OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
Lol, where's that one SLAB guy who was banging on about how the people of Scotland wouldn't vote Tory.
I think the churn looks like SNP -> Con and Lab/LD -> Green. There might be some Tartan Tories who are taking fright from Nicola's top up taxes and deciding to vote for the only low tax party in Scotland.
I realise that many Leavers struggle with such points but to go back to basics, it's an ad hominem attack to attack someone who puts forward an argument rather than the argument itself. It's not an ad hominem attack to make an argument, even if you are fortunate enough to be highly regarded and with a long track record in the public eye.
This is an hominem attack in itself, of course. "LEAVERS are stupid"
What grotesque clowns pb's REMAINIANS have made of themselves. Quite remarkable.
What I find most amusing is how many Leavers work extensively abroad, in well paid jobs, often married to foreign nationals - yet are stupid little Englanders... Okaaay.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
This post is so deliciously out of touch and elitist that I wonder if its a troll.
The thought of ordinary British people, struggling to make ends meet, being swayed by letters from their stockbrokers.
Labour is now a party so hideously bound up with needing the support of the Muslim vote that it is prepared to abandon the Jews to suffer anti-semitism from within its own ranks.
What would Ed Miliband's dad say?
A thread on the Labour Party's demise over the last twenty years would be fascinating - the fall-out from Blair's era - devolution, immigration, Gordon... it's crushing them everywhere. And Mandy et al thought they were so clever at the time. Well they did nicely for themselves, and failed their Party.
Cameron is sailing the same path today.
To be fair, Brown predated the Blair era. Indeed, he never really got over the fact that he was passed over (cheated out of) the leadership in 1994, having been heir apparent until Blair outshone him at (for Brown) the wrong moment.
Ominous, have Cameron and Osborne strengthened Labour to the detriment of their own party?
Michael Crick Deal on £1.7m union funding of Labour in Europe campaign was struck in meetings between union leaders and ministers
Michael Crick Union leaders told ministers they hadn't time or resources to fight for Remain campaign as had to devote efforts & money to fight TU Bill
The EU comes before British interests for Cameron and Osborne.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
...
Well invest in European shares instead, if you believe that.
Are labour stalling on Shah for fear of upsetting certain people who may be voting in the London Mayoral?
It certainly does look like it. Zac has a chance to hit Khan hard with this and force him to condemn her and call for the suspension of her whip, if Khan doesn't he confirms all of mud slinging might have something to it.
You know what the response will be...RACCCCCISSSTTTTTTTTTTT....
Labour is now a party so hideously bound up with needing the support of the Muslim vote that it is prepared to abandon the Jews to suffer anti-semitism from within its own ranks.
What would Ed Miliband's dad say?
A thread on the Labour Party's demise over the last twenty years would be fascinating - the fall-out from Blair's era - devolution, immigration, Gordon... it's crushing them everywhere. And Mandy et al thought they were so clever at the time. Well they did nicely for themselves, and failed their Party.
Cameron is sailing the same path today.
I wonder if a Welsh meltdown is in the offing for labour next.
How are UKIP's prospects? Labour losing to them is just delicious.
Politics since May 2015 has almost been too much fun. The thought of Zac, LEAVE and Trump winning would be spoiling me too much. A tory UKIP coalition in the Senydd would be the cherry on top of a very big cake, but I think that's a step too far, for now.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
This post is so deliciously out of touch and elitist that I wonder if its a troll.
The thought of ordinary British people, struggling to make ends meet, being swayed by letters from their stockbrokers.
Shame I missed Mr. Pulpstar's first article (and ensuing discussion) *and* Mr. Royale's post-debate report.
There's been almost nothing about the local elections, yet they can't be far away at all...
I haven't seen one poster in Woking. We've had a few leaflets through the door.
Interestingly in Woking the whole council is up for re-election. There are 10 wards with three councillors in each. Usually they elect one at a time on a rolling four year cycle, but with the whole lot up for election we are in the unusual position (for Woking, anyway) of having multiple candidates from the same party.
Each voter will have up to three votes and it is still first past the post. This slightly concerns me because it puts those parties with fewer candidates than positions to be filled at a potential disadvantage. We have only one Ukip candidate - who I will be voting for - but I'm slightly worried that some people will think they have to use all three votes and won't realize that all votes count as one and they are voting against themselves. It probably won't make any difference as I expect each ward to return either three Tory or three Lib Dems.
What's funny is that it had been proposed for the council to be elected like this every four years rather than electing the council in thirds in three out of every four years. However, one councillor got confused and voted the wrong way to we are going to revert to the old system. Apparently they'll decide the order in which the candidates have to stand for election again based on the number of votes they receive this time. So the candidate that comes third goes first, etc.
Lots of councils are elected this way, with one election every four years and multiple party candidates in each ward.
Lol, where's that one SLAB guy who was banging on about how the people of Scotland wouldn't vote Tory.
I think the churn looks like SNP -> Con and Lab/LD -> Green. There might be some Tartan Tories who are taking fright from Nicola's top up taxes and deciding to vote for the only low tax party in Scotland.
Best to be an SNP -> SCON switcher to keep them all honest.
Please point out the short-term predictions that you claim turned out to be incorrect. Just one will do.
You have completely swallowed the Kool-Aid. There's no point debating with you as your mind is closed to rational discussion.
Morris_Dancer claimed that the 4th IPCC report included some short-term temperature predictions which were completely wrong. I disputed that, and asked him to point out the predictions that he is referring to. How is that not rational discussion?
Apparently Shah had her fingers crossed so doesnt count.
FFS she has to be suspended at least.
Failing that, Shah should be kicked off the Home Affairs Select Committee, set up to investigate rising anti-Semitism in Britain. - She's now compromised beyond belief.
Forced academisation is one Conservative policy I really don't understand the purpose of - particularly with good schools run by decent LEAs.
I think the Gov't has realised this and so is allowing LEAs themselves to become providers of services through the academy structure rather than the old one.
In other words, Morgan has made a right mess and No.10 policy people are trying to find a way out of it. She's gone in reshuffle. How about sending her to sort out the doctors?
No, I think Hunt is doing an excellent job in health, not shirking from the fight to impose the neccessary new terms on Doctors.
So I agree with the Gov't on health, and disagree with them on forced academisation. I'm guessing that's a small venn diagram - but my opinions are my own and its why I'm not in any party despite being more politically interested than most.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of strike action, why do you see the new terms as "necessary"? Is it that the existing contract makes it impossible to deploy doctors in the manner which is desired to go to a "7-day" model, or that paying them on that contract makes it undesirably expensive? I've seen a lot of doctor bashing, some of it probably justified, but nothing that actually makes it clear why Hunt thought it was a good idea to start the fight in the first place.
Sigh!
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
Are labour stalling on Shah for fear of upsetting certain people who may be voting in the London Mayoral?
It certainly does look like it. Zac has a chance to hit Khan hard with this and force him to condemn her and call for the suspension of her whip, if Khan doesn't he confirms all of mud slinging might have something to it.
You know what the response will be...RACCCCCISSSTTTTTTTTTTT....
Not really, Khan has said he is the British Muslim who will take on the extremists or something like that, well here is his chance. In his own party there is an anti-Semitic extremist, take her on and give her both barrels unlike your leader.
@rowenamason: Corbyn spokesman says he will not suspend whip from Naz Shah because she's showing with words&actions she did not mean antiSemitic comments
Absolutely nothing to do with jeopardising Labour's chances of winning the London mayoralty which are entirely dependant on the Muslim vote.
When will Liverpool ever accept the fact that it was Liverpool fans who crushed other Liverpool fans to death...no one else
Not once in the coverage of the past 48 hours have I seen any reference to the trauma the Forest fans suffered that day. The Forest fans who managed to get into Hillsborough in a calm, sensible way that the Liverpool fans somehow didn't...
My brother in law was a Forest fan at Hillsborough that day. Of course this was before the era of mobile phones and it took many hours before the news made clear that it was the Liverpool end where people had been dying. I wouldn't wish the agony of not knowing that my sister and many others went through that day on anyone. After the event of course it seems mild compared to the suffering of the families who lost loved ones but at the time it was truly horrible.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
My stockbroker is neutral, the founder is in favour of Brexit mind -
Forced academisation is one Conservative policy I really don't understand the purpose of - particularly with good schools run by decent LEAs.
I think the Gov't has realised this and so is allowing LEAs themselves to become providers of services through the academy structure rather than the old one.
In other words, Morgan has made a right mess and No.10 policy people are trying to find a way out of it. She's gone in reshuffle. How about sending her to sort out the doctors?
No, I think Hunt is doing an excellent job in health, not shirking from the fight to impose the neccessary new terms on Doctors.
So I agree with the Gov't on health, and disagree with them on forced academisation. I'm guessing that's a small venn diagram - but my opinions are my own and its why I'm not in any party despite being more politically interested than most.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of strike action, why do you see the new terms as "necessary"? Is it that the existing contract makes it impossible to deploy doctors in the manner which is desired to go to a "7-day" model, or that paying them on that contract makes it undesirably expensive? I've seen a lot of doctor bashing, some of it probably justified, but nothing that actually makes it clear why Hunt thought it was a good idea to start the fight in the first place.
Sigh!
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
I also agree with that... can any of Hunt's supporters help me out with an explanation of the benefits of these changes?
Shame I missed Mr. Pulpstar's first article (and ensuing discussion) *and* Mr. Royale's post-debate report.
There's been almost nothing about the local elections, yet they can't be far away at all...
I haven't seen one poster in Woking. We've had a few leaflets through the door.
Interestingly in Woking the whole council is up for re-election. There are 10 wards with three councillors in each. Usually they elect one at a time on a rolling four year cycle, but with the whole lot up for election we are in the unusual position (for Woking, anyway) of having multiple candidates from the same party.
Each voter will have up to three votes and it is still first past the post. This slightly concerns me because it puts those parties with fewer candidates than positions to be filled at a potential disadvantage. We have only one Ukip candidate - who I will be voting for - but I'm slightly worried that some people will think they have to use all three votes and won't realize that all votes count as one and they are voting against themselves. It probably won't make any difference as I expect each ward to return either three Tory or three Lib Dems.
What's funny is that it had been proposed for the council to be elected like this every four years rather than electing the council in thirds in three out of every four years. However, one councillor got confused and voted the wrong way to we are going to revert to the old system. Apparently they'll decide the order in which the candidates have to stand for election again based on the number of votes they receive this time. So the candidate that comes third goes first, etc.
Lots of councils are elected this way, with one election every four years and multiple party candidates in each ward.
I'm aware of this, what I'm slightly concerned about is that the good people of Woking aren't used to it. I had to think about it for a couple of minutes before the significance of Ukip (and the Greens in my ward) only fielding one or two candidates per ward struck me. Like I said, it won't make any difference to who gets elected but I think the authorities should make it clear that you don't have to use all three votes.
Please point out the short-term predictions that you claim turned out to be incorrect. Just one will do.
You have completely swallowed the Kool-Aid. There's no point debating with you as your mind is closed to rational discussion.
Morris_Dancer claimed that the 4th IPCC report included some short-term temperature predictions which were completely wrong. I disputed that, and asked him to point out the predictions that he is referring to. How is that not rational discussion?
You'll find this site is home to what most would call the 'hard right'. Climate change is a figment of lefties imagination. Science doesn't come into it. If scientists had any talent they'd be tax avoiding businessmen working out of Panama.
If you place Nigel Lawson at the centre of the political spectrum and then look 30 degrees right you will be somewhere near the site's political cente of gravity
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
My stockbroker is neutral, the founder is in favour of Brexit mind -
Please point out the short-term predictions that you claim turned out to be incorrect. Just one will do.
You have completely swallowed the Kool-Aid. There's no point debating with you as your mind is closed to rational discussion.
Morris_Dancer claimed that the 4th IPCC report included some short-term temperature predictions which were completely wrong. I disputed that, and asked him to point out the predictions that he is referring to. How is that not rational discussion?
No he didn't.
The embedded quotes above clearly show you citing that report and not Mr Dancer.
If you intend posting on PB then you'll have to be a bit more inventive than just blatantly making shit up as you did there.
I think you're right. If I may repeat a point i made yesterday...
...Twice now we've had putative game-changers from REMAIN - the renegotiation and Obama - and they were counter-productive, increasing LEAVE. Argument from authority simply isn't working. It may be that the best approach for REMAIN is the slow, grinding, depressing necessity of answering each point LEAVE makes by pointing out the inaccuracies and/or unfounded assumptions therein, and hope that REMAIN can generate truths faster than LEAVE can generate their points. As Crosby spotted, this is the only approach that has worked.
Labour is now a party so hideously bound up with needing the support of the Muslim vote that it is prepared to abandon the Jews to suffer anti-semitism from within its own ranks.
What would Ed Miliband's dad say?
Labour has been mutating into a Green-Respect hybrid for years now.
To be true science, you need to be able to use it to predict. In 1919, Arthur Eddington sailed to the tropics to observe an solar eclipse? Why? To test a prediction of Einstein's on gravitational lensing. He showed it to be correct. Thus the General Theory of Relativity received a boost. Gravitational waves as predicted took longer, but have been found.
And as the great man said himself ... "No amount of experimentation can prove me right. A single experiment can prove me wrong."
AGW cannot be proved right by experiment .. or wrong at the moment. The aim of science is to test, not to look for excuses.
Now AGW may be correct, but if you cannot predict, it's not science let alone settled science, If I ask "What will be the average temperature of London in 2020?" the correct answer is "I don't know, there are too many confounding factors ... El Nino, solar flares etc." I will answer you, as has been said earlier ... "then it's not science yet."
It may very well be true, but it may be wishful thinking.
Apparently Shah had her fingers crossed so doesnt count.
FFS she has to be suspended at least.
Failing that, Shah should be kicked off the Home Affairs Select Committee, set up to investigate rising anti-Semitism in Britain. - She's now compromised beyond belief.
'cept if you are saying that she is not fit to be on the HASC (is she anti-semitic?) then you are also saying she is not fit to hold the Lab whip (is she anti-semitic?)...
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
This post is so deliciously out of touch and elitist that I wonder if its a troll.
The thought of ordinary British people, struggling to make ends meet, being swayed by letters from their stockbrokers.
Priceless. And if a troll, genius.
I've a feeling this might be used again when discussing the impact of Brexit on ordinary families ie those without stockbrokers.
They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go.
Anti-Semitism has been festering away in Labour for years, growing steadily worse, as the party has cravenly sought to secure the Muslim vote. It is also endemic in leftwing circles in the universities.
Now it is being exposed. This poses severe dangers for Labour, in the medium term.
Corbyn will wait it out until after the London Mayoral election. As you, and I, have said on countless occasions, Labour's toadying to the Muslim vote is absolutely disgusting, but this is a natural consequence of it, Sadiq has associated himself with similar people to Naz Shah, one of them calling the murder of Lee Rigby a hoax or setup another convicted of funding terrorists in the US, and yet Labour have put him forwards to be London mayor.
The party is rotten to the core and needs a mass clearout. If they lose their Muslim voters then so be it, we shouldn't entertain these kinds of views in this country and Labour, in doing so, are legitimising them.
Forced academisation is one Conservative policy I really don't understand the purpose of - particularly with good schools run by decent LEAs.
I think the Gov't has realised this and so is allowing LEAs themselves to become providers of services through the academy structure rather than the old one.
In other words, Morgan has made a right mess and No.10 policy people are trying to find a way out of it. She's gone in reshuffle. How about sending her to sort out the doctors?
No, I think Hunt is doing an excellent job in health, not shirking from the fight to impose the neccessary new terms on Doctors.
So I agree with the Gov't on health, and disagree with them on forced academisation. I'm guessing that's a small venn diagram - but my opinions are my own and its why I'm not in any party despite being more politically interested than most.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of strike action, why do you see the new terms as "necessary"? Is it that the existing contract makes it impossible to deploy doctors in the manner which is desired to go to a "7-day" model, or that paying them on that contract makes it undesirably expensive? I've seen a lot of doctor bashing, some of it probably justified, but nothing that actually makes it clear why Hunt thought it was a good idea to start the fight in the first place.
Sigh!
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
I also agree with that... can any of Hunt's supporters help me out with an explanation of the benefits of these changes?
You would have thought a few actually might think Hunt at least partly culpable. Apparently not even spurring them on to vote Tory in non existent elections!!!
I'm slightly reminded today of when BBC news presenters went on strike a couple of years ago and the standard of bulletins noticeably improved with temporary presenters.
'OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about? '
Was that the same stockbroker that advised you to buy all those Barclays bank shares ?
I wonder how many people will be receiving letters from Woodford Investment with the Capital Economics report confirming the scare tactics of Remain are just exaggerated nonsense.
They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go.
Anti-Semitism has been festering away in Labour for years, growing steadily worse, as the party has cravenly sought to secure the Muslim vote. It is also endemic in leftwing circles in the universities.
Now it is being exposed. This poses severe dangers for Labour, in the medium term.
Interestingly Shah wrote her tweet during the Gaza invasion. This is what you wrote in anger at the same time. I copied it because I thought it reflected the anger many of us felt at the time. the articles you refer to were I imagine those that Shah was incensed about
SeanT Posts: 4,673 1:40PM foxinsoxuk said:
» show previous quotes I read the now deleted Jerusalem Post article. I do not agree with it, but despite the title it did not advocate genocide. It did advocate the deportation from Gaza of all who opposed the Israeli state, and replacement by Jewish settlers. It also interestingly advocated giving any Palestinian who wished to remain and accept that Israel is a Jewish state full rights as Israeli citizens, including the right to peaceful democratic representation in a single state.
I do not agree, but that is far more reasonable than Hamas proposals for treatment of Israelis. You're not looking in the right place.
THIS is the article that advocated genocide, under the fairly clear headline "When Genocide Is Permissible"
In case we didn't get the message, the Times of Israel ran ANOTHER article advocating the extermination of innocent Gazans, albeit couched in more talmudic terms.
And now the Jerusalem Post has joined the chorus, stopping short of actual genocide, just advocating total ethnic cleansing, the "dismantling of Gaza" and its repopulation by Jews.
And this is the more liberal English language Jewish press. One wonders what they are saying in the Hebrew press, where the less doveish commentators hang out.
And with that, to work. Salaam.
SeanT Posts: 4,713 12:10PM Another top Israeli official calls, in effect, for the extermination of all Gazans, starving them to death whilst bombing them to hell.
Forced academisation is one Conservative policy I really don't understand the purpose of - particularly with good schools run by decent LEAs.
I think the Gov't has realised this and so is allowing LEAs themselves to become providers of services through the academy structure rather than the old one.
In other words, Morgan has made a right mess and No.10 policy people are trying to find a way out of it. She's gone in reshuffle. How about sending her to sort out the doctors?
No, I think Hunt is doing an excellent job in health, not shirking from the fight to impose the neccessary new terms on Doctors.
So I agree with the Gov't on health, and disagree with them on forced academisation. I'm guessing that's a small venn diagram - but my opinions are my own and its why I'm not in any party despite being more politically interested than most.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of strike action, why do you see the new terms as "necessary"? Is it that the existing contract makes it impossible to deploy doctors in the manner which is desired to go to a "7-day" model, or that paying them on that contract makes it undesirably expensive? I've seen a lot of doctor bashing, some of it probably justified, but nothing that actually makes it clear why Hunt thought it was a good idea to start the fight in the first place.
Sigh!
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
I also agree with that... can any of Hunt's supporters help me out with an explanation of the benefits of these changes?
You would have thought a few actually might think Hunt at least partly culpable. Apparently not even spurring them on to vote Tory in non existent elections!!!
Police and Crime commissioner is an important post
"They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go."
They've sacked a few councillors recently, this is the first MP - well, Shabana Mahmood protested the kosher aisle at my local tescos.
They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go.
Anti-Semitism has been festering away in Labour for years, growing steadily worse, as the party has cravenly sought to secure the Muslim vote. It is also endemic in leftwing circles in the universities.
Now it is being exposed. This poses severe dangers for Labour, in the medium term.
Corbyn will wait it out until after the London Mayoral election. As you, and I, have said on countless occasions, Labour's toadying to the Muslim vote is absolutely disgusting, but this is a natural consequence of it, Sadiq has associated himself with similar people to Naz Shah, one of them calling the murder of Lee Rigby a hoax or setup another convicted of funding terrorists in the US, and yet Labour have put him forwards to be London mayor.
The party is rotten to the core and needs a mass clearout. If they lose their Muslim voters then so be it, we shouldn't entertain these kinds of views in this country and Labour, in doing so, are legitimising them.
Yeah, but think of the postal votes, clearly much more important.
Forced academisation is one Conservative policy I really don't understand the purpose of - particularly with good schools run by decent LEAs.
I think the Gov't has realised this and so is allowing LEAs themselves to become providers of services through the academy structure rather than the old one.
In other words, Morgan has made a right mess and No.10 policy people are trying to find a way out of it. She's gone in reshuffle. How about sending her to sort out the doctors?
No, I think Hunt is doing an excellent job in health, not shirking from the fight to impose the neccessary new terms on Doctors.
So I agree with the Gov't on health, and disagree with them on forced academisation. I'm guessing that's a small venn diagram - but my opinions are my own and its why I'm not in any party despite being more politically interested than most.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of strike action, why do you see the new terms as "necessary"? Is it that the existing contract makes it impossible to deploy doctors in the manner which is desired to go to a "7-day" model, or that paying them on that contract makes it undesirably expensive? I've seen a lot of doctor bashing, some of it probably justified, but nothing that actually makes it clear why Hunt thought it was a good idea to start the fight in the first place.
Sigh!
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
I also agree with that... can any of Hunt's supporters help me out with an explanation of the benefits of these changes?
You would have thought a few actually might think Hunt at least partly culpable. Apparently not even spurring them on to vote Tory in non existent elections!!!
Police and Crime commissioner is an important post
When will Liverpool ever accept the fact that it was Liverpool fans who crushed other Liverpool fans to death...no one else
Not once in the coverage of the past 48 hours have I seen any reference to the trauma the Forest fans suffered that day. The Forest fans who managed to get into Hillsborough in a calm, sensible way that the Liverpool fans somehow didn't...
My brother in law was a Forest fan at Hillsborough that day. Of course this was before the era of mobile phones and it took many hours before the news made clear that it was the Liverpool end where people had been dying. I wouldn't wish the agony of not knowing that my sister and many others went through that day on anyone. After the event of course it seems mild compared to the suffering of the families who lost loved ones but at the time it was truly horrible.
Oddly enough, I was in a similar position that day. There was a very long wait that afternoon for a phone call which removed all uncertainty.
They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go.
Anti-Semitism has been festering away in Labour for years, growing steadily worse, as the party has cravenly sought to secure the Muslim vote. It is also endemic in leftwing circles in the universities.
Now it is being exposed. This poses severe dangers for Labour, in the medium term.
All probably true to a degree, but I wonder if the bigger issue is not that Labour is pandering to the Muslim vote as such but that a lot of Muslims per se (such as Ms Shah) often hold views on certain subjects that are at best not exactly mainstream and at worst outrageously and possibly unlawfully discriminatory?
I'm slightly reminded today of when BBC news presenters went on strike a couple of years ago and the standard of bulletins noticeably improved with temporary presenters.
It's amazing how much better a news programme is when you only have people reading the news.
"They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go."
They've sacked a few councillors recently, this is the first MP - well, Shabana Mahmood protested the kosher aisle at my local tescos.
"Labour's disgusting anti-Semitism" as a header - punchy
"So far, Ms Shah has lost her job as an aide to John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, but remains a Labour member. That speaks volumes about Mr Corbyn’s disgustingly inadequate response to anti-Semitism in his party. "
Quite
Don't ignore the electorate - Bradford West's disgusting anti-Semitism.
Currently it is former Killamarsh councillor "Lord" Alan Charles as he is known locally... but it'll be Hardyal Dhindsa once the elections are over. I'll be most likely be voting for Richard Bright. If Dave annoys me it might be for the kipper.
Please point out the short-term predictions that you claim turned out to be incorrect. Just one will do.
You have completely swallowed the Kool-Aid. There's no point debating with you as your mind is closed to rational discussion.
Morris_Dancer claimed that the 4th IPCC report included some short-term temperature predictions which were completely wrong. I disputed that, and asked him to point out the predictions that he is referring to. How is that not rational discussion?
No he didn't.
The embedded quotes above clearly show you citing that report and not Mr Dancer.
If you intend posting on PB then you'll have to be a bit more inventive than just blatantly making shit up as you did there.
Look back through the thread. Morris_Dancer made the first reference to the report, not me; I merely gave the link for his convenience. Then come back here and apologise.
They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go.
Anti-Semitism has been festering away in Labour for years, growing steadily worse, as the party has cravenly sought to secure the Muslim vote. It is also endemic in leftwing circles in the universities.
Now it is being exposed. This poses severe dangers for Labour, in the medium term.
Corbyn will wait it out until after the London Mayoral election. As you, and I, have said on countless occasions, Labour's toadying to the Muslim vote is absolutely disgusting, but this is a natural consequence of it, Sadiq has associated himself with similar people to Naz Shah, one of them calling the murder of Lee Rigby a hoax or setup another convicted of funding terrorists in the US, and yet Labour have put him forwards to be London mayor.
The party is rotten to the core and needs a mass clearout. If they lose their Muslim voters then so be it, we shouldn't entertain these kinds of views in this country and Labour, in doing so, are legitimising them.
Yeah, but think of the postal votes, clearly much more important.
I think this is the first election being fought under the new IVR register so harvesting those postal votes isn't going to be as easy as it was for Lutfur Rahman. Those 17 person one bedroom flats are no longer in play for Khan.
'OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about? '
Was that the same stockbroker that advised you to buy all those Barclays bank shares ?
I wonder how many people will be receiving letters from Woodford Investment with the Capital Economics report confirming the scare tactics of Remain are just exaggerated nonsense.
I'm sure Remain will have a letter signed by 364 world leading economists soon
Downing Street aides traded bogus secrets for SEX with undercover Russian and Chinese 'honey-trap' spies
Gordon Brown's aides tricked attractive women into thinking they were stealing sensitive information by preparing fake intelligence as 'dangles'. It allowed them to take advantage of the 'beautiful posse of Chinese girls and Russian blondes' who seduced aides before stealing intelligence
Currently it is former Killamarsh councillor "Lord" Alan Charles as he is known locally... but it'll be Hardyal Dhindsa once the elections are over. I'll be most likely be voting for Richard Bright. If Dave annoys me it might be for the kipper.
Yeowart. Thats Derbyshire for you what, as well as the surname of the UKIP candidate.
"They simply have to sack Shah, political logic demands it - but I wonder if they are resisting because they know there are probably dozens more Labour MPs, politicians and councillors who have said similar horrible stuff. So they'd all have to go."
They've sacked a few councillors recently, this is the first MP - well, Shabana Mahmood protested the kosher aisle at my local tescos.
Seriously?!
"In August 2014, Mahmood was accused of promoting "mob rule" after she boasted on YouTube that she had recently participated in a protest calling for the boycotting of Israeli goods that temporarily forced a supermarket to close. Simon Johnson, CEO of the Jewish Leadership Council sharply criticized Mahmood, arguing that "It is completely inappropriate for a Member of Parliament to promote public disorder", while Conservative MP Mike Freer stated that "For any Parliamentarian to encourage mob rule as a way of protesting is shameful.""
'OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about? '
Was that the same stockbroker that advised you to buy all those Barclays bank shares ?
I wonder how many people will be receiving letters from Woodford Investment with the Capital Economics report confirming the scare tactics of Remain are just exaggerated nonsense.
As we discussed at the time, the report is pretty In-y.
Here's his point on Financial Services:
Financial services have more to lose immediately after a European Union exit than most other sectors of the economy. Even in the best case, in which passporting rights were preserved, the United Kingdom would still lose influence over the single market’s rules. The City would probably be hurt in the short term, but it would not spell disaster. The City’s competitive advantage is founded on more than just unfettered access to the single market. A European Union exit would enable the United Kingdom to broker trade deals with emerging markets that could pay dividends for the financial services sector in the long run.
To be true science, you need to be able to use it to predict. In 1919, Arthur Eddington sailed to the tropics to observe an solar eclipse? Why? To test a prediction of Einstein's on gravitational lensing. He showed it to be correct. Thus the General Theory of Relativity received a boost. Gravitational waves as predicted took longer, but have been found.
And as the great man said himself ... "No amount of experimentation can prove me right. A single experiment can prove me wrong."
AGW cannot be proved right by experiment .. or wrong at the moment. The aim of science is to test, not to look for excuses.
Now AGW may be correct, but if you cannot predict, it's not science let alone settled science, If I ask "What will be the average temperature of London in 2020?" the correct answer is "I don't know, there are too many confounding factors ... El Nino, solar flares etc." I will answer you, as has been said earlier ... "then it's not science yet."
It may very well be true, but it may be wishful thinking.
As a former physicist myself, I'm fully aware of how science works.
AGW, like any scientific theory, cannot be *proved* to be correct, although it could be disproved if, for example, the sea levels were to stop rising for a significant length of time. However, AGW is currently by far the best explanation we have for the recent changes in the Earth's climate, and the predictions of warming made back in the early 1980s have materialised almost exactly as forecast.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
LOL - oh Roger how far removed from normal peoples lives and experiences you are.
This is why she should have resigned. By supporting her Corbyn has blown it up into something much bigger.
A Labour MP is going to address the Commons and personally apologise for being an anti-Semite.
I mean, how much worse can it get? Can't they see how damaging it is?
Damaging from who's point of view though? From a point of view which gets 10-15% of their total votes from Muslims, probably not. There is going to be a lot more handwringing and acceptance of disturbing views by Labour in the coming years as they become more dependent on inner cities. Ask surbiton of this parish, Muslim vote harvesting is a Labour policy, he has said as much time and again.
To be true science, you need to be able to use it to predict. In 1919, Arthur Eddington sailed to the tropics to observe an solar eclipse? Why? To test a prediction of Einstein's on gravitational lensing. He showed it to be correct. Thus the General Theory of Relativity received a boost. Gravitational waves as predicted took longer, but have been found.
And as the great man said himself ... "No amount of experimentation can prove me right. A single experiment can prove me wrong."
AGW cannot be proved right by experiment .. or wrong at the moment. The aim of science is to test, not to look for excuses.
Now AGW may be correct, but if you cannot predict, it's not science let alone settled science, If I ask "What will be the average temperature of London in 2020?" the correct answer is "I don't know, there are too many confounding factors ... El Nino, solar flares etc." I will answer you, as has been said earlier ... "then it's not science yet."
It may very well be true, but it may be wishful thinking.
As a former physicist myself, I'm fully aware of how science works.
AGW, like any scientific theory, cannot be *proved* to be correct, although it could be disproved if, for example, the sea levels were to stop rising for a significant length of time. However, AGW is currently by far the best explanation we have for the recent changes in the Earth's climate, and the predictions of warming made back in the early 1980s have materialised almost exactly as forecast.
Alternatively its a giant excuse for self appointed moralists like you to tell the rest of us what to do.
50 years ago its was marxist doctrine, and when that got debunked with millions of lives lost the controllers latched onto climate.
In fifty years time you will have doubtless invented some other reason to control human activity.
OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
LOL - oh Roger how far removed from normal peoples lives and experiences you are.
Well with auto-enrollment being rolled out, every working man and woman will have an interest in the stockmarket whether they knoiw it or not ^_~
Before the GE Survation consistently polled high for Ukip, in Jan last year the MD did a presentation at a ukip meeting, Nigel was amongst those who asked questions.
Comments
Remain: 45% (-1)
Leave: 38% (+3)
Fieldwork 25/26 April
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about?
FFS she has to be suspended at least.
I think the churn looks like SNP -> Con and Lab/LD -> Green. There might be some Tartan Tories who are taking fright from Nicola's top up taxes and deciding to vote for the only low tax party in Scotland.
The thought of ordinary British people, struggling to make ends meet, being swayed by letters from their stockbrokers.
Priceless. And if a troll, genius.
https://twitter.com/StrongerIn/status/725301590723317760
Are these the same oncologists who tried to stop Ashya King getting the best possible cancer care in Europe?
Well invest in European shares instead, if you believe that.
It really does look like Obama's intervention has back fired. I just hope Dave invites Merkel over next.
This is beyond a joke.
The new contract is not just about pay (though of the issues that is the simplist to understand). Doctors have not asked for a payrise, just annoyed at getting a paycut, which falls hardest on those who already do weekend hours.
You simply cannot spread 5 days of staff across seven days without spreading them a lot thinner, affecting safety, continuity and training (these being training posts).
The BMA has always recognised and supported the desire for better emergency services, but this contract is not the answer. Indeed any answer that is not supported by the medical staff is destined to fail, not least because browbeaten staff with an eye on the exit are not going to be useful partners .
Iraq/PFI/Academies/Foundation Trusts/Tory lite economics etc
So usually because they are too right wing.
Anti Semitic views are not acceptable and an MP expressing them has to be suspended at the very least.
BTW I have never had a letter from a Stockbroker past/current/future!!
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/articles/what-does-the-eu-referendum-mean-for-your-investments
Maybe the fact is that this is just what you have to say in some parts of Britain if you want to get elected.
Lol. Jez doesn't know the difference between "historic" and "historical".
And we all know the reasons for her visceral anti-semitism: Sean Thomas uttered the single word of truth.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/27/naz-shah-employed-zio-hater-as-taxpayer-funded-aide/
You'll find this site is home to what most would call the 'hard right'. Climate change is a figment of lefties imagination. Science doesn't come into it. If scientists had any talent they'd be tax avoiding businessmen working out of Panama.
If you place Nigel Lawson at the centre of the political spectrum and then look 30 degrees right you will be somewhere near the site's political cente of gravity
The embedded quotes above clearly show you citing that report and not Mr Dancer.
If you intend posting on PB then you'll have to be a bit more inventive than just blatantly making shit up as you did there.
...Twice now we've had putative game-changers from REMAIN - the renegotiation and Obama - and they were counter-productive, increasing LEAVE. Argument from authority simply isn't working. It may be that the best approach for REMAIN is the slow, grinding, depressing necessity of answering each point LEAVE makes by pointing out the inaccuracies and/or unfounded assumptions therein, and hope that REMAIN can generate truths faster than LEAVE can generate their points. As Crosby spotted, this is the only approach that has worked.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36150192
Some interesting shuffling going on there...
To be true science, you need to be able to use it to predict. In 1919, Arthur Eddington sailed to the tropics to observe an solar eclipse? Why? To test a prediction of Einstein's on gravitational lensing. He showed it to be correct. Thus the General Theory of Relativity received a boost. Gravitational waves as predicted took longer, but have been found.
And as the great man said himself ... "No amount of experimentation can prove me right. A single experiment can prove me wrong."
AGW cannot be proved right by experiment .. or wrong at the moment. The aim of science is to test, not to look for excuses.
Now AGW may be correct, but if you cannot predict, it's not science let alone settled science, If I ask "What will be the average temperature of London in 2020?" the correct answer is "I don't know, there are too many confounding factors ... El Nino, solar flares etc." I will answer you, as has been said earlier ... "then it's not science yet."
It may very well be true, but it may be wishful thinking.
The debate is gaining clarity.
The party is rotten to the core and needs a mass clearout. If they lose their Muslim voters then so be it, we shouldn't entertain these kinds of views in this country and Labour, in doing so, are legitimising them.
@Roger To Africa.
'OT. I got a letter from my stockbroker today which suggested-among other things-that Brexit would likely be disadvantageous to share values in the longer term.
This morning Farage dismissed every economist financial institution and think tank who thought Brexit would be damaging on the ground that they were politicians academics and people who work in the rarified atmosphere of think tanks not businessmen like him with 40 years experience.
I wonder how people will react when they get letters like the one I just got from people who clearly do know what they're talking about? '
Was that the same stockbroker that advised you to buy all those Barclays bank shares ?
I wonder how many people will be receiving letters from Woodford Investment with the Capital Economics report confirming the scare tactics of Remain are just exaggerated nonsense.
SeanT Posts: 4,673
1:40PM
foxinsoxuk said:
» show previous quotes
I read the now deleted Jerusalem Post article. I do not agree with it, but despite the title it did not advocate genocide. It did advocate the deportation from Gaza of all who opposed the Israeli state, and replacement by Jewish settlers. It also interestingly advocated giving any Palestinian who wished to remain and accept that Israel is a Jewish state full rights as Israeli citizens, including the right to peaceful democratic representation in a single state.
I do not agree, but that is far more reasonable than Hamas proposals for treatment of Israelis.
You're not looking in the right place.
THIS is the article that advocated genocide, under the fairly clear headline "When Genocide Is Permissible"
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/08/website-deletes-op-ed-suggesting-gaza-genocide.html
In case we didn't get the message, the Times of Israel ran ANOTHER article advocating the extermination of innocent Gazans, albeit couched in more talmudic terms.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/1-samuel-1518/#ixzz39AIQIcls
And now the Jerusalem Post has joined the chorus, stopping short of actual genocide, just advocating total ethnic cleansing, the "dismantling of Gaza" and its repopulation by Jews.
And this is the more liberal English language Jewish press. One wonders what they are saying in the Hebrew press, where the less doveish commentators hang out.
And with that, to work. Salaam.
SeanT Posts: 4,713
12:10PM
Another top Israeli official calls, in effect, for the extermination of all Gazans, starving them to death whilst bombing them to hell.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4554583,00.html
This really is a theme now, significant elements of Israeli opinion are openly genocidal.
They've sacked a few councillors recently, this is the first MP - well, Shabana Mahmood protested the kosher aisle at my local tescos.
I'll be most likely be voting for Richard Bright. If Dave annoys me it might be for the kipper.
Gordon Brown's aides tricked attractive women into thinking they were stealing sensitive information by preparing fake intelligence as 'dangles'. It allowed them to take advantage of the 'beautiful posse of Chinese girls and Russian blondes' who seduced aides before stealing intelligence
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3558239/Downing-Street-aides-traded-bogus-secrets-SEX-undercover-Russian-Chinese-honey-trap-spies.html
From the obvious online encylopedia.
Here's his point on Financial Services:
Financial services have more to lose immediately after a European Union exit than most other sectors of the economy. Even in the best case, in which passporting rights were preserved, the United Kingdom would still lose influence over the single market’s rules. The City would probably be hurt in the short term, but it would not spell disaster. The City’s competitive advantage is founded on more than just unfettered access to the single market. A European Union exit would enable the United Kingdom to broker trade deals with emerging markets that could pay dividends for the financial services sector in the long run.
AGW, like any scientific theory, cannot be *proved* to be correct, although it could be disproved if, for example, the sea levels were to stop rising for a significant length of time. However, AGW is currently by far the best explanation we have for the recent changes in the Earth's climate, and the predictions of warming made back in the early 1980s have materialised almost exactly as forecast.
Hopefully suspension within the hour
50 years ago its was marxist doctrine, and when that got debunked with millions of lives lost the controllers latched onto climate.
In fifty years time you will have doubtless invented some other reason to control human activity.
They were widely derided on here at the time.
"David Lammy says sorry to Jewish voters who lost faith in Labour"
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/136610/david-lammy-says-sorry-jewish-voters-who-lost-faith-labour