriate for Christmas though - how about 'wie schönen leuchtet den Morgenstern' as their new motto? Only thing is nobody would accuse Milne, McDonnell and the Jezziah of being three wise men...
Now let's be fair, Henry V prosecuted the dead as well. It's not exactly a new thing.
The slight difference was that Henry V prosecuted the corpse of (I think) Oldcastle after he was reminded that Oldcastle was entitled to a fair trial - and hadn't received one before being hanged.
My personal favourite in that oeuvre is that after the battle of Sedgemoor, the Duke of Monmouth was executed. They subsequently realised that there was no official portrait of him, which - as a nephew of the King - was clearly unacceptable, so they sewed his head back on an painted him (with a fetching red scarf to cover the stitches)
I never knew that. One would have thought that the expression on his face post mortem would not have made the corpse an ideal subject for a portrait, especially as it allegedly took the executioner multiple blows of the axe (and possibly, finally, a knife), to get his head off.
I have said repeatedly that what I want is Britain to have the same relationship with the EU than Norway does. In EFTA/EEA, but not in the EU. Lower bills, less regulation.
But I do value the Four Freedoms. I think the Freedom of people to work across Europe without paperwork is an unambiguously good thing. (Equally though, I do think governments should be able to discriminate in favour of their own citizens.)
If the choice is between EU and Completely Out, then I'm in a very difficult position.
Freedom to work across Europe is a good thing for the economy as a whole.
But it's only viable with a comprehensive reform of the welfare system. It makes no sense to import unskilled workers if we are paying our own folk to sit at home doing nothing. (It probably needs continued reform of the education system as well but that's a longer term project).
The fundamental issue is that we have created a generation of people many of whom lack the skills and aspiration to flourish in a competitive global economy. Either the country needs to bear that deadweight cost through transfer payments and import alternative workers, or we need to try to ensure that as many of these people work as possible, thereby reducing the burden on the state. I suspect if you recycled the savings (including reduced need for infrastructure investment) back into lower taxes then the overall net benefits of allowing more immigration would be less obvious
I don't think I know any husbands who don't do their fair share of Christmas wrapping, even in a jokey 'I'm so useless at it the wife does it all, lol' way.
But you can always tell if it's been wrapped by a female hand or otherwise.
Re nationality, i appreciate it can cause problems. A friend of mine owned a hotel, he refused to let some Japanese stay there once because of the treatment his father received in a PoW camp.
I don't think I know any husbands who don't do their fair share of Christmas wrapping, even in a jokey 'I'm so useless at it the wife does it all, lol' way.
I have said repeatedly that what I want is Britain to have the same relationship with the EU than Norway does. In EFTA/EEA, but not in the EU. Lower bills, less regulation.
But I do value the Four Freedoms. I think the Freedom of people to work across Europe without paperwork is an unambiguously good thing. (Equally though, I do think governments should be able to discriminate in favour of their own citizens.)
If the choice is between EU and Completely Out, then I'm in a very difficult position.
Freedom to work across Europe is a good thing for the economy as a whole.
But it's only viable with a comprehensive reform of the welfare system. It makes no sense to import unskilled workers if we are paying our own folk to sit at home doing nothing. (It probably needs continued reform of the education system as well but that's a longer term project).
The fundamental issue is that we have created a generation of people many of whom lack the skills and aspiration to flourish in a competitive global economy. Either the country needs to bear that deadweight cost through transfer payments and import alternative workers, or we need to try to ensure that as many of these people work as possible, thereby reducing the burden on the state. I suspect if you recycled the savings (including reduced need for infrastructure investment) back into lower taxes then the overall net benefits of allowing more immigration would be less obvious
Well said sir, we discussed on here the other day that we were importing nurses because the numbers we are training here is dwindling. Successive govts are failing our youth, mainly by charging them for worthless degrees.
The tradition of eating rather too much at midnight on Christmas Eve ("Noche Buena") takes some getting used to even after coming here for almost two decades!
I don't think I know any husbands who don't do their fair share of Christmas wrapping, even in a jokey 'I'm so useless at it the wife does it all, lol' way.
I am on guard duty. We are surrounded in people letting of lots of fire crackers etc, so my job is to sit in the kids room with my laptop and intercept anyone waking up before they go downstairs and interrupt the wife in wrapping mode.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
We haven't always been friends with the Germans but they seem ok, there's been times when I was concerned about my feelings towards Jurgen Klinsman, his dive after scoring away at Sheffield Weds on his debut for Spurs still gives me a warm glow inside.
Apart from the early 20th Century World Championship (which the Germans lost 2-nil) we have had a remarkably good relationship with Germany and the states that went to make it up for centuries.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
... There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
The biggest problem trade unions face is a surfeit of cheap labour, it's an employer's market, the reason why big businesses are pro EU and Bob Crow was vehemently against it.
Big Business? Like the big businesses of Renault/Nissan and BMW and Honda and Toyota which you are adamant will not flee the UK if we leave the EU? Why would they stay when instead of the Bulgarians coming here they could go to Bulgaria?
The EU migrants I see are not 'big business' anyway. They serve me coffee.
You have a habit of getting excited quite quickly, 6th form economics will tell you that if you have a surplus of labour wages are compressed. If you'd like to explain how that's wrong I'm happy to listen.
Surfeit of Labour? Job nrs have been rising quite dramatically, where is the surfeit? One mans surfeit of labour is another mans high unemployment. You miss my point - if migration is so good for big business because it cuts their costs then there would be a big driver for them to relocate if we left the EU and moved to a restricted high cost labour market. But leavers decry the notion that leaving the EU would damage our inward investment and cost jobs.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
" We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
We haven't always been friends with the Germans but they seem ok, there's been times when I was concerned about my feelings towards Jurgen Klinsman, his dive after scoring away at Sheffield Weds on his debut for Spurs still gives me a warm glow inside.
Apart from the early 20th Century World Championship (which the Germans lost 2-nil) we have had a remarkably good relationship with Germany and the states that went to make it up for centuries.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
I take your point, I heard somebody say recently:
We enjoy fighting the French so much that we kept one war going for a hundred years.
More to the point, why wasn't a sword used? He *was* a nobleman. Or was the axe an added insult?
The executioner was Jack Ketch, he was probably drunk (not uncommon in those days).
The use of a sword for decapitation in England was very rare. Indeed aside from Anne Boleyn, I can't think of an example off the top of my head (though, this being PB, someone will be along in a moment to provide others). The use of an axe for toffs was standard, wretched poor people were hanged, and the fact that the full penalty for High Treason was not imposed was the mercy bit.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
" We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
If you are unwilling to accept that the market is the ultimate driver discussion is futile. It's why in the UK wages are low and rents are high, hence tax credits and housing benefits.
If ten people apply for one job the employer is in charge, the other way round also applies.
We had four days in France in August in a remote place with no internet access, it was bliss.
Apart from the French obviously.
Why don't you like the French? ....
Crikey, if you have to ask that question then I am afraid there is a lot of tedious spade work ahead of us before you get your answer. Let me give you a quick summary and perhaps we can fill in the details later. The French have been our enemies for the best part of a thousand years.
We haven't always been friends with the Germans but they seem ok, there's been times when I was concerned about my feelings towards Jurgen Klinsman, his dive after scoring away at Sheffield Weds on his debut for Spurs still gives me a warm glow inside.
Apart from the early 20th Century World Championship (which the Germans lost 2-nil) we have had a remarkably good relationship with Germany and the states that went to make it up for centuries.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
I take your point, I heard somebody say recently:
We enjoy fighting the French so much that we kept one war going for a hundred years.
Try as I might, they've always been nice to me.
Actually, as I was reminded the other day, by a Frenchman, we had two wars with the French that each lasted a hundred years.
I have never, save the odd waiter in Paris, had a Frenchman or lady who has been rude or nasty to me. In all my visits to the battlefields in Normandy and Northern France no one has been anything but courteous, charming and hospitable. Even in my professional life, when for I while I came into very regular contact with my opposite numbers in France, I always found them knowledgeable, thoughtful, and collegiate in approach to our mutual problems. However, that was always just a cover for their real intention which was to screw the Anglo-Saxons and the English in particular.
An old Boss of mine described dealing with the Frogs thus: They will always follow you into the revolving door of operations but always come out in front.
I am aware of everything you have said there - but it is really beside the point. I am not suggesting that we are living in a totalitarian state comparable to Nazi Germany in 1933.
It came across that way. So you need to think about how you phrase things.
It does disturb me ,however, that there is something insidious about measures intended to make it very difficult for Trade Unions to effectively carry out their functions representing workers against their employers. The balance of power has already been shifted massively in favour of employers over the last 35 years and it is now proposed to take that even further by adding to the obstacles faced by unions when contemplating industrial action
There is a reason for that. It is that in 1980 the unions had massive power which they were using very unwisely. To give only the classic example, the steel strike of 1980-81 did more damage to the British steel industry than every mistake made by every politician in Britain since the industry was first nationalised. True, the unions have less power than they did. That is not necessarily at all a bad thing. They still have freedom of association, freedom of bargaining, freedom to strike and freedom to campaign. As long as they have those, if they are even halfway competent they should be able to do a decent job in standing up for their workers.
A slave labour economy is what many - not all - Tories wish to bring about in which workers - deprived of rights and the ability to fight back - simply have to accept their lot and do as they are told.
That would, if you associated it with somebody's name, actually be a libellous comment. Do you have any evidence to support it? I cannot think of a single Conservative who has ever advocated such a thing, or even suggested that such a thing would be desirable - certainly not since the early nineteenth century. Even the Taff Vale ruling had nothing like that effect.
That is a bit naive surely! Nobody in public life is likely to openly admit such a desired outcome - but we can reasonably judge them on the effect of their policies - and indeed on how some Tories treat their staff!
Mr. 124, if you judge a whole group based on a few individuals, then Labour must have the honesty of Blair and a Phil Woolas approach to racial harmony...
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
" We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
Even the great men get it wrong sometimes. If he had said:
" We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies (save the French). Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
he would have been spot on. Even Raglan in the Crimea talked about the French being our enemies and he was one of the biggest fools the British army has ever produced - and that is against some very stiff competition.
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
Indeed so - but where or when have I suggested that a Tory is a Nazi? I never have said that - despite there having been a good few pro Nazi sympathisers in the Tory party well into the 1930s and long after the opening of concentration camps. That,however, does not mean that quite a few Tories are not prepared to pursue policies today intended to have the same effect on organized labour.
Mr. 124, if you judge a whole group based on a few individuals, then Labour must have the honesty of Blair and a Phil Woolas approach to racial harmony...
"...and the European Spirit of Mr Anthony Wedgwood Benn"
My Grandfather had great respect for the Turks he fought in Mesopotamia, honourable and brave soldiers. He didn't have much against the Germans despite fighting them on the Somme. His opinion on the French though was unprintable...
Mind you after those adventures he never wanted to go further than Scarborough again!
I can recommend this little tome to anyone wanting to understand our falling out with our German cousins. Apart from the five decades at the beginning of the last Century we have generally got on quite well.
I see the BBC pushing the "interesting" family trip to Disney land that got stopped. I don't remember hearing the same level of outcry over a white single mum of two, who has never convicted of any crime, who got the same treatment....
"Ms Lawson went to Heathrow on Sunday morning to catch a British Airways flight to Los Angeles. The Daily Mail reported that she was thought to have checked-in and cleared security when she was told she would not be allowed on the flight."
I see the BBC pushing the "interesting" family trip to Disney land that got stopped. I don't remember hearing the same level of outcry over a white single mum of two, who has never convicted of any crime, who got the same treatment....
"Ms Lawson went to Heathrow on Sunday morning to catch a British Airways flight to Los Angeles. The Daily Mail reported that she was thought to have checked-in and cleared security when she was told she would not be allowed on the flight."
It is nothing like as blatant or obvious as what the Nazis did in 1933, but arguably potentially just as dangerous and inherently wicked.
As I pointed out to you, it is not merely 'nothing like as blatant or obvious', it is not even remotely comparable. Have the unions been forced to merge into one unit under government control, led by a mass murderer? Have they been stripped of the right to strike, on penalty of imprisonment or summary execution? Have their leaders been arrested on spurious grounds? Has the government declared a permanent state of emergency? Have the workers been forced to accept massive cuts in wages so the money can go to finance George Osborne's private art collection? Have we had food rationing, and rations cut for those who speak out (Germany had rationing throughout the 1930s, in case anyone asks)? Of course not. Therefore your subclause is hyperbolic and falls as well.
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
Indeed so - but where or when have I suggested that a Tory is a Nazi? I never have said that - despite there having been a good few pro Nazi sympathisers in the Tory party well into the 1930s and long after the opening of concentration camps. That,however, does not mean that quite a few Tories are not prepared to pursue policies today intended to have the same effect on organized labour.
So they are pursuing policies intended to have the same effect, as in they are pursuing nazi policies?
I see the BBC pushing the "interesting" family trip to Disney land that got stopped. I don't remember hearing the same level of outcry over a white single mum of two, who has never convicted of any crime, who got the same treatment....
"Ms Lawson went to Heathrow on Sunday morning to catch a British Airways flight to Los Angeles. The Daily Mail reported that she was thought to have checked-in and cleared security when she was told she would not be allowed on the flight."
I see the BBC pushing the "interesting" family trip to Disney land that got stopped. I don't remember hearing the same level of outcry over a white single mum of two, who has never convicted of any crime, who got the same treatment....
"Ms Lawson went to Heathrow on Sunday morning to catch a British Airways flight to Los Angeles. The Daily Mail reported that she was thought to have checked-in and cleared security when she was told she would not be allowed on the flight."
Although she did admit in a court to taking drugs.
And the head of this family admits being ejected from Israel...The point is the US have done this before at the gate.
Yeah, I am sure they have done it far more often than just these two cases. The reason there wasn't continued interest in the Nigella case is because it was so open-and-shut.
My Grandfather had great respect for the Turks he fought in Mesopotamia, honourable and brave soldiers. He didn't have much against the Germans despite fighting them on the Somme. His opinion on the French though was unprintable...
Mind you after those adventures he never wanted to go further than Scarborough again!
I can recommend this little tome to anyone wanting to understand our falling out with our German cousins. Apart from the five decades at the beginning of the last Century we have generally got on quite well.
Thanks for that recommendation, Doc. Alas I am again under the one-in equals one-out edict from Herself (after my last trip to Leeds I got captured trying to smuggle in books that I bought at the Royal Armouries) so it may be a while until I can get hold of a copy.
My paternal grandfather had very similar views to yours as regards the Germans and the Frogs from WWI. As did my own father from WW2 (he was invalided out after escaping at Dunkirk) and his brothers (who were not directly involved in the 1940 fiasco but came up against the French later on). As indeed did my father-in-law who was wounded by the perfidious French during Dacca operation but had to smile nicely at the crew of the Richelieu in the Far East in 1945.
Anyway, it is Christmas a time of good will to all men (except the frogs, but including Surbiton) and I must away to wrap presents and eat and drink too much.
He mentions Trots thinking Tory voters will choose them instead, cultural appropriation outrage [like yoga] and prosecuting the dead as some of most egregious examples of 2015. So far...
@Plato_Says It's when I read rubbish like that from Corbyn's admirers that I realise his is a religious rather than a political cult. It's as bad as reading some of the freaky apologetics stuff from an American fundie. Who cares about things like facts and the evidence when you can have 'faith of the heart'?
Very appropriate for Christmas though - how about 'wie schönen leuchtet den Morgenstern' as their new motto? Only thing is nobody would accuse Milne, McDonnell and the Jezziah of being three wise men...
Now let's be fair, Henry V prosecuted the dead as well. It's not exactly a new thing.
The slight difference was that Henry V prosecuted the corpse of (I think) Oldcastle after he was reminded that Oldcastle was entitled to a fair trial - and hadn't received one before being hanged.
My personal favourite in that oeuvre is that after the battle of Sedgemoor, the Duke of Monmouth was executed. They subsequently realised that there was no official portrait of him, which - as a nephew of the King - was clearly unacceptable, so they sewed his head back on an painted him (with a fetching red scarf to cover the stitches)
I never knew that. One would have thought that the expression on his face post mortem would not have made the corpse an ideal subject for a portrait, especially as it allegedly took the executioner multiple blows of the axe (and possibly, finally, a knife), to get his head off.
I believe it's actually an urban myth, but I still like the story so then to ignore the disclaimer!
(The multiple blows are, of course, entirely his fault for distracting the axeman and putting him off his game)
"The problem with this is that one network in a smart marketing move, Three, has already abolished the charges for most of the major EU tourist destinations without any knock on effect on its pricing. " - as a Three customer since 2009 I can tell you this is untrue, their pricing has definitely increased since they introduced Feel at Home.
Mr. 124, if you judge a whole group based on a few individuals, then Labour must have the honesty of Blair and a Phil Woolas approach to racial harmony...
Comments
That said, some people believe there are currently two species of elephant in Africa (confusingly, they may call one of these forest elephants).
After some naughtiness in the First Punic War, elephant-riders [I forget the technical term] in the Second were equipped with large nails and mallets, in case their steed started running amok.
Mathematical Proof ...
MERRY CHRISTMAS https://t.co/UkUQU7XHoc
I hope you hit the jack-pot in the New Year with your novelties.
Wishing you a merry Christmas and looking forward to more of your erudite posts in 2016.
You might get some of the capital cost back through adding value to the house.
I shall be sure to bang on about various books as and when they're released.
Those are elephant-riders.
Promulgated by American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990, Godwin's Law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions. It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and blog comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric.
In 2012, "Godwin's Law" became an entry in the third edition of the Oxford English Dictionary
Source Wikipedia
You're a very competent historian Justin and you are clearly intelligent, but you must think about what you are writing because sometimes it shows you in a rather unflattering light. Just to compare what we do: I pointed out that Corbyn associates with Holocaust deniers. That, to my mind, is an unforgivably stupid thing for him to do. But you may notice I stopped short of saying he is a Nazi, or that he thinks like a Nazi. Because to call somebody such a thing is a very, very serious matter. There are no mainstream politicians in Britain today, from any party, who have an agenda that could be compared to the Nazi one (and that includes UKIP and the SNP). To say otherwise reveals, frankly, an unedifying lack of perspective on your political opponents.
However, I do recall when solar panels were the new thing stories about financial institutions refusing to give mortgages on houses that were equipped with them. That was a fair while ago and I never paid much attention at the time. Given the massive growth in the number of such houses I assume that panels are not still seen as a bad thing.
Short work.
Apart from the French obviously.
What I think you meant to say was that you would be offering mature, yet witty, fair criticism of books (and I hope games) as they come to your attention.
Mr. Llama, I was referring to *my* books
Got the review of the Marshal biography pencilled-in for 1 January.
As I mentioned the other day, I may well buy The Banner Saga, which releases on consoles on 12 January.
Our house seems well insulated and I think that is the first thing people should think about.
Incidentally, the same fool had his say in a BBC article about the cost of maintaining churches. As you might expect, he didn't really care about that.
The EU migrants I see are not 'big business' anyway. They serve me coffee.
Then again, the Greek government said (during the debt crisis, I hasten to add) they wanted to build an F1 circuit, and that never happened.
Mind you, there were three subjects which formed the early learning of a doctorate in the Elizabethan era, and these were therefore judged 'trivial'.
But it's only viable with a comprehensive reform of the welfare system. It makes no sense to import unskilled workers if we are paying our own folk to sit at home doing nothing. (It probably needs continued reform of the education system as well but that's a longer term project).
The fundamental issue is that we have created a generation of people many of whom lack the skills and aspiration to flourish in a competitive global economy. Either the country needs to bear that deadweight cost through transfer payments and import alternative workers, or we need to try to ensure that as many of these people work as possible, thereby reducing the burden on the state. I suspect if you recycled the savings (including reduced need for infrastructure investment) back into lower taxes then the overall net benefits of allowing more immigration would be less obvious
More to the point, why wasn't a sword used? He *was* a nobleman. Or was the axe an added insult?
https://uk.video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIvjJHxWi0YABMf03olQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZWc0dGJtBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMQ--?p=present+cats&vid=c44de7d4eea79678fa82a78352de119c&turl=http://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=WN.%2bZ%2bmqOxLg26TB%2fTs4K2KZg&pid=15.1&h=168&w=300&c=7&rs=1&rurl=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm3dm5J5r0A&tit=How+To+Wrap+A+Cat+For+Christmas&c=0&h=168&w=300&l=104&sigr=11b1prrip&sigt=10veq18l7&sigi=12rk7uin3&age=1261815866&fr2=p:s,v:v&&tt=b The perfect Christmas cat
The tradition of eating rather too much at midnight on Christmas Eve ("Noche Buena") takes some getting used to even after coming here for almost two decades! I am on guard duty. We are surrounded in people letting of lots of fire crackers etc, so my job is to sit in the kids room with my laptop and intercept anyone waking up before they go downstairs and interrupt the wife in wrapping mode.
Now granted we have fought against every proper country in Europe at some stage (except Portugal who are our BFF on the continent) but if you look closely you will find the hand of France behind the fight in the majority of cases (the Anglo-Dutch wars of the 17th Century are the most obvious exceptions, they were about money). The two wars that have really damaged the UK are those when we were allied to France.
As the Great Duke once said, "We always have been, we are and I hope we always will be detested in France".
You miss my point - if migration is so good for big business because it cuts their costs then there would be a big driver for them to relocate if we left the EU and moved to a restricted high cost labour market. But leavers decry the notion that leaving the EU would damage our inward investment and cost jobs.
The rest of us will get sloshed.
We enjoy fighting the French so much that we kept one war going for a hundred years.
Try as I might, they've always been nice to me.
The use of a sword for decapitation in England was very rare. Indeed aside from Anne Boleyn, I can't think of an example off the top of my head (though, this being PB, someone will be along in a moment to provide others). The use of an axe for toffs was standard, wretched poor people were hanged, and the fact that the full penalty for High Treason was not imposed was the mercy bit.
If you are unwilling to accept that the market is the ultimate driver discussion is futile. It's why in the UK wages are low and rents are high, hence tax credits and housing benefits.
If ten people apply for one job the employer is in charge, the other way round also applies.
I have never, save the odd waiter in Paris, had a Frenchman or lady who has been rude or nasty to me. In all my visits to the battlefields in Normandy and Northern France no one has been anything but courteous, charming and hospitable. Even in my professional life, when for I while I came into very regular contact with my opposite numbers in France, I always found them knowledgeable, thoughtful, and collegiate in approach to our mutual problems. However, that was always just a cover for their real intention which was to screw the Anglo-Saxons and the English in particular.
An old Boss of mine described dealing with the Frogs thus: They will always follow you into the revolving door of operations but always come out in front.
Very good indeed
" We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies (save the French). Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
he would have been spot on. Even Raglan in the Crimea talked about the French being our enemies and he was one of the biggest fools the British army has ever produced - and that is against some very stiff competition.
My Grandfather had great respect for the Turks he fought in Mesopotamia, honourable and brave soldiers. He didn't have much against the Germans despite fighting them on the Somme. His opinion on the French though was unprintable...
Mind you after those adventures he never wanted to go further than Scarborough again!
I can recommend this little tome to anyone wanting to understand our falling out with our German cousins. Apart from the five decades at the beginning of the last Century we have generally got on quite well.
http://tinyurl.com/oak892s
"Ms Lawson went to Heathrow on Sunday morning to catch a British Airways flight to Los Angeles. The Daily Mail reported that she was thought to have checked-in and cleared security when she was told she would not be allowed on the flight."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/nigella-lawson-banned-from-entering-united-states-after-the-celebrity-chef-admitted-taking-illegal-9234134.html
My paternal grandfather had very similar views to yours as regards the Germans and the Frogs from WWI. As did my own father from WW2 (he was invalided out after escaping at Dunkirk) and his brothers (who were not directly involved in the 1940 fiasco but came up against the French later on). As indeed did my father-in-law who was wounded by the perfidious French during Dacca operation but had to smile nicely at the crew of the Richelieu in the Far East in 1945.
Anyway, it is Christmas a time of good will to all men (except the frogs, but including Surbiton) and I must away to wrap presents and eat and drink too much.
I wish a merry Christmas to all on PB.
(The multiple blows are, of course, entirely his fault for distracting the axeman and putting him off his game)