OT, but would like to garner the combined wisdom of PB for a hypothetical. Would the financial gains of abolishing gift aid be worth the political cost in a future budget?
There was a hell of a backlash when the coalition proposed limiting the total which could be claimed:
So, quite a high political cost, I expect. </blockquote
Surely if there was ever an easy time to put 2,3 or 4p on petrol this would be it - could even be a temp measure which would unwind as/when petrol goes back over say 120p?
Rob Hutton Been so long since anyone except the Labour Party attacked the Labour Party that I'd forgotten the Tories knew how.. https://t.co/Y5mt34pxVI
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
according to BSE all my goods are cheaper because I'm in the EU.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
Or send people a shredder to put all their 'Britain Stronger in Europe' literature through.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
Or send people a shredder to put all their 'Britain Stronger in Europe' literature through.
You only have to read threads here to see that political people think that their message is stronger if they pretend they are not the ones delivering it or that they are neutral... if that is so it might be a good tactic for LEAVE to use... let REMAIN send BIG GOVT literature telling you what to think while simply saying "Read the papers, watch the news, see for yourselves what is going on in the EU"
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
even odder they have quote from Allen a company director in Warwickshire claiming the EU allows him to access his customers round the world.
Problem is the bloke runs a local cider mill and if he exports anything I'd be little short of amazed.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Excellent dead squirrel lobbing.
Don't know what that means, sorry.
It means you are deflecting from this poisoning case.
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
To be fair, one of Britains most famous literary and cinemotographic creations is "Licensed to Kill" by Her Majesty. He seems to tackle his task with some relish, but on the other hand is a fictional figure...
OT, but would like to garner the combined wisdom of PB for a hypothetical. Would the financial gains of abolishing gift aid be worth the political cost in a future budget?
There was a hell of a backlash when the coalition proposed limiting the total which could be claimed:
A shame, but I think I had come to the same conclusion re: Gift aid - it really annoys me when people do it and feel extra-virtuous about it - despite it taking tax away from the treasury.
I think the idea of a 'petrol price stablizer' - a windfall tax when oil prices are as low as now that is unwound automatically if prices go over a certain price; it could be justified from a Green perspective, too.
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
Or send people a shredder to put all their 'Britain Stronger in Europe' literature through.
You only have to read threads here to see that political people think that their message is stronger if they pretend they are not the ones delivering it or that they are neutral... if that is so it might be a good tactic for LEAVE to use... let REMAIN send BIG GOVT literature telling you what to think while simply saying "Read the papers, watch the news, see for yourselves what is going on in the EU"
It's a cute idea but I don't think it would work. I think it would be portrayed as Leave not having any money, and they would end up blinking first and playing catch up in the junk mail stakes. I also suspect the papers and television, as in the last general election and euros with UKIP, will be on full attack mode against 'Leave', so there would be little point in telling people to give credence to what they will see in the broadcast and print media.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
To be fair, one of Britains most famous literary and cinemotographic creations is "Licensed to Kill" by Her Majesty. He seems to tackle his task with some relish, but on the other hand is a fictional figure...
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
I know nothing about that case, and I mock conspiracy theorists all the time (mostly because most conspiracies require the willing participation or at least complicity of far far too many people to make bribery or vested interests strong enough to manage it with our inefficient government machinery - it is simply not usually believable not because the powers that be would not want to do it, but because their incompetence or the extent of it would prevent them being able), but I am quite certain our security services have tortured and murdered people, or contracted such things out. Don't they all? Their opponents certainly do. And a common argument tactic seems to be to insist they do not do that which is alleged to be wrong, then admit they do it but in a somehow legal way, then that it is not legal but should be made legal.
Bottom line, I'm sure our services get up to shady stuff, and our government pretends not to notice as much as it can. But because of our comparitively more open, challenging and liberal society, what they can get away with not noticing is less than, say, Putins type of regime.
With us, it's hard to even unofficially encourage such behaviours at the deepest levels, so if it does happen, it probably happens rarely due to that constraint.
"Sami Abu-Yusuf, of the Salafist Cologne mosque, provoked outrage when he reportedly said society needed to "react properly" to the mass rapes, adding people should not "add fuel to the fire".
He argued that the women out celebrating New Year's Eve were to blame for the abhorrent events that ensued because of their state of dress, adding: "It is not surprising the men wanted to attack them.""
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Excellent dead squirrel lobbing.
Don't know what that means, sorry.
It means you are deflecting from this poisoning case.
Not at all. We have seen a dark and ugly side of the Russian state exposed. I simply suggest it is naive to think that other state actors don't behave in the same way, and that fulminating against it therefore seems hollow.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
I am a bit sceptical about Afghan "wedding parties". Afghan weddings are not matches of besotted youngsters in the presence of adoring parents. They are typically forcible marriages of young women to older men that they have never met before as a method of cementing clan alliances, often with nefarious intent.
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
Unless it's escaped your attention, Putin and chums aren't too bothered about collateral deaths in Syria. How many civilians have their air force killed so far in the bombing campaign?
And it's more by luck than no-one else suffered poisoning in London. I know a few people who received contamination.
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
More and more I am thinking that the leave campaign shouldn't send any leaflets etc, but just say to people whenever they are on tv, "Read the papers, looks what is happening in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and all the places where the "refugees" that Merkel encouraged into Europe.. why would you want to be governed by her?"
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
Or send people a shredder to put all their 'Britain Stronger in Europe' literature through.
You only have to read threads here to see that political people think that their message is stronger if they pretend they are not the ones delivering it or that they are neutral... if that is so it might be a good tactic for LEAVE to use... let REMAIN send BIG GOVT literature telling you what to think while simply saying "Read the papers, watch the news, see for yourselves what is going on in the EU"
It's a cute idea but I don't think it would work. I think it would be portrayed as Leave not having any money, and they would end up blinking first and playing catch up in the junk mail stakes. I also suspect the papers and television, as in the last general election and euros with UKIP, will be on full attack mode against 'Leave', so there would be little point in telling people to give credence to what they will see in the broadcast and print media.
Yes perhaps you are right, although it may give LEAVE the moral high ground when people accuse both sides of trading spurious stats
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
I am a bit sceptical about Afghan "wedding parties". Afghan weddings are not matches of besotted youngsters in the presence of adoring parents. They are typically forcible marriages of young women to older men that they have never met before as a method of cementing clan alliances, often with nefarious intent.
Bradley Manning blew the whistle by releasing a video of a US chopper in Iraq gleefully mowing down any civilians in its path and providing commentary at the same time. US drone strike operators call children 'fun-size terrorists'. Trying to exonerate the US from wading in 'collaterol damage' puts you on something of a sticky wicket.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
I am a bit sceptical about Afghan "wedding parties". Afghan weddings are not matches of besotted youngsters in the presence of adoring parents. They are typically forcible marriages of young women to older men that they have never met before as a method of cementing clan alliances, often with nefarious intent.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
I am a bit sceptical about Afghan "wedding parties". Afghan weddings are not matches of besotted youngsters in the presence of adoring parents. They are typically forcible marriages of young women to older men that they have never met before as a method of cementing clan alliances, often with nefarious intent.
So, better dead than wed, in your hippocratic opinion ?
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
There is almost ZERO moral difference between Obama and Putin, in this respect. Both approve extra judicial killings of perceived enemies, its just that Obama does it nice and neatly in 3rd world countries which can't complain and have less CCTV, and Putin did it in London.
The one difference I can see is that Obama is quite content with collateral deaths - wiping out entire wedding parties by mistake, say - but Putin at least slotted his one target and no one else.
It's all realpolitik and great power gameplaying. We are not morally superior, in this respect, and we better get used to it, as China rises, and decides to drone a few people in Poland. How could we object?
Unless it's escaped your attention, Putin and chums aren't too bothered about collateral deaths in Syria. How many civilians have their air force killed so far in the bombing campaign?
You tell us - no-one actually has credible figures from the ground, but so many keep getting produced and repeated verbatim, it's quite remarkable.
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
Btw are there any other PB-ers who have changed their views on a fundamental issue during their time on the site? I reckon it's a good thing.
I've also changed my mind on electoral reform. Thanks to PB. Used to be opposed. Now I support.
I fundamentally changed my views on the Lib Dems when they went into coalition. I still think history will be kind to Nick Clegg - he really did put country before party. Whether he meant to or not, that's still worthy of respect.
Other than that; not really. I used to be grudgingly anti-EU but not really that bothered, but as we've iterated through treaties & enlargement, I'm now quite passionately against the whole concept of a federal Europe, and am an ardent BOOer.
I'm just waiting for an opportunity to do something practical in terms of the campaign (intellectual wankery about the pros and cons of EEA on here don't count ).
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Straw man argument. I was responding to MonikerDiCanio's moronic claim that there was comparability between the murder of Litvinenko and the killing of Jihadi John. There is no comparison.
War falls outside the Hippocratic oath, and war always involves civilian casualties. Military terms of engagement try to keep these to a minimum in civilised countries, but they will never be zero. In the fog of war there will also be mistakes made.
Has everyone on PB now signed up as a Corbynista and want to shower Taliban weddings with rose petals so that they are nice to us?
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
Straw man argument. I was responding to MonikerDiCanio's moronic claim that there was comparability between the murder of Litvinenko and the killing of Jihadi John. There is no comparison.
It is not a staw man argument, it is a direct response to your second paragraph, in which you highlighted the implausibility of British state actors having someone killed for political expediency.
War falls outside the Hippocratic oath, and war always involves civilian casualties. Military terms of engagement try to keep these to a minimum in civilised countries, but they will never be zero. In the fog of war there will also be mistakes made.
Has everyone on PB now signed up as a Corbynista and want to shower Taliban weddings with rose petals so that they are nice to us?
in case it's escaped your attention, America is not actually at war, at the moment. Obama is just slowly and methodically droning people he consider's America's "enemies", in foreign lands. Just vaporising them, with the touch of a button, along with any wives, children, dancing wedding people, who happen to be standing nearby.
Do I approve of what he's doing? Yes, VERY reluctantly, I loathe Islamists and want them all killed.
That said, can I condemn Russia when it acts, similarly, but with less collateral damage, in its own perceived interests? It's logically very difficult. If not impossible.
War falls outside the Hippocratic oath, and war always involves civilian casualties. Military terms of engagement try to keep these to a minimum in civilised countries, but they will never be zero. In the fog of war there will also be mistakes made.
Has everyone on PB now signed up as a Corbynista and want to shower Taliban weddings with rose petals so that they are nice to us?
in case it's escaped your attention, America is not actually at war, at the moment. Obama is just slowly and methodically droning people he consider's America's "enemies", in foreign lands. Just vaporising them, with the touch of a button, along with any wives, children, dancing wedding people, who happen to be standing nearby.
Do I approve of what he's doing? Yes, VERY reluctantly, I loathe Islamists and want them all killed.
That said, can I condemn Russia when it acts, similarly, but with less collateral damage, in its own perceived interests? It's logically very difficult. If not impossible.
It is only difficult if you consider all players as morally equivalent. If you believe in the superiority of western civilisation and culture then it is fairly simple. For them it is terrorism, for us nessecary vermin control, provided it is open and democratically arrived at.
I never had you down as a post modern cultural relativist.
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
Post of the day!
A workman is only as good as his tools and materials. And Powell provides plenty of the latter.
Rather than listening to Hall’s bureaucratic platitudes – as sincere as a prostitute’s smile – consider the record of what happened to BBC journalists who told the truth about Savile.
Liz MacKean: Resigned. ‘When the Savile scandal broke,’ she told me, ‘the BBC tried to smear my reputation. They said they had banned the film because Meirion and I had produced shoddy journalism... I went because I knew I was never going to appear on screen again.’
Meirion Jones: Took redundancy after his job on Newsnight mysteriously vanished...
Panorama:... BBC managers shifted Tom Giles, the editor of Panorama, out of news. Peter Horrocks...resigned to ‘find new challenges’. Clive Edwards, who as commissioning editor ...was demoted.
No surprise that as the oil price bounces, so do share markets. WTI back up to nearly $30 and the Dow has pretty much cleared all yesterday's losses.
We were of course here on Tuesday with the archetypal dead cat bounce so it remains to see where the market will go tomorrow if there is another downward push on oil.
On topic, watching the anti-Trump GOP media try to latch on to another hopeful only for that hopeful to sink almost at once is now becoming boring. Bush, Fiorina, Carson, Rubio, Kasich and Cruz have all had their moment in the spotlight but Trump still looks to be in the driving seat.
I don't think I've had a fundamental change of view from pb.com though it's a source for argument (among many). I suspect my views are more nuanced as a result though being in a minority doesn't bother me in the least. After all, a majority is only the largest number of people wrong about any given issue at any given time.
Rather than listening to Hall’s bureaucratic platitudes – as sincere as a prostitute’s smile – consider the record of what happened to BBC journalists who told the truth about Savile. Liz MacKean: Resigned.... Meirion Jones: Took redundancy after his job on Newsnight mysteriously vanished... (on) Panorama:... BBC managers shifted Tom Giles, the editor of Panorama, out of news. Peter Horrocks...resigned to ‘find new challenges’. Clive Edwards, who as commissioning editor ...was demoted.
Shocking but not surprising. The BBC is simply too big and some folk regard it as a religion.
Suddenly, but very perceptively Britain's EU negotiations appear to have become bogged down. Possibly this is all part of the game. But it does seem that SkyBet's 12/5 odds against the referendum being held in 2017 look better value than their measly 3/10 odds on it taking place this year. As ever, DYOR.
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
Evening all,
Well the socialists Left do love their factions. Popcorn again.
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
Milne is wasted in a country without a cabinet portfolio for Ideology or Public Enlightenment
Suddenly, but very perceptively Britain's EU negotiations appear to have become bogged down. Possibly this is all part of the game. But it does seem that SkyBet's 12/5 odds against the referendum being held in 2017 look better value than their measly 3/10 odds on it taking place this year. As ever, DYOR.
Is a referendum in Oct/Nov/Dec 2016 a possibility or does it clash with any elections?
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
Milne is wasted in a country without a cabinet portfolio for Ideology or Public Enlightenment
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
Unless it's escaped your attention, Putin and chums aren't too bothered about collateral deaths in Syria. How many civilians have their air force killed so far in the bombing campaign?
And it's more by luck than no-one else suffered poisoning in London. I know a few people who received contamination.
And.... how many died in America's pointless, indeed utterly calamitous war on Iraq? 100,000? 500,000?
It's ridiculous. We lost the moral high ground, re Russia, the moment we bombed Baghdad. They have an autocratic regime which kills enemies abroad. America has a slightly more democratic regime, which kills a lot MORE people abroad.
Let's get back to realpolitik. Islamism is the enemy, not Russia.
Since you hate muslims you should be pleased to know that far and away the most deaths in Iraq were and are caused by muslims killing muslims. In other words an Iraqi civil war and or invasion by other muslim terrorist groups. Spouting rubbish figures hardly helps your loony and increasingly tiresome rantings. Iraq Body Count puts combatant deaths at about 70,000 and civilian deaths at between 150000 and 170000 since 2003. This is much lower than the reported civilian deaths in Syria over a much shorter time.
Islam is a stupid religion; its chances of gaining a political or violent military world hegemony is minimal as is its chances of infliucting vast casualties on the UK population.
He's right up there in the idiot stakes in my view. However surely there must be some measure of economic pundits success that one might access. Perhaps there isn't such a thing?
Anyway my opinion of him is that he couldn't predict a sunny day on mercury, but I'd be the first to admit that's based on simple prejudice.
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
She's kinda my MP during the week.
People speak very highly of her.
Lucy Powell is the least of Labour's worries right now.
David " five million unemployed " Blanchflower is far beyond a " credibility crisis " , he's an empirically proven imbecile. It's a mystery to me as to why The Guardian should continue to publish his garbage.
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
Milne is wasted in a country without a cabinet portfolio for Ideology or Public Enlightenment
A Milne measures the fall in energy demand when Corbyn gets up to speak at PMQs.
Perhaps The King's Fund is a loony left organisation too, or it could just be that the government's claims to be generous to the NHS are a load of hot air?
He's right up there in the idiot stakes in my view. However surely there must be some measure of economic pundits success that one might access. Perhaps there isn't such a thing?
Anyway my opinion of him is that he couldn't predict a sunny day on mercury, but I'd be the first to admit that's based on simple prejudice.
They don't tend to put quantities into the predictions, so its easy to wriggle.
I think there'd be some merit in someone organising a scorecard for these loud mouths. 5 questions a month, out % chances and Brier score the shit out of it.
I'm reading the Litvinenko report. I hadn't realised that this was the second attempt on Litvinenko's life - the first having taken place a couple of weeks earlier.....leaving a trail of radiation across London too:
He was a wanted criminal in Russia and should have been extradited there.
So...we should extradite to Russia when Russia won't extradite to us.....?
He was a Russian and Israeli citizen, why should we have granted him asylum in our country, especially when it damages our national interest and relations with important foreign states, especially given his proven criminality?
If you can't tell the difference between a vocal political opponent and an armed jihadist intent on murdering their fellow citizens then there really is no hope for you.
Perhaps you feel Cameron or Corbyn would be justified in having some of their disgruntled back benchers murdered on the quiet because that would be a far more accurate comparison.
If the British secret services had/have performed extra judicial killings, they are unlikely to shout it from the rooftops, and those who raise questions are likely to be vociferously shouted down as 'conspiracy theorists'. The murkiness surrounding the demise of Dr David Kelly springs to mind.
To be fair, one of Britains most famous literary and cinemotographic creations is "Licensed to Kill" by Her Majesty. He seems to tackle his task with some relish, but on the other hand is a fictional figure...
Boyski83 thinks they're documentary films.
The pathetic moral equivocation by the usual suspects, and a few more besides who make their excuses by descending into crass hysteria, is disgusting. They drag the website into the gutter.
@MrHarryCole: Hear Kat Fletcher is not a happy bunny either. Sources say 3 factions now in Team Corbyn: Milne/Fisher V old guard V the Livingstonions. : (
Milne is wasted in a country without a cabinet portfolio for Ideology or Public Enlightenment
A Milne measures the fall in energy demand when Corbyn gets up to speak at PMQs.
LOL. A Thornberry is a unit of measurement of Labour poll falls.
He's right up there in the idiot stakes in my view. However surely there must be some measure of economic pundits success that one might access. Perhaps there isn't such a thing?
Anyway my opinion of him is that he couldn't predict a sunny day on mercury, but I'd be the first to admit that's based on simple prejudice.
which is ironic, as that's the same as his 'predictions'
And here's Jeremy Hunt in his own words to the Chairman of the Health Select Committee - it's a reasonably good and accurate letter. You will note that it nowhere mentions "junior doctors" at all. So what has the last 8 weeks been all about? As a doctor quoted in Private Eye put it we have a "macho tit of a health secretary [who] enjoys confrontation."
Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons.
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
I believe she was quite good at "taking decisions" behind the scenes.
Which sounds like damning with faint praise, but apparently it was welcome in comparison to how endlessly most of Miliband's advisers dithered about taking a firm decision or stance on anything.
Personally, I don't think the EdStone might a slight bit of differerence to the result, but I think the endless line of awful TV interviews by shadow cabinet members (including, as you rightly say, countless entries from Powell) throughout the campaign probably added to the sense that they weren't competent.
Comments
Been so long since anyone except the Labour Party attacked the Labour Party that I'd forgotten the Tories knew how.. https://t.co/Y5mt34pxVI
Britain Stronger in Europe are first off the mark, though the claims made are a stretchier than elastic.
LEAVE by stealth!
and cheaper
I think that line was written by french farmers.
Was it online or phone?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business
;-)
Problem is the bloke runs a local cider mill and if he exports anything I'd be little short of amazed.
Much more powerful message when sources are seen as impartial or authoritative.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/achenbach-text
I think the idea of a 'petrol price stablizer' - a windfall tax when oil prices are as low as now that is unwound automatically if prices go over a certain price; it could be justified from a Green perspective, too.
Bottom line, I'm sure our services get up to shady stuff, and our government pretends not to notice as much as it can. But because of our comparitively more open, challenging and liberal society, what they can get away with not noticing is less than, say, Putins type of regime.
With us, it's hard to even unofficially encourage such behaviours at the deepest levels, so if it does happen, it probably happens rarely due to that constraint.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/636537/Cologne-police-ignored-200-migrant-sex-attacks-four-hours-respond-rape-reports
"Sami Abu-Yusuf, of the Salafist Cologne mosque, provoked outrage when he reportedly said society needed to "react properly" to the mass rapes, adding people should not "add fuel to the fire".
He argued that the women out celebrating New Year's Eve were to blame for the abhorrent events that ensued because of their state of dress, adding: "It is not surprising the men wanted to attack them.""
I assume. Otherwise how she has held and holds positions of at least some influence and which require her to speak to the media despite a calvacade of catastrophically bad but hilarious media performances, makes no sense at all.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12112103/Jeremy-Corbyns-Labour-Party-is-posher-than-Tony-Blairs.html
And it's more by luck than no-one else suffered poisoning in London. I know a few people who received contamination.
http://news.sky.com/story/1627140/ugandan-warlord-ordered-civilians-be-eaten
People speak very highly of her.
Other than that; not really. I used to be grudgingly anti-EU but not really that bothered, but as we've iterated through treaties & enlargement, I'm now quite passionately against the whole concept of a federal Europe, and am an ardent BOOer.
I'm just waiting for an opportunity to do something practical in terms of the campaign (intellectual wankery about the pros and cons of EEA on here don't count
War falls outside the Hippocratic oath, and war always involves civilian casualties. Military terms of engagement try to keep these to a minimum in civilised countries, but they will never be zero. In the fog of war there will also be mistakes made.
Has everyone on PB now signed up as a Corbynista and want to shower Taliban weddings with rose petals so that they are nice to us?
They've totally ruined two of my heroes, Sir Mick Jagger and Alan Rickman, for me.
Like the 'dancing Iraqis'?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3331503/US-military-drops-leaflets-warning-civilian-truck-drivers-45-minutes-airstrike.html
One might almost think they didn't want to attack ISIS.
'Lucy Powell is an amazing constituency MP and razor sharp adviser behind the scenes in the Commons'
Wasn't she one of Ed's adviser's !
I never had you down as a post modern cultural relativist.
6 part beginners guide to neoliberalism
know about your enemy, we need change quick!
have a listen here!
https://t.co/82UsRUgrhI
#Corbyn4PM
No surprise that as the oil price bounces, so do share markets. WTI back up to nearly $30 and the Dow has pretty much cleared all yesterday's losses.
We were of course here on Tuesday with the archetypal dead cat bounce so it remains to see where the market will go tomorrow if there is another downward push on oil.
On topic, watching the anti-Trump GOP media try to latch on to another hopeful only for that hopeful to sink almost at once is now becoming boring. Bush, Fiorina, Carson, Rubio, Kasich and Cruz have all had their moment in the spotlight but Trump still looks to be in the driving seat.
I don't think I've had a fundamental change of view from pb.com though it's a source for argument (among many). I suspect my views are more nuanced as a result though being in a minority doesn't bother me in the least. After all, a majority is only the largest number of people wrong about any given issue at any given time.
But it does seem that SkyBet's 12/5 odds against the referendum being held in 2017 look better value than their measly 3/10 odds on it taking place this year.
As ever, DYOR.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/20/bank-of-england-missing-financial-crisis-interest-rates
Well the socialists Left do love their factions. Popcorn again.
And picking arbitrary points in time pre 2008 to foretell the end of the world.
Can you please hold the EU ref in the second half of 2016.
Thanks,
A. Punter
Iraq Body Count puts combatant deaths at about 70,000 and civilian deaths at between 150000 and 170000 since 2003. This is much lower than the reported civilian deaths in Syria over a much shorter time.
Islam is a stupid religion; its chances of gaining a political or violent military world hegemony is minimal as is its chances of infliucting vast casualties on the UK population.
Their and the Western powers' bombing campaign in Syria is not even remotely comparable.
Anyway my opinion of him is that he couldn't predict a sunny day on mercury, but I'd be the first to admit that's based on simple prejudice.
as the rag is given away with his shopping over £5 at Waitrose.
Nate Silver looks like he's come round to the idea of the Donald being GOP nominee.
I shall be making further enquiries about a nuclear shelter in my garden in that case. As well as losing a small stack on GOP primary.
Pffft. What the eff does Nate Silver know about American politics?
http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2016/01/how-does-nhs-spending-compare-health-spending-internationally
I think there'd be some merit in someone organising a scorecard for these loud mouths. 5 questions a month, out % chances and Brier score the shit out of it.
Trump ahead in North Carolina, but it is very close:
Trump 27
Cruz 23
Rubio 10
Carson 7
Bush 4
Christie 4
.@JohnRentoul Aww you got me. Well if you don't fancy a pie, how about a colourless bar? https://t.co/3mbIhUyOVe
Glen OHara
Here's some more gloom for you: if another recession, the UK is much, much worse equipped to fight back in policy terms than in 2007.
@PlatoSays Much higher debt and deficit in public sector, no room to cut interest rates, QE alr ramped up.
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/Health/Correspondence/2015-16/Letter-from- the-Secretary-of-State-for-Health-to-the-Chair-on-seven-day NHS hospital services.pdf
Which sounds like damning with faint praise, but apparently it was welcome in comparison to how endlessly most of Miliband's advisers dithered about taking a firm decision or stance on anything.
Personally, I don't think the EdStone might a slight bit of differerence to the result, but I think the endless line of awful TV interviews by shadow cabinet members (including, as you rightly say, countless entries from Powell) throughout the campaign probably added to the sense that they weren't competent.