After the new president banned refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries, Google, Facebook, Salesforce, Microsoft and others railed against the move, saying it violated the country’s principles and risked disrupting its engine of innovation. Trump’s next steps could strike even closer to home: His administration has drafted an executive order aimed at overhauling the work-visa programs technology companies depend on to hire tens of thousands of employees each year.
How many engineers do Google, Facebook and Microsoft recruit from Somalia I wonder. Or possibly it has nothing to do with the "engine of innovation" and everything to do with the liberal principles of the companies and their founders. There is nothing wrong with that of course, but they should say so, and spare us the bullshit.
Perhaps you should read the article.
I did. When those changes happen they can complain about them, but visa regulations like that need to be passed by congress, indeed it seems some of the measures are being sponsored by Democrats. But it's hardly a revolutionary idea that jobs should be offered to the locals first, thats a rule that exists in the vast majority of countries right now.
My experience of some of the subcontinent consultancies suggests that specialised staff is a little generous in many cases, bums on seats is often a more appropriate description
You are absolutely right: H1B visas were hideously abused by some of the US/Indian consulting companies. Much less so, I suspect, by Facebook/Google/Microsoft/Intel/etc.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Which is exactly the SNP pitch. Funny that...
Yes and EU looks much more inviting than the butt licking UK
Morning Malc - how much does Scotland export to the EU and how much to England.
And surprised a Scotsman wants to be ruled by Brussels
Indeed. And this time the question shouldn't be the vague but loaded "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Given that Brexit is being used explicitly by the SNP to roll the dice again, I would suggest:
"Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to remain part of the EU?"
That would ensure that all the consequences as explicitly on the table - trade tariffs with England, border controls, joining Schengen, adoption of the Euro.
Remember that the wording has to be agreed and thus isn't just up to the SNP nor the Scottish Government. The UK Government is a player too with the Electoral Commission acting as referee. Last time Cameron pretty well rolled over and agreed to a wording referencing "independence" that clearly affected the outcome compared to more neutral alternatives that referred to leaving the UK.
Whether or not a new Scottish referendum referred to the EU, if there is to be a next time the bottom line for the UK government should be that the word "independence" should be no-where on the ballot paper.
LOL, Yes lord and Master, we will do exactly as you command.
LOL. Those would be the very same trade tariffs and border controls that the Government assures us will NOT apply to Ireland. The fundamental weakness in the proposition – why would border patrol boats be needed on the Tweed but not on the Foyle?
The usual Unionist response is that the security situation means NI requires a unique solution. The tumbleweed tends to blow when they're asked if that means the threat of violence should be rewarded.
Wow, No 10 are determined to make this even worse aren't they? Own the decision.
The worst of both worlds. The petition guarantees it will be covered by the US media and Trump follows this kind of minutiae about who offended him and how. The message will go out that we don't really want to host Trump but we have to suck it up because we need a trade deal and don't want to 'undo everything'.
And the forthcoming protests bring the issues of Trump, Brexit and May together in one convenient package. No wonder that Anti-England is on the warpath.
People are seizing on Trump as yet another way of blocking Brexit, on some sort of "it's too risky right now" basis. When that fails they'll find something else, and as the end date approaches of us actually leaving the EU I would imagine there will be increasingly desperate arguments made against it.
It all sounds pretty desparate now, any more desparate and its going to be moving into "embarrassing" and eventually into "cringeworthy"
To be fair I was using Trump as an argument against Brexit all along. US interests are not aligned with ours.
I wish I was party to all the information people seem to have here today. Southam appears to be party to the details of the negotiation between the Trump team and the British Government and clearly has a much better handle on what is in the national interest than any of the cabinet or the civil service. As if that is not enough Topping clearly has access to the details of the side channel negotiations between the government and our EU partners and is clearly much better placed to know whether there was any mileage in freedom of movement vs the single market. We are truly blessed to have such insights into these closely held and confidential matters, long may it continue
Booooorrrrrinnnngggg.
We are all discussing likely scenarios. If you want to wait until 2019 when we will know for sure what the A50 negotiations look like then you could save yourself a whole bunch of bits & bytes.
You were telling us quite forcefully that the government had thrown away the single market without even testing to see if there was room for manoeuvre on freedom of movement. On what basis, perhaps the conversation has happened and they were told to piss off, if we float various ideas now and they say no, why would they say yes later when the clock is running ?
Eh? Theresa May has ruled out freedom of movement. She has gone from no running commentary to an explicit submission on the matter of single market membership, the thing that arguably will cause the greatest furore ahead of our leaving.
Absolutely. It has been suggested that this is because the side channel conversations have told her there is no way to keep Freedom of Movement and stay in the single market, and yet you told us down thread that she was throwing away the single market without having tested this assumption. So I repeat, what basis do you have for knowing that it hasnt been tested ?
It doesn't matter what someone said to someone else plus how would they know. All of sudden you take tittle tattle ("side channel conversations"?? Were you there?) as gospel?. Prove to me those side channel conversations took place? Plus even if they did so what? Great negotiating tactics by the EU. Thank god you're not on our negotiation team. What a shame someone as idiotic as you evidently was.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Which is exactly the SNP pitch. Funny that...
Yes and EU looks much more inviting than the butt licking UK
Morning Malc - how much does Scotland export to the EU and how much to England.
And surprised a Scotsman wants to be ruled by Brussels
Indeed. And this time the question shouldn't be the vague but loaded "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Given that Brexit is being used explicitly by the SNP to roll the dice again, I would suggest:
"Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to remain part of the EU?"
That would ensure that all the consequences as explicitly on the table - trade tariffs with England, border controls, joining Schengen, adoption of the Euro.
Remember that the wording has to be agreed and thus isn't just up to the SNP nor the Scottish Government. The UK Government is a player too with the Electoral Commission acting as referee. Last time Cameron pretty well rolled over and agreed to a wording referencing "independence" that clearly affected the outcome compared to more neutral alternatives that referred to leaving the UK.
Whether or not a new Scottish referendum referred to the EU, if there is to be a next time the bottom line for the UK government should be that the word "independence" should be no-where on the ballot paper.
LOL, Yes lord and Master, we will do exactly as you command.
LOL. Those would be the very same trade tariffs and border controls that the Government assures us will NOT apply to Ireland. The fundamental weakness in the proposition – why would border patrol boats be needed on the Tweed but not on the Foyle?
The usual Unionist response is that the security situation means NI requires a unique solution. The tumbleweed tends to blow when they're asked if that means the threat of violence should be rewarded.
LOL. Yes, quite. It's an utterly absurd position and Nicola will enjoy destroying it. By the way, best of luck with independence. I was (as you know) a staunch unionist last time. Now I am a pragmatic supporter of independence for Scotland. I have no doubt we will strike a decent trade deal despite the ludicrous hyperbole.
@SamCoatesTimes: By distancing themselves from the state visit decision, & pointing at FCO, No10 implicitly saying visit not great idea. Palace furious?
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mr. Glenn, our interests can only be pursued if we're the ones doing the pursuing. Farming out our interests to a supra-national body which has a critical mass of eurozone nations for QMV is as foolish as claiming wars are only just if backed by a Security Council resolution, which means giving Russia and China (and France/the US) a veto over UK military action.
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
Mr. Glenn, our interests can only be pursued if we're the ones doing the pursuing. Farming out our interests to a supra-national body which has a critical mass of eurozone nations for QMV is as foolish as claiming wars are only just if backed by a Security Council resolution, which means giving Russia and China (and France/the US) a veto over UK military action.
Wow, No 10 are determined to make this even worse aren't they? Own the decision.
The worst of both worlds. The petition guarantees it will be covered by the US media and Trump follows this kind of minutiae about who offended him and how. The message will go out that we don't really want to host Trump but we have to suck it up because we need a trade deal and don't want to 'undo everything'.
But he's a massive fan of everything gaudy and is OK with being hated by protestors. He'll love a State Visit and dismiss the protests as "liberals" just like what he gets at home.
LOL. Yes, quite. It's an utterly absurd position and Nicola will enjoy destroying it. By the way, best of luck with independence. I was (as you know) a staunch unionist last time. Now I am a pragmatic supporter of independence for Scotland. I have no doubt we will strike a decent trade deal despite the ludicrous hyperbole.
Thanks. I try to tend towards the pragmatic myself but recent history can make me feel I'm on the wrong side of it!
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
Ah yes, my mistake I forgot that only the salt-of-the-earth British bulldog natives count for anything these days. The educated middle classes from 'That London' and 'That Brighton' are untermensch. Silly me.
I wish I was party to all the information people seem to have here today. Southam appears to be party to the details of the negotiation between the Trump team and the British Government and clearly has a much better handle on what is in the national interest than any of the cabinet or the civil service. As if that is not enough Topping clearly has access to the details of the side channel negotiations between the government and our EU partners and is clearly much better placed to know whether there was any mileage in freedom of movement vs the single market. We are truly blessed to have such insights into these closely held and confidential matters, long may it continue
Booooorrrrrinnnngggg.
We are all discussing likely scenarios. If you want to wait until 2019 when we will know for sure what the A50 negotiations look like then you could save yourself a whole bunch of bits & bytes.
You were telling us quite forcefully that the government had thrown away the single market without even testing to see if there was room for manoeuvre on freedom of movement. On what basis, perhaps the conversation has happened and they were told to piss off, if we float various ideas now and they say no, why would they say yes later when the clock is running ?
Eh? Theresa May has ruled out freedom of movement. She has gone from no running commentary to an explicit submission on the matter of single market membership, the thing that arguably will cause the greatest furore ahead of our leaving.
Absolutely. It has been suggested that this is because the side channel conversations have told her there is no way to keep Freedom of Movement and stay in the single market, and yet you told us down thread that she was throwing away the single market without having tested this assumption. So I repeat, what basis do you have for knowing that it hasnt been tested ?
It doesn't matter what someone said to someone else plus how would they know. All of sudden you take tittle tattle ("side channel conversations"?? Were you there?) as gospel?. Prove to me those side channel conversations took place? Plus even if they did so what? Great negotiating tactics by the EU. Thank god you're not on our negotiation team. What a shame someone as idiotic as you evidently was.
If you think that the real negotiation happen when the ministers turn up in the room, rather than before hand by civil servants I dont know what to say. You are trying to say that the government threw away your favourite toy without negotiating for it, on the basis of no evidence. If it makes you more comfortable to believe that, who I am to stop you
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Which is exactly the SNP pitch. Funny that...
Yes and EU looks much more inviting than the butt licking UK
Morning Malc - how much does Scotland export to the EU and how much to England.
And surprised a Scotsman wants to be ruled by Brussels
Indeed. And this time the question shouldn't be the vague but loaded "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Given that Brexit is being used explicitly by the SNP to roll the dice again, I would suggest:
"Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to remain part of the EU?"
That would ensure that all the consequences as explicitly on the table - trade tariffs with England, border controls, joining Schengen, adoption of the Euro.
Remember that the wording has to be agreed and thus isn't just up to the SNP nor the Scottish Government. The UK Government is a player too with the Electoral Commission acting as referee. Last time Cameron pretty well rolled over and agreed to a wording referencing "independence" that clearly affected the outcome compared to more neutral alternatives that referred to leaving the UK.
Whether or not a new Scottish referendum referred to the EU, if there is to be a next time the bottom line for the UK government should be that the word "independence" should be no-where on the ballot paper.
LOL, Yes lord and Master, we will do exactly as you command.
LOL. Those would be the very same trade tariffs and border controls that the Government assures us will NOT apply to Ireland. The fundamental weakness in the proposition – why would border patrol boats be needed on the Tweed but not on the Foyle?
The usual Unionist response is that the security situation means NI requires a unique solution. The tumbleweed tends to blow when they're asked if that means the threat of violence should be rewarded.
LOL. Yes, quite. It's an utterly absurd position and Nicola will enjoy destroying it. By the way, best of luck with independence. I was (as you know) a staunch unionist last time. Now I am a pragmatic supporter of independence for Scotland. I have no doubt we will strike a decent trade deal despite the ludicrous hyperbole.
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
"In the declining years of the British empire, some of its politicians flattered themselves that they could be “Greeks to their Romans” — providing wise and experienced counsel to the new American imperium."
"But the Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington — and the British are having to smile and clap as he sets fires and reaches for his fiddle."
Also known as wearing a shit-eating grin. Perhaps that should be called a "Theresa".
Is there any British politician who has the guts to say that even outside the EU Britain's most important partner would be the EU?
@SamCoatesTimes: Srce: "A state visit is granted on the advice of the Queen's principal minister - the PM. There would be zero chance without (PM approval)"
Wow, No 10 are determined to make this even worse aren't they? Own the decision.
The worst of both worlds. The petition guarantees it will be covered by the US media and Trump follows this kind of minutiae about who offended him and how. The message will go out that we don't really want to host Trump but we have to suck it up because we need a trade deal and don't want to 'undo everything'.
For goodness sake, Trump only has to look out of the White House or Trump Tower to see endless protesters against him and Trump wants the UK on board too, he cannot just rely on Israel and Russia as his only international allies, especially given the latter is hardly reliable
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Which is exactly the SNP pitch. Funny that...
Yes and EU looks much more inviting than the butt licking UK
Morning Malc - how much does Scotland export to the EU and how much to England.
And surprised a Scotsman wants to be ruled by Brussels
Indeed. And this time the question shouldn't be the vague but loaded "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Given that Brexit is being used explicitly by the SNP to roll the dice again, I would suggest:
"Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to remain part of the EU?"
That would ensure that all the consequences as explicitly on the table - trade tariffs with England, border controls, joining Schengen, adoption of the Euro.
Remember that the wording has to be agreed and thus isn't just up to the SNP nor the Scottish Government. The UK Government is a player too with the Electoral Commission acting as referee. Last time Cameron pretty well rolled over and agreed to a wording referencing "independence" that clearly affected the outcome compared to more neutral alternatives that referred to leaving the UK.
Whether or not a new Scottish referendum referred to the EU, if there is to be a next time the bottom line for the UK government should be that the word "independence" should be no-where on the ballot paper.
LOL, Yes lord and Master, we will do exactly as you command.
SNIP
SNIP
LOL. Yes, quite. It's an utterly absurd position and Nicola will enjoy destroying it. By the way, best of luck with independence. I was (as you know) a staunch unionist last time. Now I am a pragmatic supporter of independence for Scotland. I have no doubt we will strike a decent trade deal despite the ludicrous hyperbole.
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
No - the argument is that the political downside to the PM of ignoring them is limited, because they are unlikely to be swing voters for the Tories (and if they were the seats are not target seats). Not the same as saying they are "not very important".
Afternoon all. I have been stuck in a traffic jam. This is such a rare occurrence in these parts that it's the talk of the town. I see that people are getting exercised about clicktivism while others are once more confusing Twitter with the real world.
The challenge to our relationship with the USA has little to do with how big a twat Trump is (ans: Gigantic), more the fact that, whether the POTUS likes it or not, American strategic interests are gradually and inexorably pivoting to the Pacific. The UK can offer useful capability in the Med and Gulf. East of Suez, we have precisely fuck all, bar BIOT. Australia is of more utility than Britain.
State actor relationships are always transactional. We have excellent working & personal relationships with all the US agencies, but those are ultimately based on value-add and overlapping national interests.
It doesn't matter what someone said to someone else plus how would they know. All of sudden you take tittle tattle ("side channel conversations"?? Were you there?) as gospel?. Prove to me those side channel conversations took place? Plus even if they did so what? Great negotiating tactics by the EU. Thank god you're not on our negotiation team. What a shame someone as idiotic as you evidently was.
If you think that the real negotiation happen when the ministers turn up in the room, rather than before hand by civil servants I dont know what to say. You are trying to say that the government threw away your favourite toy without negotiating for it, on the basis of no evidence. If it makes you more comfortable to believe that, who I am to stop you
I don't think they've thrown it away.
They've just said "it's not worth the price you are demanding"
Sam Coates seems to be gleaming stuff from that No 10 press release that simply isn't there.
The press release describes the process, note the last sentence is in the past tense - which indicates the process with respect to the President of the USA has already been completed. They are not 'blaming' anyone, Mr Coates is just seeking to sensationalise the whole business for twitter likes and whatnot.
Well, I think today's the day that Theresa's honeymoon came to an end. But that in itself is no big deal: it happens to all PMs sooner or later. However, the whole Trump thing came about because too much attention was given to two entities:
The 24-hour news cycle. Nigel Farage.
In future, just pretend neither of those exist and all should be well.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Whilst I wouldn't countenance a rerun of the vote (the people have spoken and all that), I've said previously that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump, the EU would have looked more wholesome and benevolent to many - probably enough a to swing it to Remain. All hypothetical of course, but I bet Dave kicks himself for not following Ozzy and Crosby's advice and delaying things. Another example of pressure from Farage addling a Tory leader's brain.
Arguably Trump only won because of Brexit, it led his camp to focus heavily on the industrial Midwest which mirrored the industrial north and Midlands where Brexit won a landslide
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
The real reason its irrelevant is because its a completely unauthenticated system where any muppet with basic programming experience could set up a bot to enter petition entries all day. As a measure of public interest its next to worthless.
@JoeMurphyLondon: Oh dear. I gather a senior No 10 official sits on the committee that recommended the Trump state visit. Can't easily blame the FO for it ...
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
I think the notion is that it doesn't matter about the petition because most people who are signing it leave in places that voted to Remain in the EU. Apparently, they are not very important.
No - the argument is that the political downside to the PM of ignoring them is limited, because they are unlikely to be swing voters for the Tories (and if they were the seats are not target seats). Not the same as saying they are "not very important".
It's just a reason for why they are so considered.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
If you look at the BBC website the highest number of signatures come from Remoaner Labour seats in inner London, Bristol and Green Brighton areas which in the US also voted Hillary by a landslide. In areas like Wolverhampton and Walsall barely anyone has signed and that was peak Brexit territory and would have been peak Trump territory in the US http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38796357
Wow, No 10 are determined to make this even worse aren't they? Own the decision.
The worst of both worlds. The petition guarantees it will be covered by the US media and Trump follows this kind of minutiae about who offended him and how. The message will go out that we don't really want to host Trump but we have to suck it up because we need a trade deal and don't want to 'undo everything'.
Trump will see a petition signed by a million Brits and conclude that 1 million don't want him to come and the remaining 61 million do! A 98% approval rating. On a more sombre note, I think it's foolish in the extreme to conflate noise and disgust from a small section of society who clearly hate Trump in a way that is a bit unhinged and a little creepy with the broad masss of indifference (or even support) from Joe Average. Trump knows and uses this. In the USA they call it 'Trump derangement syndrome'. He pushes something deliberately a bit OTT, his opponents and the press react like a toddler whose ice cream you confiscate, and Joe Average looks on in disgust. There's a rapidly growing 'I wasn't for Trump but I am now' movement. He's yanking lefty chains and they're responding exactly as he wants.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
Private Eye Cover 256 was unusually vicious re Hirohito.
However The Guards Division might enjoy the challenge of making Trump look small.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
Private Eye Cover 256 was unusually vicious re Hirohito.
However The Guards Division might enjoy the challenge of making Trump look small.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Whilst I wouldn't countenance a rerun of the vote (the people have spoken and all that), I've said previously that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump, the EU would have looked more wholesome and benevolent to many - probably enough a to swing it to Remain. All hypothetical of course, but I bet Dave kicks himself for not following Ozzy and Crosby's advice and delaying things. Another example of pressure from Farage addling a Tory leader's brain.
Arguably Trump only won because of Brexit, it led his camp to focus heavily on the industrial Midwest which mirrored the industrial north and Midlands where Brexit won a landslide
Good point. If we're both right, then had Dave delayed neither Brexit nor Trump would have happened.
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
In political terms, the constituencies from which most signatures to the petition come from are unimportant to the government. They're all very left wing constituencies which the Conservatives have no hope of winning.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
If you look at the BBC website the highest number of signatures come from Remoaner Labour seats in inner London, Bristol and Green Brighton areas which in the US also voted Hillary by a landslide. In areas like Wolverhampton and Walsall barely anyone has signed and that was peak Brexit territory and would have been peak Trump territory in the US http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38796357
So our divided nation continues to be divided. Great. How is that helpful? There was absolutely no need to offer Trump a state visit.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
If you look at the BBC website the highest number of signatures come from Remoaner Labour seats in inner London, Bristol and Green Brighton areas which in the US also voted Hillary by a landslide. In areas like Wolverhampton and Walsall barely anyone has signed and that was peak Brexit territory and would have been peak Trump territory in the US http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38796357
So our divided nation continues to be divided. Great. How is that helpful? There was absolutely no need to offer Trump a state visit.
Its happened. Its going to happen. Time to move on.
We seem to obsess on here about decisions that are in the past and won't change.
Sam Coates seems to be gleaming stuff from that No 10 press release that simply isn't there.
The press release describes the process, note the last sentence is in the past tense - which indicates the process with respect to the President of the USA has already been completed. They are not 'blaming' anyone, Mr Coates is just seeking to sensationalise the whole business for twitter likes and whatnot.
Coates is also a passionate Remainer. He hates what TMay is doing.
Everything must now be seen through this prism.
The last (unquoted by Coates) paragraph brought up by Blanchford is worthy for amusement value in the Johnson-May relationship, but the paras he has quoted simply state the process. It is shit stirring parading as reporting.
@chrisshipitv: Diplo source: Boris been back in touch with @WhiteHouse. The @foreignoffice statement (agreed with Team Trump) is correct. State Dept wrong
Sam Coates seems to be gleaming stuff from that No 10 press release that simply isn't there.
The press release describes the process, note the last sentence is in the past tense - which indicates the process with respect to the President of the USA has already been completed. They are not 'blaming' anyone, Mr Coates is just seeking to sensationalise the whole business for twitter likes and whatnot.
Although I think Trump's barmy edict and some of his other policies are potentially catastrophic, the reaction of the Guardianistas is hilarious:
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria 13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania 17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe 19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China 24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
Mobutu in 1973 Hu Jintao in 2005 Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
If you look at the BBC website the highest number of signatures come from Remoaner Labour seats in inner London, Bristol and Green Brighton areas which in the US also voted Hillary by a landslide. In areas like Wolverhampton and Walsall barely anyone has signed and that was peak Brexit territory and would have been peak Trump territory in the US http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38796357
So our divided nation continues to be divided. Great. How is that helpful? There was absolutely no need to offer Trump a state visit.
He's yanking lefty chains and they're responding exactly as he wants.
Lefites like Nadhim Zahawi, Daniel Hannan and the rest of the 'global Brexit' fools?
I'd say 'liberally minded' chains. He's certainly pulling mine, but I'm on a Twitter break at present, so have refrained from venting my spleen. That's partly because causing this kind of outrage, faux or not, is grist to Trump's mill. The more I feel like emoting, the harder I try to detach and analyse. There are limits to presidential government via XO.
So we see that Trump's domestic immigration policy is the last hurrah of Remain.
It's all a bit sad. I think these these hardened remainers will look back at their views a few years down the line and cringe at the desperation on display. Leave voters may yet end up having made an incorrect decision but remain voters flapping to stop the referendum should be embarrassed by the desperation they have displayed to halt democracy.
Theresa the Appeaser seems to want to appease anti Trump populism in the UK, or at least put the blame on someone else.
"So as we rediscover our confidence together – as you renew your nation just as we renew ours – we have the opportunity – indeed the responsibility – to renew the Special Relationship for this new age. We have the opportunity to lead, together, again."
Translation:
"Please, please, please, Mr President, please be nice to us; please let us lead with you, please, please; we are renewing just like you, Mr President; we are a hopelessly divided nation, just like yours; and, just like you, I am only interested in appealing to the specific percentage of voters whose support I need to remain in power; so please, please, please, can I be your little helper. You can meet the Queen and everything. Please. I promise. Oh, thank-you, Mr President; thank-you so very, very, very, very much. We are leading the world together; yes, really, we are. Oh, thank-you. So much. Please."
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
One could argue on a purely practical level, a State visit is a mistake: the security involved will be horrendous and there will be protest.
Sam Coates seems to be gleaming stuff from that No 10 press release that simply isn't there.
The press release describes the process, note the last sentence is in the past tense - which indicates the process with respect to the President of the USA has already been completed. They are not 'blaming' anyone, Mr Coates is just seeking to sensationalise the whole business for twitter likes and whatnot.
Coates is also a passionate Remainer. He hates what TMay is doing.
Everything must now be seen through this prism.
Quite. Faisal Islam is another who's lost his professional perspective. There are a number of journos who've made (in my view) the fatal mistake of wearing their political hearts on their Twitter sleeves. The result is simple; I've lost much of my trust in media reportage.
I have no idea why some PBers are obsessed with where the signatures are coming from. If the proposition is more popular in N1 than Doncaster, so what?
These are the most left wing places in the whole country, and do not represent the centre ground of public opinion. They will be overwhelmingly Labour/Green and young voters who went massively for Remain, and are heavily present on social media.
A Conservative Government isn't going to be too worried by those who think the only problem Corbyn has is that he's a bit too right wing.
So we see that Trump's domestic immigration policy is the last hurrah of Remain.
It's all a bit sad. I think these these hardened remainers will look back at their views a few years down the line and cringe at the desperation on display. Leave voters may yet end up having made an incorrect decision but remain voters flapping to stop the referendum should be embarrassed by the desperation they have displayed to halt democracy.
What good is democracy when people elect the wrong Presidents and Leave Political Unions? A lot of the Blairites (the Master) were ex communists, old habits die hard
@chrisshipitv: Diplo source: Boris been back in touch with @WhiteHouse. The @foreignoffice statement (agreed with Team Trump) is correct. State Dept wrong
Yes, looks like 'cock up' not real policy. Mind you it's a bit difficult for the State Department to keep up when normal diplomatic lines of communication are not followed.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
I signed the petition. I will not be going on any marches or demos. These are likely to be hijacked by the usual anti-Israel, anti-West far left suspects, and will be entirely self-defeating.
@DPJHodges: With the introduction of the State Visit Committee, this has now become Theresa May's first official Ominshambles. She's gone full Iannucci.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
I signed the petition. I will not be going on any marches or demos. These are likely to be hijacked by the usual anti-Israel, anti-West far left suspects, and will be entirely self-defeating.
did you sign the Jeremy Clarkson petition too? it's pretty sad that people thing signing a meaningless petition or posting outrage on social media will have any effect.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
One could argue on a purely practical level, a State visit is a mistake: the security involved will be horrendous and there will be protest.
A state visit is an admission of weakness: Trump has an ego that has to be pandered to and it is only by pandering to him that we stand any chance of getting anything that we want. Other US presidents o f both parties - rational men who could see beyond themselves - were fine with official visits on their first trips over here. Trump wanted to meet the Queen and the other royals (except prince Charles) and we felt could not afford to turn him down, even though he has only been in office a week. And the rest of the world will note this and see we realise just how weak a spot we are in.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
It was a mistake to offer the Visit so quickly after he took office but having offered it, it would be a bigger mistake to withdraw it. State Visits by US presidents in their first term are hardly unprecedented: the last three all received such invites (albeit in their second or third year), as did Reagan (also in his second year).
Better to go ahead and champion the First Amendment.
So we see that Trump's domestic immigration policy is the last hurrah of Remain.
Grey in the Speccie puts forward the view that Trump meddling with America's borders is rather safer all around than Bush meddling in the middle east.
I was far more concerned with Trump's views on torture, Putin and NATO than this.
But i didn't throw my toys out of the pram on that either.
Trump's problem is that he's poked the identity politics hornets nest with a very big and blunt stick.
He doesn't care. Nial Ferguson seems to have the measure of all this, explaining in Sunday Times how Trump is basically just continuing to communicate with his base as if still campaigning.
As a matter of interest, I've had quite strong pushback from constituents over the petition - a dozen or so emails from across the political spectrum saying hey, he's the President, we need to get on with him. Most have in common that they think the petition actually calls for him to be banned from coming - the nuances about state visits vs working visits have passed them by.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
I signed the petition. I will not be going on any marches or demos. These are likely to be hijacked by the usual anti-Israel, anti-West far left suspects, and will be entirely self-defeating.
Trump's problem is that he's poked the identity politics hornets nest with a very big and blunt stick.
I think it was something he always had in mind to do. One of his main selling points in the midwest was his aggressive opposition to political correctness. Nothing would please him and his supporters more than to take a large stick to the identity politics nest, and the sail blithely on with his plans leaving them to froth in their impotence.
Comments
Mike's 5-1 bet looking better by the minute.
I wish I had taken it.
The British state reserves its pomp and pageantry for those with shared values. To do this for Trump is not simply appeasing, but legitimising his regime. This is not just embarrassing for the Queen but for every decent citizen. The vicar’s daughter may have lost her moral compass somewhere over the Atlantic, but this petition and the debate it prompts shows more than a million of us are clinging on to ours. It is not in the national interest to bend a knee to hate.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/30/petition-queen-uk-citizens-travel-ban-bend-knee-hate
Let's see those shared values in action, shall we?
12–15 June 1973 General Yakubu Gowon and Mrs. Gowon of Nigeria
13–16 June 1978 President Nicolae Ceaușescu and Madame Ceausescu of Romania
17–20 May 1994 President Mugabe of Zimbabwe
19–22 October 1999 President Jiang Zemin and Mrs. Wang Yeping of China
24–27 June 2003 President Vladimir Putin and Mrs. Lyudmila Putina of Russia
I try to tend towards the pragmatic myself but recent history can make me feel I'm on the wrong side of it!
I wonder what the correlation between strong Momentum PLP areas and petition signing is?
"In the declining years of the British empire, some of its politicians flattered themselves that they could be “Greeks to their Romans” — providing wise and experienced counsel to the new American imperium."
"But the Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington — and the British are having to smile and clap as he sets fires and reaches for his fiddle."
Also known as wearing a shit-eating grin. Perhaps that should be called a "Theresa".
Is there any British politician who has the guts to say that even outside the EU Britain's most important partner would be the EU?
That right there is T Maybe's premiership.
Weak, weak, weak.
https://twitter.com/mrharrycole/status/826044106409439232
The challenge to our relationship with the USA has little to do with how big a twat Trump is (ans: Gigantic), more the fact that, whether the POTUS likes it or not, American strategic interests are gradually and inexorably pivoting to the Pacific. The UK can offer useful capability in the Med and Gulf. East of Suez, we have precisely fuck all, bar BIOT. Australia is of more utility than Britain.
State actor relationships are always transactional. We have excellent working & personal relationships with all the US agencies, but those are ultimately based on value-add and overlapping national interests.
They've just said "it's not worth the price you are demanding"
The press release describes the process, note the last sentence is in the past tense - which indicates the process with respect to the President of the USA has already been completed.
They are not 'blaming' anyone, Mr Coates is just seeking to sensationalise the whole business for twitter likes and whatnot.
The 24-hour news cycle.
Nigel Farage.
In future, just pretend neither of those exist and all should be well.
Hu Jintao in 2005
Emperor Hirohito in 1971 isnt exactly an uncontroversial choice either!
http://groups.peoplesmomentum.com/
How does it compare with strong petition signing?
Not very many signatures in Northern Ireland, given support to remain.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38796357
On a more sombre note, I think it's foolish in the extreme to conflate noise and disgust from a small section of society who clearly hate Trump in a way that is a bit unhinged and a little creepy with the broad masss of indifference (or even support) from Joe Average. Trump knows and uses this. In the USA they call it 'Trump derangement syndrome'. He pushes something deliberately a bit OTT, his opponents and the press react like a toddler whose ice cream you confiscate, and Joe Average looks on in disgust. There's a rapidly growing 'I wasn't for Trump but I am now' movement. He's yanking lefty chains and they're responding exactly as he wants.
However The Guards Division might enjoy the challenge of making Trump look small.
I disagree with them - I think that at this point it's unwise to embrace Trump too enthusiastically. May's visit was OK, having him here for a discussion is OK, but rolling out the red carpet is premature and could be very embarrassing if he turns out a real disaster. But it's interesting that parts of the public that you might expect to agree have doubts.
That said, the gyrations of Downing Street are embarrassing. There is no way that May can reasonably say that the Visits Committee Made Me Do It. That's Just Silly.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-256
http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=171928
Map of Momentum offices
http://groups.peoplesmomentum.com/
We seem to obsess on here about decisions that are in the past and won't change.
It is shit stirring parading as reporting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/man-killed-tiger-chinese-zoo-climbed-enclosure-avoid-paying/
Translation:
"Please, please, please, Mr President, please be nice to us; please let us lead with you, please, please; we are renewing just like you, Mr President; we are a hopelessly divided nation, just like yours; and, just like you, I am only interested in appealing to the specific percentage of voters whose support I need to remain in power; so please, please, please, can I be your little helper. You can meet the Queen and everything. Please. I promise. Oh, thank-you, Mr President; thank-you so very, very, very, very much. We are leading the world together; yes, really, we are. Oh, thank-you. So much. Please."
A Conservative Government isn't going to be too worried by those who think the only problem Corbyn has is that he's a bit too right wing.
But i didn't throw my toys out of the pram on that either.
Trump's problem is that he's poked the identity politics hornets nest with a very big and blunt stick.
http://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcm8c8zoP21rjq40do1_500.jpg
Better to go ahead and champion the First Amendment.
The base will love all this I suspect.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/martin-schulz-vows-heal-germanys-divisions-announces-bid-oust/
From the UK POV, pray for a Mutti win.
(or did we sell the water cannons on, I forget)
No, I'm not signing it.
Why is May even responding to this?
Of all the injustice, dishonesty, and abuse of power that goes on in this country, let alone the world, is this really the most important thing?
"Do you actually understand where the (first) Summer of Love came from? Clearly not."
I was at university in 1967. It was based on hippiedom, smoking dope and anti-establishment views.
A bit like Brexit - apart from the dope, kaftans and acid.