Right now, and over the last few years, ISIS have beheaded people, crucified children, implemented industrial scale sexual slavery, attempted religious genocide and burnt people alive. And that's just off the top of my head.
Hitler's acts are historical for most people. ISIS is still there, still doing this sort of thing as we type.
I have to go out again, and I've just come in too.
I have just this to say about the Elite propagandists for remain. Burn them like Daenerys Targaryen did to the Khals. Season 6/4. If you missed last night you've lost the plot.
@MikeK I'm going to watch that one tonight ! My opinion of you might drop below Dave if you carry on with the spoilers
I have to go out again, and I've just come in too.
I have just this to say about the Elite propagandists for remain. Burn them like Daenerys Targaryen did to the Khals. Season 6/4. If you missed last night you've lost the plot.
@MikeK I'm going to watch that one tonight ! My opinion of you might drop below Dave if you carry on with the spoilers
I profusely apologise. On bended knees I seek forgiveness from you both and the Seven. Not only that I will send a prayer to the gods of the forest. What more can I do.
Interestingly the post-GE15 Labour joiners don't plump for John McDonnell immediately after Corbyn (still by a huge margin their favourite), but go for Burnham first. Among longer standing Labour members Jarvis leads the pack (but not highly rated among the new members);
Imagine there were an election for the next Labour Party Leader in May this year and these were the candidates, who would you give your first preference to?
I have to go out again, and I've just come in too.
I have just this to say about the Elite propagandists for remain. Burn them like Daenerys Targaryen did to the Khals. Season 6/4. If you missed last night you've lost the plot.
You should really stop watching that stuff, it's mind rot.
I have to go out again, and I've just come in too.
I have just this to say about the Elite propagandists for remain. Burn them like Daenerys Targaryen did to the Khals. Season 6/4. If you missed last night you've lost the plot.
You should really stop watching that stuff, it's mind rot.
Right now, and over the last few years, ISIS have beheaded people, crucified children, implemented industrial scale sexual slavery, attempted religious genocide and burnt people alive. And that's just off the top of my head.
Hitler's acts are historical for most people. ISIS is still there, still doing this sort of thing as we type.
We're only fortunate that ISIS don't have the same relative military strength of Germany circa 1939 in comparison to the rest of the world.
Mr. Royale, Kim might be the most tedious character in all of Star Trek (NB I've not seen much of Enterprise).
Neelix Quark Dr Julian Bashir Wes Crusher
How can you not like Quark On the opposite end, I think my favourite must be Garak, despite how little he is in it.
There are no good Star Trek episodes which major on Ferengi, holodecks or alternate realities. Those are the rules.
Nonsense, Our Man Bashir and Yesterday's Enterprise show how wrong those rules are.
++1
Even The Last Outpost was fun, not least for Riker in short trousers, and Star Trek NG still trying desperately to do the female-crew-in-mini-skirts-taken-seriously vibe as if it was still 1971 .
Can I just say how outrageous it is that having been told to make cuts the BBC is making cuts? How dare they. It just proves their bias.
Yes of course. Because they couldn't find anywhere else to cut....hmm like spending a load of money on a new logo for a channel that was supposed to be closing, took 2 years extra to close than simply flicking the switch and then rebranded it online so in fact not closing it at all.
And in terms of savings, wiping some recipes off the net doesn't save any money. In fact it probably costs money to action that, especially with all the red tape that is the BBC.
As I said down thread it is like the closing all the public bogs move. It is just designed to get publicity, nothing more. If they were serious about saving money or new remits, there are is far more major reforms, but instead it is get the MumsNet crowd pissed move instead.
This is one of a number of cuts. I suspect there will be plenty more.
It isn't a cut that will save any money...it is pure posturing.
No it is not because the government wants more than cuts. HMG wants the BBC not to engage or compete in many areas. George Osborne (as I posted earlier) explicitly called out recipes on the web. Whittingdale did not say the BBC should axe The Voice to save money, he said they should axe it so as not to compete with ITV and Sky. This is not about money. It was never about money.
It's a tricky one. If I was a commercial organisation with interests in online recipe publishing, I have to say I'd regard the BBC as essentially unfair competition. Similarly, if I was a journalist at a newspaper that's struggling with the transition to online, I'd be concerned about the rise of BBC News Online as effectively becoming the UK's national online newspaper. On the other hand, as a consumer, I found the BBC recipes handy (and after all, I paid for it, right?) and would be loathe to see the BBC news website be cut down in size.
To be honest, in the long run, I think a subscription model with a strict public service charter (to guarantee subscribers that the product they are paying for will attempt to emulate the BBC's basic objectives in the past) is probably the way to go. But have no idea how feasible that is.
Right now, and over the last few years, ISIS have beheaded people, crucified children, implemented industrial scale sexual slavery, attempted religious genocide and burnt people alive. And that's just off the top of my head.
Hitler's acts are historical for most people. ISIS is still there, still doing this sort of thing as we type.
We're only fortunate that ISIS don't have the same relative military strength of Germany circa 1939 in comparison to the rest of the world.
The attitude is similiar.
Historically, there was nothing particularly exceptional about the Nazis except its bureaucracy. Discuss.
So Leave are going to spend today explaining why ISIS don't back Brexit.
Master Strategy from Dave
Except, as ever, it is overstated and will just turn into people once again laughing at the leader of the Tory party.
Poor strategy from an out of touch leader who is ready to move on.
There are a number of people who post here who'll claim that they're chortling, it's the funniest thing they ever seen. I'm not wholly convinced that the wider world sees things the way that some of the more enthusiastic posters here do.
Mr. Royale, Kim might be the most tedious character in all of Star Trek (NB I've not seen much of Enterprise).
Neelix Quark Dr Julian Bashir Wes Crusher
How can you not like Quark On the opposite end, I think my favourite must be Garak, despite how little he is in it.
There are no good Star Trek episodes which major on Ferengi, holodecks or alternate realities. Those are the rules.
Nonsense, Our Man Bashir and Yesterday's Enterprise show how wrong those rules are.
The Mirror Universe in DS9 is generally decent.
You and I can never be friends.
So much of Deep Space Nine was ruined by:
1) Dr Bashir 2) Ferengi 3) Alternate universes 4) Section 31 (though to be fair this is a subset of 1)
And they let the storylines round Odo get way too mushy.
On the plus side, it had Weyoun.
Section 31 made sense to me, it was the side of Starfleet/Federation that no one really wanted to go into, one can't have a vast galactic empire without an agency to keep everyone in line.
Bashir I can take or leave, he was better before the genetic enhancement stuff, his character took a real nosedive after that.
Ferengi I can take or leave too, though Quark is an interesting character and goes through some good development, from cold and calculating businessman to a "good capitalist" of the type Ed M would approve.
Alternate universes, again, I only really like the DS9 one, and even then only the first couple of episodes. Sisko goes to the alternate universe and the first thing he does is sleep with Dax, what's not to like!
Can I just say how outrageous it is that having been told to make cuts the BBC is making cuts? How dare they. It just proves their bias.
Yes of course. Because they couldn't find anywhere else to cut....hmm like spending a load of money on a new logo for a channel that was supposed to be closing, took 2 years extra to close than simply flicking the switch and then rebranded it online so in fact not closing it at all.
And in terms of savings, wiping some recipes off the net doesn't save any money. In fact it probably costs money to action that, especially with all the red tape that is the BBC.
As I said down thread it is like the closing all the public bogs move. It is just designed to get publicity, nothing more. If they were serious about saving money or new remits, there are is far more major reforms, but instead it is get the MumsNet crowd pissed move instead.
This is one of a number of cuts. I suspect there will be plenty more.
It isn't a cut that will save any money...it is pure posturing.
No it is not because the government wants more than cuts. HMG wants the BBC not to engage or compete in many areas. George Osborne (as I posted earlier) explicitly called out recipes on the web. Whittingdale did not say the BBC should axe The Voice to save money, he said they should axe it so as not to compete with ITV and Sky. This is not about money. It was never about money.
It's a tricky one. If I was a commercial organisation with interests in online recipe publishing, I have to say I'd regard the BBC as essentially unfair competition. Similarly, if I was a journalist at a newspaper that's struggling with the transition to online, I'd be concerned about the rise of BBC News Online as effectively becoming the UK's national online newspaper. On the other hand, as a consumer, I found the BBC recipes handy (and after all, I paid for it, right?) and would be loathe to see the BBC news website be cut down in size.
To be honest, in the long run, I think a subscription model with a strict public service charter (to guarantee subscribers that the product they are paying for will attempt to emulate the BBC's basic objectives in the past) is probably the way to go. But have no idea how feasible that is.
Once its subscription-based, it won't need a charter. Let it compete in the market place along with everyone else. If there's a demand for its output then people will buy. No need to enforce production options on it; supply and demand should be sufficient.
Good post. Sadiq offers the Labour right wing some hope.
Among his other talents, he's mastered the art of not looking Corbynite without annoying people like me by being divisive - he just gets on with showing he can do other stuff well. That's the way back for centrists.
On deselection, what we have is a truce. They is very little appetite even among the hard left for a ruthless purge of people they've worked with for years, unless they constantly feed the Tory press with sneery articles like Mr Danczuk, whom most of us would deselect tomorrow if we had the chance.
Interestingly the post-GE15 Labour joiners don't plump for John McDonnell immediately after Corbyn (still by a huge margin their favourite), but go for Burnham first. Among longer standing Labour members Jarvis leads the pack (but not highly rated among the new members);
Imagine there were an election for the next Labour Party Leader in May this year and these were the candidates, who would you give your first preference to?
Yes, but that's a poll where you get to choose between Corbyn and McDonnell and others, not a post-Corbyn poll. Corbyn overwhelmingly gets the left-to-centre vote, much of which would probably *otherwise* go to McDonnell.
If so, have you got your postal/proxy vote sorted out for this referendum?
Yeah but I'm thinking about abstaining as I feel a bit guilty voting from overseas (even if I may come back sometime next year). Also I haven't got a clue how I'd vote...
Vote leave.
Your housing will be cheaper, and as the £ will be worthless your dollar earnings will be worth more
Interesting analysis Mr Meeks - and while I agree that it would be foolish to rely on the Mr Micawber option:
Labour rightwingers can also present this to themselves as the Mr Micawber option. In practice, however, there is no particular reason why anything should turn up.
I suspect quite a few things will turn up.
None of us know the state of the Conservative Party, or the government not much over a month from now. 'Weakened' and 'Divided' are both dead certs, but 'badly' or 'disastrously'?
Who will be the PM three months from now?
What will be the state of the economy six months from now?
So, lots of 'events, dear boy, events'.......
PS - it's faintly amusing that Corbyn, who has sucked up to numerous fascist (Galtieri, Saddam, Gaddafi, Eisen) and paramilitary (IRA) organisations, is described as being on the left. Self awareness isn't his long suit, is it? But then Chavez had the same problem.
It's rather GCSE history, but Fascism is not an ideology of the right...
Well - yes and no. It usually starts on the left (Mussolini, Mosley, Drexler, arguably Chavez) but usually by the time it gets into power it is avowedly right-wing and anti-Communist, or has acquired militaristic overtones through army involvement. Hitler and Mussolini, for example, both emphatically identified as right wing on gaining power and among their first acts were to have Communist/Socialist rivals killed.
To argue otherwise is degree level philosophy rather than GCSE history.
Well the Nazis (and I assume Mussolini but don't know) were certainly very keen to eliminate their Communist/Socialist rivals. But surely that was simple power politics - getting rid of rivals with a power base (the unions) and following that could threaten their position.
Did both Hitler and Mussolini "emphatically identify as right wing"? - perhaps a link?
My general contention is that they are a part of the left economically that dresses up in the symbols of nationalism (which are not necessarily right wing - no one has a monopoly on patriotism). The whole Nazis = Right wing claim for Nazism is just clever market positioning by politicians on the left.
So why did so many businessmen finance the Nazis? Why did the likes of the Daily Mail support them? One could say the whole Nazis ≠ extreme right wingers meme is just denial by people on the right.
It's not really my period, but following the instability of Weimar, I believe the promise of "order" was a highly attractive proposition to the middle classes / small businessmen.
It was an authoritarian/control based appeal rather than a left/right one.
Interestingly the post-GE15 Labour joiners don't plump for John McDonnell immediately after Corbyn (still by a huge margin their favourite), but go for Burnham first. Among longer standing Labour members Jarvis leads the pack (but not highly rated among the new members);
Imagine there were an election for the next Labour Party Leader in May this year and these were the candidates, who would you give your first preference to?
The Bayeux Tapestry, probably commissioned by him to adorn his own cathedral, appears to labour the point that he did not actually fight, that is to say shed blood, at Hastings, but rather encouraged the troops from the rear.
THE free-spending culture in the corridors of power at the BBC has wasted almost £350million of licence fee payers’ money on excessive pay-offs for departing executives, lavish relocation packages and a failed digital scheme.
If only they had used that £8mn to keep the 2015 election show in iPlayer for another year (and perhaps bought the rights to the sky/itv coverage). That's a policy I'm sure @Scrapheap_as_was could get behind
Comments
Right now, and over the last few years, ISIS have beheaded people, crucified children, implemented industrial scale sexual slavery, attempted religious genocide and burnt people alive. And that's just off the top of my head.
Hitler's acts are historical for most people. ISIS is still there, still doing this sort of thing as we type.
Laura Kuenssberg – Verified account @bbclaurak
Meanwhile Boris says letter from Serco boss shows remain campaign is 'biggest stitch up since the Bayeux tapestry'
4:01 a.m. - 17 May 2016
Imagine there were an election for the next Labour Party Leader in May this year and these were the candidates, who would you give your first preference to?
Joined Before GE15 / After GE15
Corbyn: 30 / 58
Jarvis: 14 / 2
Burnham: 11 / 9
Cooper: 11 / 4
McDonnell 4 / 7
Also the worst edition of snog, marry, and avoid.
David Cameron has turned to dating app Tinder in a bid to engage young people and drive up voter registration numbers.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/eu-referendum-david-cameron-voter-registration_uk_573ae6a1e4b01359f6875e2f?63lmyg7fdb7zoxbt9
The attitude is similiar.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/662231/Out-supporters-ISIS-want-to-attack-UK-to-force-BREXIT-which-will-destroy-the-Union
Even The Last Outpost was fun, not least for Riker in short trousers, and Star Trek NG still trying desperately to do the female-crew-in-mini-skirts-taken-seriously vibe as if it was still 1971
I liked the Incredible Sulk myself. I reckon the backbenches would be a more interesting place with Blair or Major sitting on them.
Poor strategy from an out of touch leader who is ready to move on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo,_Earl_of_Kent
To be honest, in the long run, I think a subscription model with a strict public service charter (to guarantee subscribers that the product they are paying for will attempt to emulate the BBC's basic objectives in the past) is probably the way to go. But have no idea how feasible that is.
So much of Deep Space Nine was ruined by:
1) Dr Bashir
2) Ferengi
3) Alternate universes
4) Section 31 (though to be fair this is a subset of 1)
And they let the storylines round Odo get way too mushy.
On the plus side, it had Weyoun.
Of course the real question is What would Diana think?
And Will there be a breakthrough for arthritis?
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
Bashir I can take or leave, he was better before the genetic enhancement stuff, his character took a real nosedive after that.
Ferengi I can take or leave too, though Quark is an interesting character and goes through some good development, from cold and calculating businessman to a "good capitalist" of the type Ed M would approve.
Alternate universes, again, I only really like the DS9 one, and even then only the first couple of episodes. Sisko goes to the alternate universe and the first thing he does is sleep with Dax, what's not to like!
On deselection, what we have is a truce. They is very little appetite even among the hard left for a ruthless purge of people they've worked with for years, unless they constantly feed the Tory press with sneery articles like Mr Danczuk, whom most of us would deselect tomorrow if we had the chance.
Your housing will be cheaper, and as the £ will be worthless your dollar earnings will be worth more
It was an authoritarian/control based appeal rather than a left/right one.
Wikipedia says .....
The Bayeux Tapestry, probably commissioned by him to adorn his own cathedral, appears to labour the point that he did not actually fight, that is to say shed blood, at Hastings, but rather encouraged the troops from the rear.
Was Blair a descendant of Odo?