Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
Yes, that's one area where the ban was clumsy. Deliberately? Who knows.
Almost certainly. He wanted to turn the outrage dial up to 11 and give his support some meat. The problem is this time, outside of the campaign, real innocent people get squished.
AIUI, accidentally hurting the innocent has been part of Trumps business progress.
@jimkillock: Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?
Cue outrage from the headbangers...
Not so much a good question as a new benchmark for whataboutery.
Or indeed when there is an "r" in the month. Or not....
We have long had elements of the SNP who feel a stiff breeze justifies a second independence referendum. We now have the English subspecies, where every geopolitical or economic frisson demands Brexit be reconsidered. We just have to accept that this will remain the state of affairs ad nauseam.
I went to bed extremely exercised by Trump's idiocy. This morning, I'm more inclined to think he's already running up against the constitutional limits of government via XO.
For those criticising Theresa May I'm really not sure David Cameron would have done anything differently re Trump. Brexit or no Brexit. The UK always has to accommodate the USA. America is the leading military power in the world, the biggest economic power in the world (alongside China). It's our chief intelligence and security ally. It's the arsenal of the West. The guarantor of European freedom.
Short of an American Mao becoming POTUS, British PMs, Labour or Tory, will go to Washington looking for close friendship. And offering flattery and praise.
TMay did what she had to do and she did it well.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
@jimkillock: Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?
Cue outrage from the headbangers...
Not so much a good question as a new benchmark for whataboutery.
Or indeed when there is an "r" in the month. Or not....
We have long had elements of the SNP who feel a stiff breeze justifies a second independence referendum. We now have the English subspecies, where every geopolitical or economic frisson demands Brexit be reconsidered. We just have to accept that this will remain the state of affairs ad nauseam.
I went to bed extremely exercised by Trump's idiocy. This morning, I'm more inclined to think he's already running up against the constitutional limits of government via XO.
For those criticising Theresa May I'm really not sure David Cameron would have done anything differently re Trump. Brexit or no Brexit. The UK always has to accommodate the USA. America is the leading military power in the world, the biggest economic power in the world (alongside China). It's our chief intelligence and security ally. It's the arsenal of the West. The guarantor of European freedom.
Short of an American Mao becoming POTUS, British PMs, Labour or Tory, will go to Washington looking for close friendship. And offering flattery and praise.
TMay did what she had to do and she did it well.
I don't criticise Theresa May. She did what she had to. But she had to do what she had to do because of Brexit. Britain is in a strategically awful position and she's out of options.
No. Brexit is irrelevant. Imagine if we hadn't Brexited, how would PM Cameron have reacted to Trump? He'd have decided - in the interests of Britain and the west, it's best to go over there asap, flatter him, praise him, and subtly try and get him to see the merits of NATO, tone it down on torture. And so on.
Which is exactly what TMay did.
The idea that a British PM would ever ignore or criticize a new POTUS is daft.
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
I think that's fair. I also wonder if he knew it was likely unconstitutional in parts (i.e. those people issued valid US visas), and he wanted it to get struck down by the Supreme Court, so he could turn to his base and say "fucking elites, stopping me from protecting our country".
On the other hand, there's a steady drip-drip of him alienating a few of his supporters at a time. There will be thousands, maybe tens of thousands of people who voted for him and have a friend who falls under these categories, and think "whoahhh... that's a bit much".
The thing that may come back to haunt him on this, of course, is that the countries terrorists who have attacked the US come from are:
Saudi Arabia (2,369 US citizens killed) UAE (314) Egypt (162) Lebanon (159)
While the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Iranians (0), Yemeni (0), Sudan (0) and Libya (0).
It looks awfully like the US ban is more about business interests than preventing actual terrorists from going to the US.
(On the other hand, in Toulouse they must be high-fiving. That $17bn order for Boeing planes is surely soon going to be going to Airbus instead.)
I agree - Trump is engaging in the modern day equivalent of blitzkrieg on his liberal enemies. Remember Mexico and the wall ? - yesterday's news - as today's federal injunction takes over. Soon the liberals will have so many protests to go to they won't be able to stop the real smaller changes that Trump wants to happen and will get through.
I don't criticise Theresa May. She did what she had to. But she had to do what she had to do because of Brexit. Britain is in a strategically awful position and she's out of options.
No. Brexit is irrelevant. Imagine if we hadn't Brexited, how would PM Cameron have reacted to Trump? He'd have decided - in the interests of Britain and the west, it's best to go over there asap, flatter him, praise him, and subtly try and get him to see the merits of NATO, tone it down on torture. And so on.
Which is exactly what TMay did.
The idea that a British PM would ever ignore or criticize a new POTUS is daft.
A week ago we were being assured by Leavers that Theresa May being first to meet Donald Trump was a diplomatic coup (it was, incidentally). Now we are being told by Leavers that it would always have been an imperative for any British Prime Minister (it wouldn't, incidentally). The correct response of a Britain still in the EU would have been to obtain public assurances of Donald Trump's commitment to NATO before visiting. No public criticism would have been required but the public anointing could have been withheld, pending establishing whether his intentions were friendly.
With Europe divided, Donald Trump can divide and rule, and is doing so. A united EU could have given him more pause for thought about the US's responsibilities in the region. One of the many malign consequences of Brexit.
Yes, that's a common complaint. We see it a lot in IT, people who maybe be brilliant at building a server or developing software, but lacking in many of the other vital skills required of someone working in corporate IT - whether it be communication, troubleshooting, soft people skills or the standard office-worker skills of turning up on time, having had a shower and being appropriately dressed!
Now a large company might be able to keep a genius in their IT team who can't talk to people, but unless there's a load of others keeping between him and the business, it's not going to work out. Schools teaching Comp Sci and the like need to concentrate on employable skills as much as the technical ones, else their graduates are going to struggle in the real world.
Novartis, where I used to work (lovely, patient, tolerant employers in my experience) did have a grumpy, arrogant genius in IT, and an insane manager put him into customer support, where he would say things to callers like "Have you even switched your computer on, you moron?" He was hastily taken off that but still stayed on for a while, until he greeted a delegation of directors visiting the IT centre by asking "Don't these arseholes have anything better to do than waste our time?" A polite enquiry to IT management as to whether this was typical and whether his presence was really essential led to his early retirement...
(Personally I thought being rude to hapless users seeking help was actually worse than being rude to directors.)
LOL that's brilliant.
Most recent graduates don't understand that for a sysadmin role the entry level is the helpdesk (or Service Desk as ITIL now likes to call it). People skills and documentation are at least as important in that role as the technical skills of course, yet frequently neither have been trained at all!
I think that's fair. I also wonder if he knew it was likely unconstitutional in parts (i.e. those people issued valid US visas), and he wanted it to get struck down by the Supreme Court, so he could turn to his base and say "fucking elites, stopping me from protecting our country". [...]
Basically this was all told to him when he floated the proposals ~6 months or so ago; that the proposed treatment of certain groups including those with green cards, would be hugely problematic in the courts; but they could be dropped easily enough from the scope of the order.
So (not for the first or last time) ... what is Trump's plan here?
I agree - Trump is engaging in the modern day equivalent of blitzkrieg on his liberal enemies. Remember Mexico and the wall ? - yesterday's news - as today's federal injunction takes over. Soon the liberals will have so many protests to go to they won't be able to stop the real smaller changes that Trump wants to happen and will get through.
That is certainly one possibility. As someone said yesterday, he has released hundreds of rabbits, and "liberals" are chasing all of them.
It's also possible having successfully launched Blitzkrieg on the low countries, he has now launched Operation Barbarossa without preparing for Winter...
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
@Steven_Swinford: What a difference 24 hours makes. Government now hugely critical of Donald Trump's 'divisive' immigration ban #marr
@DPJHodges: One thing this saga shows is inexperience of Theresa May's team. Totally blindsided by immigration announcement.
In other words, T May knew nothing whatsoever about it 10 minutes before it was done. Surely Trump would have mentioned it.
If, of course, he’d thought it about 10 minutes before he did it!
Hasn't he been campaigning about doing this for months? Not sure why anyone is surprised and surely governments (including the UK) should have been prepared?
@jimkillock: Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?
Cue outrage from the headbangers...
Not so much a good question as a new benchmark for whataboutery.
Or indeed when there is an "r" in the month. Or not....
We have long had elements of the SNP who feel a stiff breeze justifies a second independence referendum. We now have the English subspecies, where every geopolitical or economic frisson demands Brexit be reconsidered. We just have to accept that this will remain the state of affairs ad nauseam.
I went to bed extremely exercised by Trump's idiocy. This morning, I'm more inclined to think he's already running up against the constitutional limits of government via XO.
For those criticising Theresa May I'm really not sure David Cameron would have done anything differently re Trump. Brexit or no Brexit. The UK always has to accommodate the USA. America is the leading military power in the world, the biggest economic power in the world (alongside China). It's our chief intelligence and security ally. It's the arsenal of the West. The guarantor of European freedom.
Short of an American Mao becoming POTUS, British PMs, Labour or Tory, will go to Washington looking for close friendship. And offering flattery and praise.
TMay did what she had to do and she did it well.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
China, Germany and Japan all down the toilet now of course because they didn't do the lapdog impression.
@Steven_Swinford: What a difference 24 hours makes. Government now hugely critical of Donald Trump's 'divisive' immigration ban #marr
@DPJHodges: One thing this saga shows is inexperience of Theresa May's team. Totally blindsided by immigration announcement.
In other words, T May knew nothing whatsoever about it 10 minutes before it was done. Surely Trump would have mentioned it.
If, of course, he’d thought it about 10 minutes before he did it!
Hasn't he been campaigning about doing this for months? Not sure why anyone is surprised and surely governments (including the UK) should have been prepared?
@PickardJE: Farron quotes Art of the Deal": "He says the best time for you to make a deal is when the other guy is desperate, and she looked desperate."
Mr. Meeks, if the EU hadn't decided it wanted to be a political body moving ever closer towards nationhood and had remained a trade body, we'd still be in. We didn't leave because we dislike trade or Europe, we left because we voted to join a trading bloc and found the boiled frog technique was being used to transform it into a country without any permission from the electorate.
If Europe is disunited, the cause is the deceit of the EU.
I do wonder how Cameron feels, shunning the alleged offer of Juncker for an associate membership because he wanted to 'permanently dock' the UK in the EU. Worked about as well as Blair's plan to kill Scottish nationalism stone dead with devolution.
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
Trump is discovering the difference between governing and campaigning. Will the malignant narcissist adapt?
Thank goodness HMG have decided to wait and see if Don can evolve.
@jimkillock: Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?
Cue outrage from the headbangers...
Not so much a good question as a new benchmark for whataboutery.
Or indeed when there is an "r" in the month. Or not....
We have long had elements of the SNP who feel a stiff breeze justifies a second independence referendum. We now have the English subspecies, where every geopolitical or economic frisson demands Brexit be reconsidered. We just have to accept that this will remain the state of affairs ad nauseam.
I went to bed extremely exercised by Trump's idiocy. This morning, I'm more inclined to think he's already running up against the constitutional limits of government via XO.
For those criticising Theresa May I'm really not sure David Cameron would have done anything differently re Trump. Brexit or no Brexit. The UK always has to accommodate the USA. America is the leading military power in the world, the biggest economic power in the world (alongside China). It's our chief intelligence and security ally. It's the arsenal of the West. The guarantor of European freedom.
Short of an American Mao becoming POTUS, British PMs, Labour or Tory, will go to Washington looking for close friendship. And offering flattery and praise.
TMay did what she had to do and she did it well.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
China, Germany and Japan all down the toilet now of course because they didn't do the lapdog impression.
None of those countries meet the criteria I laid out. You have no idea how important the Five Eyes is to the UK's security.
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
Yes, that's one area where the ban was clumsy. Deliberately? Who knows.
It also affects British citizens - including a Tory MP - who had the temerity to be born in the relevant countries; as well as people who have already made their lives in America, paid taxes in America and broken no American laws.
@Steven_Swinford: What a difference 24 hours makes. Government now hugely critical of Donald Trump's 'divisive' immigration ban #marr
@DPJHodges: One thing this saga shows is inexperience of Theresa May's team. Totally blindsided by immigration announcement.
In other words, T May knew nothing whatsoever about it 10 minutes before it was done. Surely Trump would have mentioned it.
If, of course, he’d thought it about 10 minutes before he did it!
Hasn't he been campaigning about doing this for months? Not sure why anyone is surprised and surely governments (including the UK) should have been prepared?
Maybe they just didn't think he'd actually do it?
See The White Rabbit’s post.
Everyone assumed he'd take out the dodgy bits and leave a reasonably defensible position.
I mean seriously if British service personnel would fought in say Afghanistan are turned away at the border, I think ~90% of people here are going to be opposed.
I don't criticise Theresa May. She did what she had to. But she had to do what she had to do because of Brexit. Britain is in a strategically awful position and she's out of options.
No. Brexit is irrelevant. Imagine if we hadn't Brexited, how would PM Cameron have reacted to Trump? He'd have decided - in the interests of Britain and the west, it's best to go over there asap, flatter him, praise him, and subtly try and get him to see the merits of NATO, tone it down on torture. And so on.
Which is exactly what TMay did.
The idea that a British PM would ever ignore or criticize a new POTUS is daft.
A week ago we were being assured by Leavers that Theresa May being first to meet Donald Trump was a diplomatic coup (it was, incidentally). Now we are being told by Leavers that it would always have been an imperative for any British Prime Minister (it wouldn't, incidentally). The correct response of a Britain still in the EU would have been to obtain public assurances of Donald Trump's commitment to NATO before visiting. No public criticism would have been required but the public anointing could have been withheld, pending establishing whether his intentions were friendly.
With Europe divided, Donald Trump can divide and rule, and is doing so. A united EU could have given him more pause for thought about the US's responsibilities in the region. One of the many malign consequences of Brexit.
Well.. as someone who doesn't seem to have come to terms with the ref result, you are doing a good job of trying to divide people with continual use of the terms leavers and remainers. You don't want to end up like embittered Scott P do you?
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
I would love to see Nigel come to us. I just fear for him having to deal with the arch knob that is Fawaz. I would be much happier if he arrived with a more stable chairman in charge!
I agree - Trump is engaging in the modern day equivalent of blitzkrieg on his liberal enemies. Remember Mexico and the wall ? - yesterday's news - as today's federal injunction takes over. Soon the liberals will have so many protests to go to they won't be able to stop the real smaller changes that Trump wants to happen and will get through.
That is certainly one possibility. As someone said yesterday, he has released hundreds of rabbits, and "liberals" are chasing all of them.
It's also possible having successfully launched Blitzkrieg on the low countries, he has now launched Operation Barbarossa without preparing for Winter...
Next step - paying for the wall. Witholding Tax of 30% by banks and money transfer agents of all remittances to Mexico. Legal workers get the tax back through their tax returns, illegal workers or those not paying enough tax to offset the witholding tax (ie getting funds from black economy) don't.
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
"Allowed"?
A party wins a GE with that in its manifesto and shouldn't be "allowed" to hold one?
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
I think that's fair. I also wonder if he knew it was likely unconstitutional in parts (i.e. those people issued valid US visas), and he wanted it to get struck down by the Supreme Court, so he could turn to his base and say "fucking elitesories, and think "whoahhh... that's a bit much".
The thing that may come back to haunt him on this, of course, is that the countries terrorists who have attacked the US come from are:
Saudi Arabia (2,369 US citizens killed) UAE (314) Egypt (162) Lebanon (159)
While the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Iranians (0), Yemeni (0), Sudan (0) and Libya (0).
It looks awfully like the US ban is more about business interests than preventing actual terrorists from going to the US.
(On the other hand, in Toulouse they must be high-fiving. That $17bn order for Boeing planes is surely soon going to be going to Airbus instead.)
Wow. I just read this. Read it.
It this is true, it looks like a lot of the hysteria against Trump isn't just overdone, it's based on lies. Alternative Facts from the Snowflake Left.
"So for more than a year it has been US policy to discriminate against, target and even begin to ban people from the seven countries that Trump is accused of banning immigrants and visitors from. CNN even hinted at this by noting “those countries were named in a 2016 law concerning immigration visas as ‘countries of concern.'” But why didn’t CNN note that the seven countries were not named and that in fact they are only on the list because of Obama’s policy?"
That's fairly incredible.
The Terrorist Travel Prevention Act is an act of Congress, not an executive order. So he's being quite misleading too.
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
Trump is discovering the difference between governing and campaigning. Will the malignant narcissist adapt?
Thank goodness HMG have decided to wait and see if Don can evolve.
Evolution is, at least in part, a result of adaptation to external stimuli.
That being said, there are some obvious flaws in the current approach that Trump has had a year (!) to avoid. Flaws, because there are going to be at least some cases that will hit home domestically. War heroes, sportspeople, etc.
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
"Allowed"?
A party wins a GE with that in its manifesto and shouldn't be "allowed" to hold one?
I don't want to start the A50 debate again, but the MPs did vote for the referendum. The government then spent tax payers money on an information booklet telling voters that the government would implement what the people decided. They didn't say that they'd "try to" implement what the people decided. The time for MPs to get upset about direct democracy was long before June 23.
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
I think that's fair. I also wonder if he knew it was likely unconstitutional in parts (i.e. those people issued valid US visas), and he wanted it to get struck down by the Supreme Court, so he could turn to his base and say "fucking elitesories, and think "whoahhh... that's a bit much".
The thing that may come back to haunt him on this, of course, is that the countries terrorists who have attacked the US come from are:
Saudi Arabia (2,369 US citizens killed) UAE (314) Egypt (162) Lebanon (159)
While the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Iranians (0), Yemeni (0), Sudan (0) and Libya (0).
It looks awfully like the US ban is more about business interests than preventing actual terrorists from going to the US.
(On the other hand, in Toulouse they must be high-fiving. That $17bn order for Boeing planes is surely soon going to be going to Airbus instead.)
Wow. I just read this. Read it.
It this is true, it looks like a lot of the hysteria against Trump isn't just overdone, it's based on lies. Alternativly on the list because of Obama’s policy?"
That's fairly incredible.
The Terrorist Travel Prevention Act is an act of Congress, not an executive order. So he's being quite misleading too.
Nonetheless it puts to bed that bollocks about Trump's business interests determining the list.
Trump has taken Obama's list, and Obama's policy. And amped it up to 11
Quite, he could have amped it to 10 much more easily. By going to 11, as it were, he has changed the rules.
The supplementaries indicate why Brexit isn't the gamechanger for Scottish Independence many thought it would be.
It also found that, when asked for their favoured option if Scotland becomes independent after the UK leaves the EU, about a third of voters (31%) oppose Scotland applying to join the EU while 48% are in favour and 21% don’t know. Among those who backed independence in 2014, 21% oppose an independent Scotland seeking to join the EU while 63% are in favour and 17% don’t know.
Similarly, among those who voted “yes” to Scottish independence, about a quarter (26%) oppose the automatic right of people from other European countries to live and work in Scotland — a central feature of EU membership. Among Scots voters as a whole, 40% support continued freedom of movement after Brexit and 37% are opposed.
Panelbase poll found enthusiasm for a pre-Brexit “indyref2” has fallen away — from 43% last June to 32% in September and only 27% now, and a majority (51%) do not want another independence vote held within the next few years.
I've just read one of the lead articles in the Sunday Times. If true, I wonder if Trump's aides realise the depth of feeling the British people have for the Royal family. If he behaves as reported, I could see an incredible backlash almost immediately
Panelbase poll found enthusiasm for a pre-Brexit “indyref2” has fallen away — from 43% last June to 32% in September and only 27% now, and a majority (51%) do not want another independence vote held within the next few years.
Nicola should have done it on 24th June. Looks like she's missed the boat...
I've just read one of the lead articles in the Sunday Times. If true, I wonder if Trump's aides realise the depth of feeling the British people have for the Royal family. If he behaves as reported, I could see an incredible backlash almost immediately
For those that don't have access to ST, what's the story about?
I've just read one of the lead articles in the Sunday Times. If true, I wonder if Trump's aides realise the depth of feeling the British people have for the Royal family. If he behaves as reported, I could see an incredible backlash almost immediately
Trump does not want to be greeted by Prince Charles, but by William and Kate.
I did answer the question. 'Why would anyone trigger article 50'? 'Because David Cameron held a referendum'. Question and answer.
That wasn't the question asked. Want another go?
Yes it was, in more words.
Question: "Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?"
Answer: "Anyone sane would trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up because David Cameron thought it would be a good idea to put our EU membership to the public".
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Trump's (temporary) ban is clumsy, messy and possibly counterproductive. But there's a lot of liberal overreaction. Carter banned all Iranians, I think. And Shia? Obama banned Iraqis. And of course Obama has been bombing and droning Muslims for eight years. A drone on your head is a LOT messier than a 90 day wait for a visa.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
I think that's fair. I also wonder if he knew it was likely unconstitutional in parts (i.e. those people issued valid US visas), and he wanted it to get struck down by the Supreme Court, so he could turn to his base and say "fucking elitesories, and think "whoahhh... that's a bit much".
The thing that may come back to haunt him on this, of course, is that the countries terrorists who have attacked the US come from are:
Saudi Arabia (2,369 US citizens killed) UAE (314) Egypt (162) Lebanon (159)
While the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Iranians (0), Yemeni (0), Sudan (0) and Libya (0).
It looks awfully like the US ban is more about business interests than preventing actual terrorists from going to the US.
(On the other hand, in Toulouse they must be high-fiving. That $17bn order for Boeing planes is surely soon going to be going to Airbus instead.)
Wow. I just read this. Read it.
It this is true, it looks like a lot of the hysteria against Trump isn't just overdone, it's based on lies. Alternativly on the list because of Obama’s policy?"
That's fairly incredible.
The Terrorist Travel Prevention Act is an act of Congress, not an executive order. So he's being quite misleading too.
Nonetheless it puts to bed that bollocks about Trump's business interests determining the list.
Trump has taken Obama's list, and Obama's policy. And amped it up to 11
@GuardianAnushka: Jeremy Corbyn says "slightly odd" Trump has been invited so quickly to state visit and thinks it'll be kicked into "long grass" #peston
@GuardianAnushka: Corbyn: "I'm not happy with him coming here until the ban is lifted"
British prime minister helps legitimise Donald Trump's presidency of the US by rushing to the US, saying Britain and the US are going to lead the world again (sic), and holding his hand for the cameras - in one of the most vomit-inducing shows put on by a British official in recent decades.
The VERY NEXT DAY, Trump issues an order banning entry to the US by people from a list of countries that he doesn't do business with and by refugees from everywhere. Condemnation ensues. Even those who said sweet fanny-adams when the US and Britain blew Arab children to bits in Iraq started expressing opposition when scientists and film-makers and medics who live in the US and who in some cases have worked for its armed forces start getting detained because they hold passports from the targeted countries.
Where does that leave Number Ten's propagandists?
Theresa "NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN" May should be out on her ear. Editorialists should compare the HAND-HOLD with the famous PIECE OF PAPER.
US citizen Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign minister (well where the hell is he?) is keeping his trap mostly shut. He should resign too, but maybe the loony thinks he can seize Number 10? It wouldn't surprise me.
Now guess what? The story is being put out that that handshake - that emetic public act saying "Britain Loves Trump" that May and her advisers were guilty of on Thursday - was in fact NOTHING OF THE KIND. Apparently it only happened because Trump is TERRIFIED of steps and staircases. What an absolute load of crap.
We all know Trump is mentally ill. "This is big stuff" said the brat with the psycho problems as he signed the banning order. Like Mussolini, he is strongly against shaking hands. But there is no known record of him being phobic about steps. He has in the past avoided handshakes where thumbs-up or open-handed gestures can be done for the cameras instead. But in meetings with leaders of other countries, and sometimes on the stage, handshakes cannot at present be dispensed with. So he grins and bears it, and waits until he's off-camera before he scrubs his hands with alcohol. Loonies sometimes can grin and bear things.
Steps? Well they aren't considered part of protocol. If he'd wanted to avoid walking down steps with the Tory leader, he could have done.
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
I would love to see Nigel come to us. I just fear for him having to deal with the arch knob that is Fawaz. I would be much happier if he arrived with a more stable chairman in charge!
There is that! Plus he'll never live up to his dad. No-one could (partly because Brian Clough was only half of that magical partnership - Peter Taylor had an extraordinary knowledge of players and how they could fit into the team).
I've just read one of the lead articles in the Sunday Times. If true, I wonder if Trump's aides realise the depth of feeling the British people have for the Royal family. If he behaves as reported, I could see an incredible backlash almost immediately
For those that don't have access to ST, what's the story about?
It's an article reporting that Trump doesn't want to meet the next king as he doesn't agree with him about global warming and may get upset. He would prefer a nice cup of tea with his eldest son and wife
More interesting is the percentage of Scots who want a new indyref before Brexit is done: 27%.
That's down from 43% in June 2016
That's the BIG change. Scots, very sensibly, don't want any more turmoil right now - and they want to see how Brexit turns out before deciding whether to stay or go.
Sturgeon would be mad to call an indyref on those figures, pre Brexit. And indeed she won't. But she wants to keep threatening one, so that Theresa says No, so Nicola can say Look we wuz robbed, without having to back down or lose, calamitously, a 2nd vote.
Cue PB Brexityoons telling Theresa the Appeaser to bring it on. Not.
@SkyNewsBreak: German Chancellor Merkel: it is "not justified to put people from specific background or faith under general suspicion" to combat terrorism
British prime minister helps legitimise Donald Trump's presidency of the US by rushing to the US, saying Britain and the US are going to lead the world again (sic), and holding his hand for the cameras - in one of the most vomit-inducing shows put on by a British official in recent decades.
The VERY NEXT DAY, Trump issues an order banning entry to the US by people from a list of countries that he doesn't do business with and by refugees from everywhere. Condemnation ensues. Even those who said sweet fanny-adams when the US and Britain blew Arab children to bits in Iraq started expressing opposition when scientists and film-makers and medics who live in the US and who in some cases have worked for its armed forces start getting detained because they hold passports from the targeted countries.
Where does that leave Number Ten's propagandists?
Theresa "NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN" May should be out on her ear. Editorialists should compare the HAND-HOLD with the famous PIECE OF PAPER.
US citizen Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign minister (well where the hell is he?) is keeping his trap mostly shut. He should resign too, but maybe the loony thinks he can seize Number 10? It wouldn't surprise me.
Now guess what? The story is being put out that that handshake - that emetic public act saying "Britain Loves Trump" that May and her advisers were guilty of on Thursday - was in fact NOTHING OF THE KIND. Apparently it only happened because Trump is TERRIFIED of steps and staircases. What an absolute load of crap.
We all know Trump is mentally ill. "This is big stuff" said the brat with the psycho problems as he signed the banning order. Like Mussolini, he is strongly against shaking hands. But there is no known record of him being phobic about steps. He has in the past avoided handshakes where thumbs-up or open-handed gestures can be done for the cameras instead. But in meetings with leaders of other countries, and sometimes on the stage, handshakes cannot at present be dispensed with. So he grins and bears it, and waits until he's off-camera before he scrubs his hands with alcohol. Loonies sometimes can grin and bear things.
Steps? Well they aren't considered part of protocol. If he'd wanted to avoid walking down steps with the Tory leader, he could have done.
The staircase-phobia story is lies.
Lies to shore up Theresa May's position.
AAAhh. so this is what "alternative facts" reads as.
An interesting fact: President Obama issued fewer executive orders than any two-term US president since the 1890s.
I don't know a huge amount about US politics, but it seems to me he should have issued a few more if he wanted to get a bit more done (closing Guantanamo Bay etc.)
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
I would love to see Nigel come to us. I just fear for him having to deal with the arch knob that is Fawaz. I would be much happier if he arrived with a more stable chairman in charge!
There is that! Plus he'll never live up to his dad. No-one could (partly because Brian Clough was only half of that magical partnership - Peter Taylor had an extraordinary knowledge of players and how they could fit into the team).
Very, very difficult for a son to take over from his father in a job where ability is important. I’m sure others will put me right, but IIRC English kings tended to alternate ..... competent, incompetent.
British prime minister helps legitimise Donald Trump's presidency of the US by rushing to the US, saying Britain and the US are going to lead the world again (sic), and holding his hand for the cameras - in one of the most vomit-inducing shows put on by a British official in recent decades.
The VERY NEXT DAY, Trump issues an order banning entry to the US by people from a list of countries that he doesn't do business with and by refugees from everywhere. Condemnation ensues. Even those who said sweet fanny-adams when the US and Britain blew Arab children to bits in Iraq started expressing opposition when scientists and film-makers and medics who live in the US and who in some cases have worked for its armed forces start getting detained because they hold passports from the targeted countries.
Where does that leave Number Ten's propagandists?
Theresa "NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN" May should be out on her ear. Editorialists should compare the HAND-HOLD with the famous PIECE OF PAPER.
US citizen Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign minister (well where the hell is he?) is keeping his trap mostly shut. He should resign too, but maybe the loony thinks he can seize Number 10? It wouldn't surprise me.
Now guess what? The story is being put out that that handshake - that emetic public act saying "Britain Loves Trump" that May and her advisers were guilty of on Thursday - was in fact NOTHING OF THE KIND. Apparently it only happened because Trump is TERRIFIED of steps and staircases. What an absolute load of crap.
We all know Trump is mentally ill. "This is big stuff" said the brat with the psycho problems as he signed the banning order. Like Mussolini, he is strongly against shaking hands. But there is no known record of him being phobic about steps. He has in the past avoided handshakes where thumbs-up or open-handed gestures can be done for the cameras instead. But in meetings with leaders of other countries, and sometimes on the stage, handshakes cannot at present be dispensed with. So he grins and bears it, and waits until he's off-camera before he scrubs his hands with alcohol. Loonies sometimes can grin and bear things.
Steps? Well they aren't considered part of protocol. If he'd wanted to avoid walking down steps with the Tory leader, he could have done.
The staircase-phobia story is lies.
Lies to shore up Theresa May's position.
Dromedary, I don't know why to conspire to come up with some complicated theory. May has simply been trying to get the most out of a potentially powerful relationship without having to agree with whatever stupid policy Trump comes up next. This is man management, like it would be with the occasional friend, business associate and/or colleague.
I think Donald Trump has done exactly the right thing. There have two or three terrorist attacks in the USA every year, and he has tied the inevitable attacks to come to his opposition. Who appear to value the rights of everybody in the world above american lives.
@SkyNewsBreak: German Chancellor Merkel: it is "not justified to put people from specific background or faith under general suspicion" to combat terrorism
No Angela, keep those five year old Christian children under just the same level of general suspicion as young Muslim guys from war zones who have broken down fences to gain illegal access into Europe. Top plan.
I've just read one of the lead articles in the Sunday Times. If true, I wonder if Trump's aides realise the depth of feeling the British people have for the Royal family. If he behaves as reported, I could see an incredible backlash almost immediately
For those that don't have access to ST, what's the story about?
It's an article reporting that Trump doesn't want to meet the next king as he doesn't agree with him about global warming and may get upset. He would prefer a nice cup of tea with his eldest son and wife
Oh right. Suspect Prince Philip is the one he should be wary of... And HMQ's "icy" stare.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
"Partner" indeed. That's not a partnership. And Britain exports FAR MORE to the rest of the EU than it does to the US.
Britain's no.1 (excuse my British usage instead of "#") export market is EU27.
An interesting fact: President Obama issued fewer executive orders than any two-term US president since the 1890s.
I don't know a huge amount about US politics, but it seems to me he should have issued a few more if he wanted to get a bit more done (closing Guantanamo Bay etc.)
Executive orders are a quite complicated issue within the nature of the federal executive, resting on a complex body of law, culture and political capital.
It's only with the Article 50 case that we've come close to a similar point in the UK.
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
I would love to see Nigel come to us. I just fear for him having to deal with the arch knob that is Fawaz. I would be much happier if he arrived with a more stable chairman in charge!
There is that! Plus he'll never live up to his dad. No-one could (partly because Brian Clough was only half of that magical partnership - Peter Taylor had an extraordinary knowledge of players and how they could fit into the team).
Very, very difficult for a son to take over from his father in a job where ability is important. I’m sure others will put me right, but IIRC English kings tended to alternate ..... competent, incompetent.
It's been a pretty good run since William IV, with the swiftly corrected aberration of Edward VIII.
@SkyNewsBreak: German Chancellor Merkel: it is "not justified to put people from specific background or faith under general suspicion" to combat terrorism
No Angela, keep those five year old Christian children under just the same level of general suspicion as young Muslim guys from war zones who have broken down fences to gain illegal access into Europe. Top plan.
How do you automagically tell if a child is Christian, Muslim, Atheist, or any other religion?
How does the BBC justify giving so much air time to the leader of a party that has single digit MPs and less than 10% support in the country?
Does it give Farron as much time as it gives someone who is not a party leader at all and has failed seven times to be elected to Parliament?
It was a silly comment by BR in the first place; it is hardly as if the LibDems are over-reported on the BBC, and appearances by LibDems on QT or AQ nowadays are the exception. The BBC, like all journalism, reports issues, not just elections, and on the Brexit issue the LibDems have a distinct (in England at least) perspective.
Reminiscent of the last week in June when we read here that Corbyn was finished (and likely to be replaced by Angela Eagle), an SDP MkII was going to be formed and the economy was collapsing.
On topic, I'm with Mr Eagles on this one: in fact I would be amazed if there were another national (as opposed to local) referendum in the U.K. in my lifetime.
There will be no more UK wide referendums - the one good consequence of the Brexit vote. We are a representative democracy, and the EU referendum should never been allowed to happen.
And saying that will KILL Labour's remaining vote.
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
I would love to see Nigel come to us. I just fear for him having to deal with the arch knob that is Fawaz. I would be much happier if he arrived with a more stable chairman in charge!
There is that! Plus he'll never live up to his dad. No-one could (partly because Brian Clough was only half of that magical partnership - Peter Taylor had an extraordinary knowledge of players and how they could fit into the team).
Very, very difficult for a son to take over from his father in a job where ability is important. I’m sure others will put me right, but IIRC English kings tended to alternate ..... competent, incompetent.
It's been a pretty good run since William IV, with the swiftly corrected aberration of Edward VIII.
Sad but interesting fact, since 1830 when William IV ascended to the throne, of those 187 years, 129 years and counting, have been occupied by just two monarchs, both women, whilst the other six monarchs have been men.
Reminiscent of the last week in June when we read here that Corbyn was finished (and likely to be replaced by Angela Eagle), an SDP MkII was going to be formed and the economy was collapsing.
Another interesting fact is that from 1207-1377 England had just four kings (Henry III, and Edwards I-III). Given the life expectancy at the time it's quite surprising 170 years was covered by just a quartet of them.
Arguably Trump won't care that his ban has been (temporarily) overturned. It just all feeds into his narrative...
He has achieved his goal, met his campaign promise only to be thwarted by those liberal lefties, win win for him.
The ban hasn't been overturned has it? Just the subsequent deportations. So anyone not in the country still can't come, and anyone already there is stuck in limbo.
Yet I don't recall Le tout Manhattan marching on the White House when Obama hit the drone button time and again.
The thing that may come back to haunt him on this, of course, is that the countries terrorists who have attacked the US come from are:
Saudi Arabia (2,369 US citizens killed) UAE (314) Egypt (162) Lebanon (159)
While the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Iranians (0), Yemeni (0), Sudan (0) and Libya (0).
It looks awfully like the US ban is more about business interests than preventing actual terrorists from going to the US.
(On the other hand, in Toulouse they must be high-fiving. That $17bn order for Boeing planes is surely soon going to be going to Airbus instead.)
Wow. I just read this. Read it.
It this is true, it looks like a lot of the hysteria against Trump isn't just overdone, it's based on lies. Alternativly on the list because of Obama’s policy?"
That's fairly incredible.
The Terrorist Travel Prevention Act is an act of Congress, not an executive order. So he's being quite misleading too.
Nonetheless it puts to bed that bollocks about Trump's business interests determining the list.
Trump has taken Obama's list, and Obama's policy. And amped it up to 11
To say that enabled Trump's egregious action is more than a bit of a stretch. And it has been discussed in the 'liberal media',who have rowed back on the 'bollocks'. The point that Saudis Arabia and the UAE not appearing on this list makes a mockery of its purported intent remains a valid one.
Trump boasted about having sex with Prince William's Mum and wanted to see photos of his wife naked. Theresa May offers him a state visit in the hope it will lead to more high-end cheese exports to the US.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
"Partner" indeed. That's not a partnership. And Britain exports FAR MORE to the rest of the EU than it does to the US.
Britain's no.1 (excuse my British usage instead of "#") export market is EU27.
I prefer not to treat the EU27 as some monolithic blob - you, of course, are at liberty to do as you please. Our major trading partners are the USA, China, Germany, France, Norway and the Netherlands. We can toss Belgium, Italy and Spain in for good measure. We run a trade surplus with the USA & a tiny surplus with the RoI. The rest are all deficits.
I think Donald Trump has done exactly the right thing. There have two or three terrorist attacks in the USA every year, and he has tied the inevitable attacks to come to his opposition. Who appear to value the rights of everybody in the world above american lives.
Nonsense - there has been significantly less than one Islamic terrorist attack per year in the US since 9/11, which suggests the current system is working fine. Toddlers with guns are a far bigger threat to Americans.
As others have pointed out, Saudi Arabia is not on the list despite being by far the nation with the most civilian American blood on its hands.
"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."
Not - "we WILL give the NHS more money". The point was that outside the EU we *could* give the NHS more money (because we won't be paying into EU coffers) and we *should* give that money to the NHS.
Will Vlad impose a ban on Muslims entering Russia next, just to stir things up even more?
No. Russian policy towards the Chechens has changed since 1999. Kadyrov has offered to send Chechen troops to Syria. One in seven citizens of the Russian Federation is Muslim.
Reminiscent of the last week in June when we read here that Corbyn was finished (and likely to be replaced by Angela Eagle), an SDP MkII was going to be formed and the economy was collapsing.
I still break out in a cold sweat over the June 27th.
Scheduled a thread to go up at 5am, climb into bed at 1am, and get an alert that Hillary Benn has been sacked, so have to write a thread in bed, whilst desperately wanting to go to sleep.
Wake up a few hours later find several other shadow cabinet ministers have resigned, and are still resigning, begin writing another thread, then David Herdson says he's just written another thread on the same topic, so mine ends up on the cutting room floor.
Start to write another thread and then David drops me another email, saying he's in a rich vein of form, and has got another thread.
I think on that day, PB published six threads in one day, which I think is a record for a non election day.
I think Donald Trump has done exactly the right thing. There have two or three terrorist attacks in the USA every year, and he has tied the inevitable attacks to come to his opposition. Who appear to value the rights of everybody in the world above american lives.
When was the last time a Tory MP committed a terrorist attack in the US? Or someone fleeing persecution in Syria, for that matter?
Trump is doing what President's do-Working for the people & keeping Americans safe.It may seem extreme to some but we now live in extreme times.Get over it or you'll all have heart attacks sooner than necessary.
Yes, I'll repeat what I posted last night. Those who think May should have temporised about visiting our #1 military partner, #1 intelligence partner, #1 bilateral investment partner and #1 export market are fuckwits halfwits.
"Partner" indeed. That's not a partnership. And Britain exports FAR MORE to the rest of the EU than it does to the US.
Britain's no.1 (excuse my British usage instead of "#") export market is EU27.
I prefer not to treat the EU27 as some monolithic blob - you, of course, are at liberty to do as you please. Our major trading partners are the USA, China, Germany, France, Norway and the Netherlands. We can toss Belgium, Italy and Spain in for good measure. We run a trade surplus with the USA & a tiny surplus with the RoI. The rest are all deficits.
Whether you like it or not, the EU is a single market.
Trump is doing what President's do-Working for the people & keeping Americans safe.It may seem extreme to some but we now live in extreme times.Get over it or you'll all have heart attacks sooner than necessary.
You could easily have posted the same nonsense in 1938
Ta. I'd say number per year is a better metric ("any two term president") looks like you are defining your way into your argument. I don't like data slicing as a rule.
Still gives broadly the same answer (based on quick eyeball) - comparable to Bush2 - below most others until McKinley.
Just read the BTL comments on the Mail website (!) About half the posters insist Trump's ban doesn't apply to UK passport holders (despite the article explicitly saying it does and providing examples). Another quarter seem to think that's a good thing. Is the problem not Fake News, but simply a large cohort who won't believe anything which disagrees with them? This applies to Left and Right btw.
@SophyRidgeSky: The Polish Deputy Prime Minister tells me financial services jobs are already starting to move from the UK to Poland due to Brexit #ridge
Comments
Also didn't prove your point as answering your question is not outrage.
http://tinyurl.com/m5zlrpg
Much happening?
@DPJHodges: One thing this saga shows is inexperience of Theresa May's team. Totally blindsided by immigration announcement.
If, of course, he’d thought it about 10 minutes before he did it!
With Europe divided, Donald Trump can divide and rule, and is doing so. A united EU could have given him more pause for thought about the US's responsibilities in the region. One of the many malign consequences of Brexit.
Most recent graduates don't understand that for a sysadmin role the entry level is the helpdesk (or Service Desk as ITIL now likes to call it). People skills and documentation are at least as important in that role as the technical skills of course, yet frequently neither have been trained at all!
So (not for the first or last time) ... what is Trump's plan here?
It's also possible having successfully launched Blitzkrieg on the low countries, he has now launched Operation Barbarossa without preparing for Winter...
"You're too stupid to vote". Keep shouting it from the rooftops...
(BTW - A Clough back at the City Ground? Looks likely.....)
Maybe they just didn't think he'd actually do it?
If Europe is disunited, the cause is the deceit of the EU.
I do wonder how Cameron feels, shunning the alleged offer of Juncker for an associate membership because he wanted to 'permanently dock' the UK in the EU. Worked about as well as Blair's plan to kill Scottish nationalism stone dead with devolution.
Only a tad, mind.
A maximum bet = 5pts
A minimum bet = 0.25pts
This mornings tip seems as though it is a maximum? Put your savings on it rather than keep them in the bank?
I mean seriously if British service personnel would fought in say Afghanistan are turned away at the border, I think ~90% of people here are going to be opposed.
#TheresaTheAppeaser
A party wins a GE with that in its manifesto and shouldn't be "allowed" to hold one?
Yes to Independence 46% (-1)
No to Independence 54% (+1)
Changes since September 2016
That being said, there are some obvious flaws in the current approach that Trump has had a year (!) to avoid. Flaws, because there are going to be at least some cases that will hit home domestically. War heroes, sportspeople, etc.
It also found that, when asked for their favoured option if Scotland becomes independent after the UK leaves the EU, about a third of voters (31%) oppose Scotland applying to join the EU while 48% are in favour and 21% don’t know. Among those who backed independence in 2014, 21% oppose an independent Scotland seeking to join the EU while 63% are in favour and 17% don’t know.
Similarly, among those who voted “yes” to Scottish independence, about a quarter (26%) oppose the automatic right of people from other European countries to live and work in Scotland — a central feature of EU membership. Among Scots voters as a whole, 40% support continued freedom of movement after Brexit and 37% are opposed.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3464039/Donald-Trump-claimed-Princess-Diana-crazy-said-slept-without-hesitation-supermodel-beauty.html
https://www.joe.co.uk/news/unsettling-tweet-donald-trump-kate-middleton-resurfaced/109918
And all so that we can export more high quality cheese to the US.
Question: "Why on earth would anyone sane trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up?"
Answer: "Anyone sane would trigger Article 50 in the midst of this emerging global diplomatic motorway pile up because David Cameron thought it would be a good idea to put our EU membership to the public".
@GuardianAnushka: Corbyn: "I'm not happy with him coming here until the ban is lifted"
The VERY NEXT DAY, Trump issues an order banning entry to the US by people from a list of countries that he doesn't do business with and by refugees from everywhere. Condemnation ensues. Even those who said sweet fanny-adams when the US and Britain blew Arab children to bits in Iraq started expressing opposition when scientists and film-makers and medics who live in the US and who in some cases have worked for its armed forces start getting detained because they hold passports from the targeted countries.
Where does that leave Number Ten's propagandists?
Theresa "NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN" May should be out on her ear. Editorialists should compare the HAND-HOLD with the famous PIECE OF PAPER.
US citizen Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign minister (well where the hell is he?) is keeping his trap mostly shut. He should resign too, but maybe the loony thinks he can seize Number 10? It wouldn't surprise me.
Now guess what? The story is being put out that that handshake - that emetic public act saying "Britain Loves Trump" that May and her advisers were guilty of on Thursday - was in fact NOTHING OF THE KIND. Apparently it only happened because Trump is TERRIFIED of steps and staircases. What an absolute load of crap.
We all know Trump is mentally ill. "This is big stuff" said the brat with the psycho problems as he signed the banning order. Like Mussolini, he is strongly against shaking hands. But there is no known record of him being phobic about steps. He has in the past avoided handshakes where thumbs-up or open-handed gestures can be done for the cameras instead. But in meetings with leaders of other countries, and sometimes on the stage, handshakes cannot at present be dispensed with. So he grins and bears it, and waits until he's off-camera before he scrubs his hands with alcohol. Loonies sometimes can grin and bear things.
Steps? Well they aren't considered part of protocol. If he'd wanted to avoid walking down steps with the Tory leader, he could have done.
The staircase-phobia story is lies.
Lies to shore up Theresa May's position.
Not.
Britain's no.1 (excuse my British usage instead of "#") export market is EU27.
It's only with the Article 50 case that we've come close to a similar point in the UK.
Reminiscent of the last week in June when we read here that Corbyn was finished (and likely to be replaced by Angela Eagle), an SDP MkII was going to be formed and the economy was collapsing.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
Another interesting fact is that from 1207-1377 England had just four kings (Henry III, and Edwards I-III). Given the life expectancy at the time it's quite surprising 170 years was covered by just a quartet of them.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158
To say that enabled Trump's egregious action is more than a bit of a stretch. And it has been discussed in the 'liberal media',who have rowed back on the 'bollocks'.
The point that Saudis Arabia and the UAE not appearing on this list makes a mockery of its purported intent remains a valid one.
As others have pointed out, Saudi Arabia is not on the list despite being by far the nation with the most civilian American blood on its hands.
"Let us give the NHS more money."
Not - "we WILL give the NHS more money". The point was that outside the EU we *could* give the NHS more money (because we won't be paying into EU coffers) and we *should* give that money to the NHS.
Got it yet? No? Never mind..
Scheduled a thread to go up at 5am, climb into bed at 1am, and get an alert that Hillary Benn has been sacked, so have to write a thread in bed, whilst desperately wanting to go to sleep.
Wake up a few hours later find several other shadow cabinet ministers have resigned, and are still resigning, begin writing another thread, then David Herdson says he's just written another thread on the same topic, so mine ends up on the cutting room floor.
Start to write another thread and then David drops me another email, saying he's in a rich vein of form, and has got another thread.
I think on that day, PB published six threads in one day, which I think is a record for a non election day.
Still gives broadly the same answer (based on quick eyeball) - comparable to Bush2 - below most others until McKinley.