I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Pretty much what happens in Casino Royale (the book, dunno about the film).
That part (with the red and blue suicide bombers) is omitted from the film.
A corbynista I know is peddling the same shite on twitter. Must be "The Party" line
The main thing that rules out the consipracy theory for me is that this government would be completely incapable of organising it.
The cult was hoping to cling on to Jezza as leader when he loses the election because it was all Blair's fault for sniping. Then it was the mainstream media in general but mainly Laura K. Now they have found a new excuse.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Blair was quite brutal in despatching opponents, with the exception of Gordon Brown who was an ally at the start and too powerful by the end. For all the Blairite talk of Brown defenestrating his enemies, it was Blair who demoted or sacked Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam, for instance, while Brown kept any number of leading Blairites in the cabinet.
I'm dubious about "scrutiny" of routine religious activity (...), but I do agree that, as a Muslim interviewed on Radio 4 yesterday said, it needs to be a priority to encourage people to argue with and if necessary report friends who are flirting with violent activity.
That is so utterly against our instincts that it needs a conscious effort. We've surely all met people who admitted to actually committing some sort of offence and it didn't cross our minds to ring the police about it. And it's not easy to judge when intent is serious. If you had a friend who said "I'd seriously like to shoot that [name a politician], maybe I will one day", you'd probably tell him to stop talking bollocks, but would you dial 999? And if you were in an ethnic group some of whom feel marginalised and under pressure, wouldn't that make it even harder? And if everyone reported every repellent comment, wouldn't that overwhelm the police and also make us too much of a Stasi society?
Perhaps we need something like Childline where people can discuss behaviour by friends and relatives that worries them and whether it's reached the point that the police need to be called in? I honestly don't know what's best - it's just a suggestion.
This is the problem we have with creating any sort of whistleblowing culture. Let me tell you what I have learnt from my experience as the person responsible for whistleblowing where I work. It is hard for people to blow the whistle on people they know and may like. It goes against our instincts: people feel that they are being a snitch, that they are letting the side/team down, that they don't know all the facts, that this may be a fuss about nothing, that they will suffer - unfairly, that the person against whom the allegations are made will suffer - unfairly. There are lots of reasons. So to get people to speak up when they are concerned you have to make them understand - in their bones - why this is the right thing to do, why misplaced loyalty is wrong, why not speaking up affects them - their good name, their hard work, their integrity, their reputation. And that takes continuous effort and showing people what the consequences of not speaking up are. You have to make people feel that being a good banker or a good Muslim or a good Irishman or whoever involves speaking up when they see bad behavior around them.
That is hard. But it needs to be done.
If you allow bad people to do what they want without any sanction from those around them then eventually in any community (whether it is banking or a religion or anything else) the bad will drive out the good. The bad will be seen as the norm. That is why it is so important to give the good the courage and the space to speak up and the support when they do.
We are nowhere near getting this right now. It is urgent that we do so.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Well he was a failed Salford uni student...so not the sharpest tool in the box....
What did he study? I thought everyone did golf club management.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Human societies generally have little problem finding young men prepared to give their lives for the glory of the King, Emperor or Caliph, whether or not virgins are involved.
What is the consensus on Trump with his comment in calling the perpetrators 'Loooooosers' ?
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Or she is Stanley Baldwin and will be in power for ten years or more.
It's conceivable. I am guessing though that quitting when it suits her would hold more appeal than spending 10 years as PM. It is not, after all, as though she has any obvious policy agenda to implement that requires 10 years.
I dunno, Nick Timothy has all sorts of ideas.
Some of them might even get the support of more than couple of Tory backbenchers.
A corbynista I know is peddling the same shite on twitter. Must be "The Party" line
The main thing that rules out the consipracy theory for me is that this government would be completely incapable of organising it.
Conspiracy theorists who wave away the moral and political hazards in such an attack still need to explain why the government would plan such a move when the polls and local government elections were pointing to a landslide anyway - or are they really saying that there was an on-the-shelf operation able to go at 48 hours' notice?
Perhaps we need something like Childline where people can discuss behaviour by friends and relatives that worries them and whether it's reached the point that the police need to be called in? I honestly don't know what's best - it's just a suggestion.
A government operated hotline where we could all call and grass each other up for imagined infractions? That would be just fucking terrific.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Blair was quite brutal in despatching opponents, with the exception of Gordon Brown who was an ally at the start and too powerful by the end. For all the Blairite talk of Brown defenestrating his enemies, it was Blair who demoted or sacked Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam, for instance, while Brown kept any number of leading Blairites in the cabinet.
I do wonder how different it all would have turned out if Alan Milburn hadn't walked away from high office because of his family.
Blair was quite brutal in despatching opponents, with the exception of Gordon Brown who was an ally at the start and too powerful by the end. For all the Blairite talk of Brown defenestrating his enemies, it was Blair who demoted or sacked Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam, for instance, while Brown kept any number of leading Blairites in the cabinet.
But the difference surely, John, is that May knifed two powerful figures in the party, Osborne and Gove, and stitched up a third - Johnson - with implementing the Brexit that IMHO he had only advocated because he figured if Leave should win he would make PM on the back of it. These are heavyweight enemies that she humbled. Blair quailed before the only comparable figure in Labour and was undermined and then undone by him. Brown himself was beset only by pygmies. I struggle to think of any PM who has been more brutal than May in the last 50-odd years.
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
Blair was quite brutal in despatching opponents, with the exception of Gordon Brown who was an ally at the start and too powerful by the end. For all the Blairite talk of Brown defenestrating his enemies, it was Blair who demoted or sacked Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam, for instance, while Brown kept any number of leading Blairites in the cabinet.
Brown had no choice, apart from briefly at the beginning - though that was the time he was trying to build a unity government across Labour and beyond. Once that phase was over, the polls and election results meant that he was too weak to move against his enemies.
Perhaps we need something like Childline where people can discuss behaviour by friends and relatives that worries them and whether it's reached the point that the police need to be called in? I honestly don't know what's best - it's just a suggestion.
A government operated hotline where we could all call and grass each other up for imagined infractions? That would be just fucking terrific.
How is that different from the existing 789123 number?
I remembered Mr. Sandpit's unlucky loser on No Safety Car at 8 last year. The only reason the 2016 race saw one was because it rained at the start (the race had four VSC periods).
So, I've backed No Safety Car at 6.5.
Also put a tiny, tiny sum on Perez at 126 (each way) to win (and 11 for a podium). He's very good at this sort of circuit and at making tyres last, so if there is a safety car he's likely to be in good shape to take advantage. Plus, Force India has the best reliability of any team.
< I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
My first thought is if she wants to leave on a high, she should quit on June 10th.
I always think this is the mark of the political figure - to stand up and argue for a policy which you believe to be right in the face of unpopularity and attack. Margaret Thatcher, for all her faults, argued for things in which she believed and didn't backtrack when faced with hostility as did Tony Blair on Iraq.
I'm NOT saying Thatcher wasn't open to persuasion when confronted with a reasoned argument but if she thought something was right and in the interests of the country, she went with it.
If the true power of the country is to be the editorial line of the Daily Mail (and May fits the demographic of that paper's readership), then we will know May is finished when the Mail deserts her.
Yes, you can argue part of the democratic process is listening to the views of others and taking them into account but as the social care payment shows there's a difference between small adjustments to take into account special circumstances which would be a mark of a hastily conceived policy and a complete volte face on matters of principle which have ramifications far beyond the policy (costs to local authorities).
I am coming to the view that May is both wholly indecisive and wholly ruthless, which is a peculiar and unsettling combination. She isn't another Iron Lady; she's more a sort of Iron David Miliband.
You're entirely right.
Her entire raison d'etre has been the construction and will now become the preservation of her "big tent" coalition. Any policy or idea which seems to annoy the coalition will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and the Minister forced into a grovelling climb-down.
None of that matters - all that matters is the preservation and continuation of Theresa May as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party.
Eventually, her political career, like all others, will end in failure but whether she is defeated from without or within is hard to gauge at this time.
I think she'll quit mid-term after Brexit is implemented with a leadership election in summer 2019.
At that point she's made it to PM, she's won a landslide and she has framed the terms of our EU withdrawal. At her age and in imperfect health it doesn't get any better and she is self-aware enough to know she risks getting rumbled. Or perhaps rumbled once too often as she was over the NI changes and then again over social care. She is using up goodwill and her nine lives very rapidly. So why not leave office on a relative high?
She is a very odd fish indeed. She has the backbone to eviscerate Osborne and Gove, but as we have now seen several times, she has no appetite to defend a policy decision unpopular with the Daily Mail or even to stick with one (Remain) that she has professed. Like Blair, all her actual political views seem lightly held, but unlike Blair, she is prepared to be utterly brutal in despatching anyone who opposes or might thwart her.
In the role of PM, she is both weirder and more interesting than she previously appeared.
She’s a very odd mixture of vulnerability and ruthlessness, strangeness and ordinariness, gawkiness and deftness.
I’d be interested in the story of “When Philip met Theresa” .
Will the Kipper manifesto include the death penalty for suicide bombers?
That's not actually as bad a suggestion as you make out, if you include attempted suicide bombers (some suicide bombs fail to explode).
But not much of a deterrent, especially against successful suicide bombers
No but if you believe in the death penalty it's an apt punishment for those that somehow survive.
The death penalty makes things worse.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
The death penalty has nothing to do with deterrence, that is what most of its opponents (of which I am one) fail to understand. The death penalty is about punishment.
A corbynista I know is peddling the same shite on twitter. Must be "The Party" line
The main thing that rules out the consipracy theory for me is that this government would be completely incapable of organising it.
Conspiracy theorists who wave away the moral and political hazards in such an attack still need to explain why the government would plan such a move when the polls and local government elections were pointing to a landslide anyway - or are they really saying that there was an on-the-shelf operation able to go at 48 hours' notice?
It would imply an extraordinary degree of effectiveness on the part of the security forces.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Human societies generally have little problem finding young men prepared to give their lives for the glory of the King, Emperor or Caliph, whether or not virgins are involved.
What is the consensus on Trump with his comment in calling the perpetrators 'Loooooosers' ?
I think that is a good term for them. Pathetic. Won't win.
It's a better term than "coward". I frown when I hear I hear pilots bombing from 20,000 feet described as "brave" and suicide bombers described as "cowards". It jars.
A corbynista I know is peddling the same shite on twitter. Must be "The Party" line
The main thing that rules out the consipracy theory for me is that this government would be completely incapable of organising it.
Conspiracy theorists who wave away the moral and political hazards in such an attack still need to explain why the government would plan such a move when the polls and local government elections were pointing to a landslide anyway - or are they really saying that there was an on-the-shelf operation able to go at 48 hours' notice?
The conspiracy theory is totally ludicrous and should be ignored. Barmy.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Human societies generally have little problem finding young men prepared to give their lives for the glory of the King, Emperor or Caliph, whether or not virgins are involved.
What is the consensus on Trump with his comment in calling the perpetrators 'Loooooosers' ?
I suppose he's probably right, in the sense that the perpetrators of these outrages tend to be averagely intelligent young men who have either failed at or become disillusioned with their normal lives. In their search for recognition and self-esteem, they fall victim to the siren call of glory through martyrdom (as it is sold to them).
The current setup saves the treasury a gigantic amount. It could well be that when the post-2012 book with the frozen threshold is sold off - even after accounting for bad loans (economically inactive graduates) - the government will actually make a profit.
The t&c's of plan 2 loans really are that bad.
You're assuming the government won't make the decision to sell off below par there !
Fair point!
I'm assuming a competitive bidding process though.
Financial institutions like pension funds will be biting the governments hand off to get the Plan 2 student loan book. It makes for an incredible inflation-protected asset.
They've been perfectly designed to make the treasury money.
Back in 1988 when student loans were first introduced, Thatcher tried to get the banks to make the loans. The banks, led by Lloyds, refused as the bad debt potential was horrific.
Students can't get rid of their loans through bankruptcy any more - IIRC that concession/loophole was closed in 2003. I don't know quite how the legislation works, but I don't think a bank could (then - or now) legally offer student loans on the same terms as the government.
I could be wrong though! It's not my area of expertise.
on those seat pages they often have one party predicted to win the vote on the left hand side and another being given the greater percentage chance to win on the right hand side. I havent been bothered to try figure out why tho.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
I remembered Mr. Sandpit's unlucky loser on No Safety Car at 8 last year. The only reason the 2016 race saw one was because it rained at the start (the race had four VSC periods).
So, I've backed No Safety Car at 6.5.
Also put a tiny, tiny sum on Perez at 126 (each way) to win (and 11 for a podium). He's very good at this sort of circuit and at making tyres last, so if there is a safety car he's likely to be in good shape to take advantage. Plus, Force India has the best reliability of any team.
365's safety car wording is very vague so I wouldn't back it there.
Vaguely on the subject of the the header, I have a great deal of respect for Dick Taverne. My late colleague, Nils Taube, told me that he (and a number of other) created the Institute of Fiscal Studies to provide Dick with a job, when it became clear that the Labour Party had no great interest in moderate views. He then went on to write an excellent book, called The March of Unreason, about why people believe strange things.
I used to see him cycling about Fitzrovia in his 80s.
Will the Kipper manifesto include the death penalty for suicide bombers?
That's not actually as bad a suggestion as you make out, if you include attempted suicide bombers (some suicide bombs fail to explode).
But not much of a deterrent, especially against successful suicide bombers
No but if you believe in the death penalty it's an apt punishment for those that somehow survive.
The death penalty makes things worse.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
The death penalty has nothing to do with deterrence, that is what most of its opponents (of which I am one) fail to understand. The death penalty is about punishment.
There is the alternative of treating all suspected terrorists the way the US have treated Abu Abu Faraj A Libbi. He's been kept in solitary confinement, without trial, for 12 years in Guantanamo. He's been waterboarded loads of times and brutalised for information.
There's plenty of evidence he was a terrorist. There's no evidence his capture and confinement has led to more terrorism. There is plenty of evidence that the information tortured out of him has led to the execution of plenty of high ranking terrorists, including Bin Laden.
I'm sure that ISIS trained the bomb maker, got him/her back into the UK, then gave him/her strict instructions that (s)he should only make one bomb.
Yeah, right.
There is another remote possibility, that he wasn't a suicide bomber.
Can you see him following instructions? Collect the bomb here. Deliver it to this point. Phone x number to confirm it is in position Move away and we will detonate fifteen minutes later.
Only problem is phone x number sets the bomb off, as he knows too much and has to be eliminated.
For the organisers it may be easier to recruit somewhat dim fanatics than suicidal fanatics who are eager to find a host of virgins, not even knowing if they are male of female virgins.
Human societies generally have little problem finding young men prepared to give their lives for the glory of the King, Emperor or Caliph, whether or not virgins are involved.
What is the consensus on Trump with his comment in calling the perpetrators 'Loooooosers' ?
I think that is a good term for them. Pathetic. Won't win.
It's a better term than "coward". I frown when I hear I hear pilots bombing from 20,000 feet described as "brave" and suicide bombers described as "cowards". It jars.
I couldn't agree more. Calling them "cowards" is meaningless and silly. Mind you politicians and journalists have been using the word to describe terrorists for decades. I've never understood why. Presumably in order to belittle them, as though being mass murderers wasn't bad enough.
Blair was quite brutal in despatching opponents, with the exception of Gordon Brown who was an ally at the start and too powerful by the end. For all the Blairite talk of Brown defenestrating his enemies, it was Blair who demoted or sacked Robin Cook and Mo Mowlam, for instance, while Brown kept any number of leading Blairites in the cabinet.
But the difference surely, John, is that May knifed two powerful figures in the party, Osborne and Gove, and stitched up a third - Johnson - with implementing the Brexit that IMHO he had only advocated because he figured if Leave should win he would make PM on the back of it. These are heavyweight enemies that she humbled. Blair quailed before the only comparable figure in Labour and was undermined and then undone by him. Brown himself was beset only by pygmies. I struggle to think of any PM who has been more brutal than May in the last 50-odd years.
Did Theresa May do all that? Have the memoirs covering the leadership election been written? In particular, who put up Gove to betray Johnson? Can that be traced back to Cameron and/or Osborne? If so, then all May has despatched is a fatally weakened Osborne. And frankly, I'm still not sure the manner of his departure was not choreographed.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
If Tuesday's attack is politically unhelpful for labour and its leader, there is a reason for that. Unfortunately, Corbyn does bring baggage with him. But Labour members knew this when they voted for him, twice, so they cannot say they were not warned.
I only hope that Corbyn and his rag bag of terrorist sympathizers, Marxists, Communists, Antisemites and holocaust deniers are booted from Labour ASAP.
I really fear that we won't see a sensible centre left Labour Party i.e. one I can vote for, if Corbyn exceeds Miliband and Brown GE performance.
Guardian, Friday 9th June 2017:
'I’ll always be a Corbynista. Jeremy was the best prime minister we never had'
by Corbynite Nelly
"The rightwing smear against Jeremy Corbyn angered me. But his bravery and integrity in the face of it was an inspiration
"Watching Jeremy’s heartbreaking speech on Friday, I couldn’t quite believe it when he mentioned the Corbynistas. It was bittersweet I suppose: that Jeremy felt the Corbynistas warranted a thank you but in the context of a resignation and not, as it should have been, a victory speech. It was an honour to know that Jeremy was thankful for the movement, and although my tears had already started flowing by then, the way that he almost smiled when he mentioned it really set me off. I have to confess that the rest of the speech was a complete blur to me.
"I know to many people it may seem silly to have got emotional over Jeremy’s resignation, but it wasn’t anything like the reaction to David Cameron leaving Downing Street, as some have carelessly compared it. We’d had the chance to have this amazing person as prime minister: a chance for equality, a chance for change, a chance for someone who truly cared about the people to lead them. To watch our country waste that chance and to see someone who had worked so unbelievably hard and was so deserving lose was utterly devastating. I don’t know when I’m going to get over that feeling of loss, that sick, hollow feeling in my stomach, when I think about what could have been. Jeremy Corbyn was the best prime minister we never had!"
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Of the nine current LD seats, it's probably about the third safest. Orkney & Shetland, of course, is the only genuinely safe LD seat.
Will the Kipper manifesto include the death penalty for suicide bombers?
That's not actually as bad a suggestion as you make out, if you include attempted suicide bombers (some suicide bombs fail to explode).
But not much of a deterrent, especially against successful suicide bombers
No but if you believe in the death penalty it's an apt punishment for those that somehow survive.
The death penalty makes things worse.
Failed suicide bombers were already facing the very real death penalty of a successful suicide bombing. These people believe quite literally they will ascend to paradise on death. For them, the death penalty is an incentive not a deterrent.
The death penalty has nothing to do with deterrence, that is what most of its opponents (of which I am one) fail to understand. The death penalty is about punishment.
There is the alternative of treating all suspected terrorists the way the US have treated Abu Abu Faraj A Libbi. He's been kept in solitary confinement, without trial, for 12 years in Guantanamo. He's been waterboarded loads of times and brutalised for information.
There's plenty of evidence he was a terrorist. There's no evidence his capture and confinement has led to more terrorism. There is plenty of evidence that the information tortured out of him has led to the execution of plenty of high ranking terrorists, including Bin Laden.
I'm fairly easy with it.
I'm not. That kind of attitude leads to a gangster state. We have to have lines we won't cross - or not in all but the most extreme circumstances - because if that kind of behaviour becomes routine in terrorist cases, what it to stop it being used in more regular police investigations? If suspected terrorists are denied a trial, why shouldn't internment be extended to other undesirables?
There is a price to be paid for living in a free society but it is not as high as the price paid by those who don't live in one.
The current situation does have an impact on the campaign and both sides can lose by playing it wrong. The Conservatives gain by getting a break on their recent missteps on the campaign. The papers are filled with terrorist threats and sad pictures of little girls.
All the Tories need to do is go around being all dertimned and prime ministerial. A measured and well judged tone is all that is needed. It plays to Mays perceived strengths. All they need to do is play it calm not get too obvious about it and hope the opposition puts their foot in it.
For Labour there is no real upside here, unless some form criminal negligence from the secuirty services is exposed there is little they can say other than supportive noises and even if there are genuine complaints to be made, it's better if the Media lead with it.
The Labour momentum for free goodies for all has been pushed off the agenda and now security has become the focus.
Of course as we have already seen at the lower levels of Corbynester support, conspiracy theories abounding. Not much use for the Conservatives unless someone senior says something stupid.
The Campaign may soon restart but the narratives have changed and security has been pushed up the agenda.
But I can already see a post election narative. Similar to Falklands, it was the bomd is what won it for May, Jeremy had no chance etc etc not his faultm the campaign was going our way, we were only 10 points behind in some polls etc!!!
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
Well remembered. I was just looking at Betfair SC market myself. Lay safety car is 1.25 so your odds are better.
Yes, check the terms of bets on safety cars that they are for a physical safety car and not a virtual one. A VSC at Monaco I'd price at 1/10, but the Monganesque marshalls are fantastic at getting broken cars out of the way quickly. They'll generally now only send a physical SC out for a multi-car crash that leaves debris on the racing line, or to accompany the medical car if that needs to be deployed. This was my reasoning last year and it damn nearly came off but for the rain at the start.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Loads of English incomers there, mainly from W Midlands. They probably voted UKIp last time and will go Tory this time. Cant see Libs losing there mind you.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Of the nine current LD seats, it's probably about the third safest. Orkney & Shetland, of course, is the only genuinely safe LD seat.
A safe seat with a majority of 817?! OK, the SNP shouldn't do as well this time but I'd still say that it hardly ranks as 'the only genuinely safe LD seat'.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Remember three things;
(i) In these small West Wales seats, the candidate matters. I’d make LibDems very slight favs, but I think it will be close between them and PC.
(ii) This is a seat that the Tories have never won in modern times. Everyone else has won it, even Labour.
(iii) The kind of polls we have seen from Scully are not a good guide to these kinds of seats, although they probably are a good guide to the SE (Glamorgan and Gwent) where most of the Welsh population live.
No go to women, blacks, and gays. No longer bobby's on the beat so the police element doesn't exist. In closed 'communities' Sharia can be the rule of law and there's no recourse to British law because the 'community' is closed. I'll also extend this to the disgusting practice of FGM
Do you have evidence no go zones exist? Where are they?
I ask because I remember people were talking about Birmingham, Woolwich and Luton as no go zones... Which came as a surprise to me and many others...
Would you like to be a young woman in a short dress walking through theseareas alone at night?
So the article is from 6 years ago (it's also from the daily mail but let's let that slide). The man Abu Izzadeen is currently in prison. Here is a more recent update from Sharia central - Waltham Forest - where they have just elected Clare Coghill as council leader.
But you are right in the sense that there are many areas where, if I were a young woman, I would feel unsafe to walk alone at night. Even as a young man there are areas where I feel unsafe and justifiably since I have been attacked in the past. That's just normal criminality though and is the case everywhere...
If Tuesday's attack is politically unhelpful for labour and its leader, there is a reason for that. Unfortunately, Corbyn does bring baggage with him. But Labour members knew this when they voted for him, twice, so they cannot say they were not warned.
I only hope that Corbyn and his rag bag of terrorist sympathizers, Marxists, Communists, Antisemites and holocaust deniers are booted from Labour ASAP.
I really fear that we won't see a sensible centre left Labour Party i.e. one I can vote for, if Corbyn exceeds Miliband and Brown GE performance.
The first action the new leader should do, from the podium in his or her voctory speech, is suspend Corbyn's membership pending an investigation into his conduct.
Boot Corbyn out and most of the nutters will follow.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Of the nine current LD seats, it's probably about the third safest. Orkney & Shetland, of course, is the only genuinely safe LD seat.
A safe seat with a majority of 817?! OK, the SNP shouldn't do as well this time but I'd still say that it hardly ranks as 'the only genuinely safe LD seat'.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
havent backed anything at ceredigion yet. I've just topped up my labour position in Westminster North with Laddy's at 7/2. everyone else is around the 2/1 mark now and I think even that is a bit generous.
5% lead from 2015. swings to Con smaller in London than elsewhere. Lib+Green> UKIP means they should benefit more from the 2-party squeeze. Not saying they should be favs but I like the odds on offer.
If Tuesday's attack is politically unhelpful for labour and its leader, there is a reason for that. Unfortunately, Corbyn does bring baggage with him. But Labour members knew this when they voted for him, twice, so they cannot say they were not warned.
I only hope that Corbyn and his rag bag of terrorist sympathizers, Marxists, Communists, Antisemites and holocaust deniers are booted from Labour ASAP.
I really fear that we won't see a sensible centre left Labour Party i.e. one I can vote for, if Corbyn exceeds Miliband and Brown GE performance.
Guardian, Friday 9th June 2017:
'I’ll always be a Corbynista. Jeremy was the best prime minister we never had'
by Corbynite Nelly
"The rightwing smear against Jeremy Corbyn angered me. But his bravery and integrity in the face of it was an inspiration
"Watching Jeremy’s heartbreaking speech on Friday, I couldn’t quite believe it when he mentioned the Corbynistas. It was bittersweet I suppose: that Jeremy felt the Corbynistas warranted a thank you but in the context of a resignation and not, as it should have been, a victory speech. It was an honour to know that Jeremy was thankful for the movement, and although my tears had already started flowing by then, the way that he almost smiled when he mentioned it really set me off. I have to confess that the rest of the speech was a complete blur to me.
"I know to many people it may seem silly to have got emotional over Jeremy’s resignation, but it wasn’t anything like the reaction to David Cameron leaving Downing Street, as some have carelessly compared it. We’d had the chance to have this amazing person as prime minister: a chance for equality, a chance for change, a chance for someone who truly cared about the people to lead them. To watch our country waste that chance and to see someone who had worked so unbelievably hard and was so deserving lose was utterly devastating. I don’t know when I’m going to get over that feeling of loss, that sick, hollow feeling in my stomach, when I think about what could have been. Jeremy Corbyn was the best prime minister we never had!"
Vaguely on the subject of the the header, I have a great deal of respect for Dick Taverne. My late colleague, Nils Taube, told me that he (and a number of other) created the Institute of Fiscal Studies to provide Dick with a job, when it became clear that the Labour Party had no great interest in moderate views. He then went on to write an excellent book, called The March of Unreason, about why people believe strange things.
I used to see him cycling about Fitzrovia in his 80s.
I thought the relative obscurity bit of the header was quite mean spirited. The IFS has had a big impact on public life... Arguably more than many MPs.
I was being slightly testy. I'm a full-on liberal and I agree with you 90% of the way but I tend to think the problem of Islamic terrorism within the UK is a bigger problem than most do. I'm hawkish on it.
I think there is a gap that is exploited by terrorists (it's where our liberal, tolerant laws exist at the edges) and the Americans got round that gap by summarily removing people from the planet and placing them in Guantanamo.
I've no doubt the Americans abused their power but they also achieved success out of it. If there was some way a law could be framed, with plenty of checks and balances - something that had to be given signed approval by, say, six people at the top of the UK govt/law/police etc - which allowed for a the most extreme potential terrorists to be vanished from society (forever) and pummelled (within the law) for valuable life-saving information, I think I'd go for it.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Of the nine current LD seats, it's probably about the third safest. Orkney & Shetland, of course, is the only genuinely safe LD seat.
A safe seat with a majority of 817?! OK, the SNP shouldn't do as well this time but I'd still say that it hardly ranks as 'the only genuinely safe LD seat'.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
Just stand on a bridge over a motorway. It is free, and as well as watching cars drive past you also get to spot Eddie Stobart lorries.
If Tuesday's attack is politically unhelpful for labour and its leader, there is a reason for that. Unfortunately, Corbyn does bring baggage with him. But Labour members knew this when they voted for him, twice, so they cannot say they were not warned.
I only hope that Corbyn and his rag bag of terrorist sympathizers, Marxists, Communists, Antisemites and holocaust deniers are booted from Labour ASAP.
I really fear that we won't see a sensible centre left Labour Party i.e. one I can vote for, if Corbyn exceeds Miliband and Brown GE performance.
The first action the new leader should do, from the podium in his or her voctory speech, is suspend Corbyn's membership pending an investigation into his conduct.
Boot Corbyn out and most of the nutters will follow.
**unwraps brand new Argos popcorn machine in eager anticipation**
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Remember three things;
(i) In these small West Wales seats, the candidate matters. I’d make LibDems very slight favs, but I think it will be close between them and PC.
(ii) This is a seat that the Tories have never won in modern times. Everyone else has won it, even Labour.
(iii) The kind of polls we have seen from Scully are not a good guide to these kinds of seats, although they probably are a good guide to the SE (Glamorgan and Gwent) where most of the Welsh population live.
And as I said a few threads back, a large reason why the Tories have never done well in Ceredigion is because it is a heartland of Welsh Nonconformism and the Tories are still seen there, rightly or wrongly, as intrinsically associated with Anglicanism.
If Tuesday's attack is politically unhelpful for labour and its leader, there is a reason for that. Unfortunately, Corbyn does bring baggage with him. But Labour members knew this when they voted for him, twice, so they cannot say they were not warned.
I only hope that Corbyn and his rag bag of terrorist sympathizers, Marxists, Communists, Antisemites and holocaust deniers are booted from Labour ASAP.
I really fear that we won't see a sensible centre left Labour Party i.e. one I can vote for, if Corbyn exceeds Miliband and Brown GE performance.
The first action the new leader should do, from the podium in his or her voctory speech, is suspend Corbyn's membership pending an investigation into his conduct.
Boot Corbyn out and most of the nutters will follow.
Blair should have booted out Corbyn and McDonnell when Galloway went. Heck Kinnock should have booted out Corbyn.
Corbyn, McDonnell and their ilk like Militant are like a cancer within the Labour Party. If you don't excise it all then it will come back.
Corbyn himself said of Militant in 1982 "If expulsions are in order for Militant, they should apply to us too." - Not often I say this but Jeremy Corbyn was entirely right and I completely agree.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
At Monaco? Definitely. It's not just the F1 cars, there are other race series on at the same meeting, including F2 cars and Porsche 911s. Great to see how quickly the cars go around the narrow streets, and the whole place is full of atmosphere and thousands of beautiful people staying for a few days more after Cannes.
What a bunch of bolleaux. The police force themselves agree(d) that better efficiency doesn't require an ever larger force and that they can and want to do more with fewer officers. Don't make me drag out the various supporting docs, etc.
What a bunch of bolleaux. The police force themselves agree(d) that better efficiency doesn't require an ever larger force and that they can and want to do more with fewer officers. Don't make me drag out the various supporting docs, etc.
TORY !
remember you can put 40000 officers back on the beat for £2.50 each as proved by Diane Abbott
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
If you're in the area, it's well worth it for practice if the weather's good. I've not been to Monaco so I don't know how easy it is to get around the different parts of the track. But if you're able to get to the first part of the swimming pool, that left-right is one of the most spectacular corners in F1.
What a bunch of bolleaux. The police force themselves agree(d) that better efficiency doesn't require an ever larger force and that they can and want to do more with fewer officers. Don't make me drag out the various supporting docs, etc.
Regardless of reports on efficacy, an interesting point is that if Jeremy Corbyn weren't so bleeding useless, Labour could be making hay pointing out the decline in police numbers and army numbers to undermine Conservative claims on security.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
I wouldn't bother with either event. A few years ago I was invited to the British Grand Prix at Silverstone. A corporate invitation where they served, inferior, champagne with the bacon sarnies on arrival and then throughout the day with a running buffet of various expensive nibbles and any other booze that you might want. I am sure the only reason the organisers spent so much on the catering was to distract us from the mind numbing boredom of the actual race, which most of us watched on a big TV anyway.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Remember three things;
(i) In these small West Wales seats, the candidate matters. I’d make LibDems very slight favs, but I think it will be close between them and PC.
(ii) This is a seat that the Tories have never won in modern times. Everyone else has won it, even Labour.
(iii) The kind of polls we have seen from Scully are not a good guide to these kinds of seats, although they probably are a good guide to the SE (Glamorgan and Gwent) where most of the Welsh population live.
And as I said a few threads back, a large reason why the Tories have never done well in Ceredigion is because it is a heartland of Welsh Nonconformism and the Tories are still seen there, rightly or wrongly, as intrinsically associated with Anglicanism.
In the 2012 CC elections , Conservatives fielded 21 candidates in Ceredigion and won no seats . This year they fielded just 3 and won none . Baxter has Conservatives winning Aberporth ward , in reality they came 4th and last with just 90 votes .
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
I wouldn't bother with either event. A few years ago I was invited to the British Grand Prix at Silverstone. A corporate invitation where they served, inferior, champagne with the bacon sarnies on arrival and then throughout the day with a running buffet of various expensive nibbles and any other booze that you might want. I am sure the only reason the organisers spent so much on the catering was to distract us from the mind numbing boredom of the actual race, which most of us watched on a big TV anyway.
Most boring event ever
Been once on a corporate like yourself, you might as well sit on your local roundabout with some beer, it would be more interesting.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
At Monaco? Definitely. It's not just the F1 cars, there are other race series on at the same meeting, including F2 cars and Porsche 911s.
A few years ago I did a Sunday Times travel piece on Monte Carlo. As part of that I stayed in the Fairmont, amongst other hotels.
It's *just* a four star but it probably has the best view of the Grand Prix, especially one corner suite right above a scary chicane; this is a suite which, the manager told me, is always booked by George "Star Wars" Lucas on the weekend of the race
I asked him how much he charged Mr Lucas.
"Twenty thousand dollars a night." Pause. "Plus breakfast."
Good story. Yes, Monaco on F1 weekend is an exercise in just how much money it's possible to spend in four days, everything is top priced then gold plated.
The sensible people either stay in Nice and commute by train, or club together to get one room with a view and all pile in there to watch. A bog-standard room in the Fairmont is something silly like €3000 a night this weekend - with four nights' minimum stay!
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
At Monaco? Definitely. It's not just the F1 cars, there are other race series on at the same meeting, including F2 cars and Porsche 911s. Great to see how quickly the cars go around the narrow streets, and the whole place is full of atmosphere and thousands of beautiful people staying for a few days more after Cannes.
Powerful piece by Douglas Murray. Why don't we take the jihadists' misogyny seriously?
For their part, the Islamists are amazingly clear about what they want and the reasons why they act accordingly. You never have to read between the lines. Listen to Jawad Akbar, recorded in the UK in 2004 as he discussed the soft targets he and his al Qaeda-linked cell were planning to hit. The targets included the Ministry of Sound nightclub in London. What was the appeal? As Akbar said to his colleague, Omar Khyam, no one could ‘turn round and say “oh they are innocent, those slags dancing around”.’
On the restart of the GE campaign Theresa May is due to join Trump at the NATO meeting in Brussels on thursday and then attend the G7 meeting in Italy at the weekend.
Here in Canada the media are showing Trudeau leaving for both meetings and saying that the Manchester attack will be the main subject in both meetings and that Theresa May will chair the meeting on security at the G7.
These meetings are going to dominate the media crowding out the GE campaigns. Theresa May will be on the World stage with many photo ops and no doubt press conferences.
Something's gone wrong with Baxter’s graphics, the LibDems hold the seat on the left, but his implied probabilities are wrong and he’s saying the Tories are favourites.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
Looking back at the history of the seat I wouldn't immediately dismiss the Tories there, though 48% is way way too high in my opinion.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
Remember three things;
(i) In these small West Wales seats, the candidate matters. I’d make LibDems very slight favs, but I think it will be close between them and PC.
(ii) This is a seat that the Tories have never won in modern times. Everyone else has won it, even Labour.
(iii) The kind of polls we have seen from Scully are not a good guide to these kinds of seats, although they probably are a good guide to the SE (Glamorgan and Gwent) where most of the Welsh population live.
And as I said a few threads back, a large reason why the Tories have never done well in Ceredigion is because it is a heartland of Welsh Nonconformism and the Tories are still seen there, rightly or wrongly, as intrinsically associated with Anglicanism.
In the 2012 CC elections , Conservatives fielded 21 candidates in Ceredigion and won no seats . This year they fielded just 3 and won none . Baxter has Conservatives winning Aberporth ward , in reality they came 4th and last with just 90 votes .
Thanks for the briefing on Wales from the English South Coast.
You have to assume 80 per cent of the Independent vote is Conservative in West/Mid Wales.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
Just stand on a bridge over a motorway. It is free, and as well as watching cars drive past you also get to spot Eddie Stobart lorries.
I'm afraid not. It used to be like that but now they've got it completely sealed-and I mean completely. There isn't the smallest gap to see through now. A few years ago you could go by the waterfront and watch the drivers and teams in their portable chateaux doing interviews.
I was being slightly testy. I'm a full-on liberal and I agree with you 90% of the way but I tend to think the problem of Islamic terrorism within the UK is a bigger problem than most do. I'm hawkish on it.
I think there is a gap that is exploited by terrorists (it's where our liberal, tolerant laws exist at the edges) and the Americans got round that gap by summarily removing people from the planet and placing them in Guantanamo.
I've no doubt the Americans abused their power but they also achieved success out of it. If there was some way a law could be framed, with plenty of checks and balances - something that had to be given signed approval by, say, six people at the top of the UK govt/law/police etc - which allowed for a the most extreme potential terrorists to be vanished from society (forever) and pummelled (within the law) for valuable life-saving information, I think I'd go for it.
I don't think a law could be so framed. Apart from anything else, what is an 'extreme potential terrorist'? Either someone has committed a crime or they haven't. The laws on thought-crime are already overly restrictive; if someone is a serious threat, they'll almost certainly have contravened one or more of them.
I don't have a problem with people being questioned assertively and within reasonable bounds where there's good reason but giving formal carte blanche to act like the thugs of Pinochet, Saddam or the Soviets is unacceptable and probably counter-productive.
Where there is a very serious and imminent threat to national security - where the potential deaths of hundreds of people or more are at stake and time is critical - then yes, extraordinary methods might be justified. But in those (hopefully extremely rare) cases, I'd rather tidy things up after the event than create a framework for them in advance.
What a bunch of bolleaux. The police force themselves agree(d) that better efficiency doesn't require an ever larger force and that they can and want to do more with fewer officers. Don't make me drag out the various supporting docs, etc.
It is perhaps worth remembering that that chart shows the police workforce not the number of coppers. The police workforce includes a very large numbers of hangers on, the HR departments, contract management departments, etc. etc.. For example in 2005 there were 191 people employed in the HR department of Sussex Police, a force of, then, slightly under 3,000 officers. Other forces have the same sort of ratios of hangers on to those actually doing police work.
Mr. Sandpit, delighted I remembered your tip, or at the prospect of a Perez triumph?
MD. Is it worth £70 to watch a practice? I haven't been to a Grand Prix before and on paper a practice doesn't sound too thrilling. The race itself is about £600 which seems like a lot but at least it's competitive. It also strikes me that you'll only see the cars for a moment as they speed past. Any thoughts? I'm thinking about it.
At Monaco? Definitely. It's not just the F1 cars, there are other race series on at the same meeting, including F2 cars and Porsche 911s.
A few years ago I did a Sunday Times travel piece on Monte Carlo. As part of that I stayed in the Fairmont, amongst other hotels.
It's *just* a four star but it probably has the best view of the Grand Prix, especially one corner suite right above a scary chicane; this is a suite which, the manager told me, is always booked by George "Star Wars" Lucas on the weekend of the race
I asked him how much he charged Mr Lucas.
"Twenty thousand dollars a night." Pause. "Plus breakfast."
I know that to be true. I met someone with a balcony that overlooks the race which takes 15 people . She serves them champagne and canapes and claims she makes enough during that week-end to live there for the rest of the year.
Comments
It was ISIS wot won it!
Pathetic. And sick.
That is hard. But it needs to be done.
If you allow bad people to do what they want without any sanction from those around them then eventually in any community (whether it is banking or a religion or anything else) the bad will drive out the good. The bad will be seen as the norm. That is why it is so important to give the good the courage and the space to speak up and the support when they do.
We are nowhere near getting this right now. It is urgent that we do so.
Some of them might even get the support of more than couple of Tory backbenchers.
But we can't dismiss it out of hand. Plaid and the Lib Dems look to have been polling horribly in Wales to my eyes.
I always think this is the mark of the political figure - to stand up and argue for a policy which you believe to be right in the face of unpopularity and attack. Margaret Thatcher, for all her faults, argued for things in which she believed and didn't backtrack when faced with hostility as did Tony Blair on Iraq.
I'm NOT saying Thatcher wasn't open to persuasion when confronted with a reasoned argument but if she thought something was right and in the interests of the country, she went with it.
If the true power of the country is to be the editorial line of the Daily Mail (and May fits the demographic of that paper's readership), then we will know May is finished when the Mail deserts her.
Yes, you can argue part of the democratic process is listening to the views of others and taking them into account but as the social care payment shows there's a difference between small adjustments to take into account special circumstances which would be a mark of a hastily conceived policy and a complete volte face on matters of principle which have ramifications far beyond the policy (costs to local authorities).
I’d be interested in the story of “When Philip met Theresa” .
OTOH, maybe Mossad did it?
It's a better term than "coward". I frown when I hear I hear pilots bombing from 20,000 feet described as "brave" and suicide bombers described as "cowards". It jars.
I could be wrong though! It's not my area of expertise.
If the Tories scoop up the UKIP vote, they are not that far behind.
I used to see him cycling about Fitzrovia in his 80s.
There's plenty of evidence he was a terrorist. There's no evidence his capture and confinement has led to more terrorism. There is plenty of evidence that the information tortured out of him has led to the execution of plenty of high ranking terrorists, including Bin Laden.
I'm fairly easy with it.
Strikes me as the sort of place May could have alot of appeal relative to Farron.
'I’ll always be a Corbynista. Jeremy was the best prime minister we never had'
by Corbynite Nelly
"The rightwing smear against Jeremy Corbyn angered me. But his bravery and integrity in the face of it was an inspiration
"Watching Jeremy’s heartbreaking speech on Friday, I couldn’t quite believe it when he mentioned the Corbynistas. It was bittersweet I suppose: that Jeremy felt the Corbynistas warranted a thank you but in the context of a resignation and not, as it should have been, a victory speech. It was an honour to know that Jeremy was thankful for the movement, and although my tears had already started flowing by then, the way that he almost smiled when he mentioned it really set me off. I have to confess that the rest of the speech was a complete blur to me.
"I know to many people it may seem silly to have got emotional over Jeremy’s resignation, but it wasn’t anything like the reaction to David Cameron leaving Downing Street, as some have carelessly compared it. We’d had the chance to have this amazing person as prime minister: a chance for equality, a chance for change, a chance for someone who truly cared about the people to lead them. To watch our country waste that chance and to see someone who had worked so unbelievably hard and was so deserving lose was utterly devastating. I don’t know when I’m going to get over that feeling of loss, that sick, hollow feeling in my stomach, when I think about what could have been. Jeremy Corbyn was the best prime minister we never had!"
There is a price to be paid for living in a free society but it is not as high as the price paid by those who don't live in one.
All the Tories need to do is go around being all dertimned and prime ministerial. A measured and well judged tone is all that is needed. It plays to Mays perceived strengths. All they need to do is play it calm not get too obvious about it and hope the opposition puts their foot in it.
For Labour there is no real upside here, unless some form criminal negligence from the secuirty services is exposed there is little they can say other than supportive noises and even if there are genuine complaints to be made, it's better if the Media lead with it.
The Labour momentum for free goodies for all has been pushed off the agenda and now security has become the focus.
Of course as we have already seen at the lower levels of Corbynester support, conspiracy theories abounding. Not much use for the Conservatives unless someone senior says something stupid.
The Campaign may soon restart but the narratives have changed and security has been pushed up the agenda.
But I can already see a post election narative. Similar to Falklands, it was the bomd is what won it for May, Jeremy had no chance etc etc not his faultm the campaign was going our way, we were only 10 points behind in some polls etc!!!
Yes, check the terms of bets on safety cars that they are for a physical safety car and not a virtual one. A VSC at Monaco I'd price at 1/10, but the Monganesque marshalls are fantastic at getting broken cars out of the way quickly. They'll generally now only send a physical SC out for a multi-car crash that leaves debris on the racing line, or to accompany the medical car if that needs to be deployed. This was my reasoning last year and it damn nearly came off but for the rain at the start.
(i) In these small West Wales seats, the candidate matters. I’d make LibDems very slight favs, but I think it will be close between them and PC.
(ii) This is a seat that the Tories have never won in modern times. Everyone else has won it, even Labour.
(iii) The kind of polls we have seen from Scully are not a good guide to these kinds of seats, although they probably are a good guide to the SE (Glamorgan and Gwent) where most of the Welsh population live.
http://walthamforestecho.co.uk/leading-the-way-in-waltham-forest/
This girl enjoying the sunny weather also suggests a lack of Sharia law:
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/15305248.Happy_Wednesday__It_looks_like_it_s_going_to_be_a_scorcher/
But you are right in the sense that there are many areas where, if I were a young woman, I would feel unsafe to walk alone at night. Even as a young man there are areas where I feel unsafe and justifiably since I have been attacked in the past. That's just normal criminality though and is the case everywhere...
Boot Corbyn out and most of the nutters will follow.
5% lead from 2015. swings to Con smaller in London than elsewhere. Lib+Green> UKIP means they should benefit more from the 2-party squeeze. Not saying they should be favs but I like the odds on offer.
The IFS has had a big impact on public life... Arguably more than many MPs.
I was being slightly testy. I'm a full-on liberal and I agree with you 90% of the way but I tend to think the problem of Islamic terrorism within the UK is a bigger problem than most do. I'm hawkish on it.
I think there is a gap that is exploited by terrorists (it's where our liberal, tolerant laws exist at the edges) and the Americans got round that gap by summarily removing people from the planet and placing them in Guantanamo.
I've no doubt the Americans abused their power but they also achieved success out of it. If there was some way a law could be framed, with plenty of checks and balances - something that had to be given signed approval by, say, six people at the top of the UK govt/law/police etc - which allowed for a the most extreme potential terrorists to be vanished from society (forever) and pummelled (within the law) for valuable life-saving information, I think I'd go for it.
Corbyn, McDonnell and their ilk like Militant are like a cancer within the Labour Party. If you don't excise it all then it will come back.
Corbyn himself said of Militant in 1982 "If expulsions are in order for Militant, they should apply to us too." - Not often I say this but Jeremy Corbyn was entirely right and I completely agree.
Meeting timetable: https://www.grandprixevents.com/f1-races/monaco/race-program-monaco
remember you can put 40000 officers back on the beat for £2.50 each as proved by Diane Abbott
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/man-detained-outside-buckingham-palace-in-dramatic-police-swoop-on-the-mall-a3547286.html
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/867356292788224001
Been once on a corporate like yourself, you might as well sit on your local roundabout with some beer, it would be more interesting.
The sensible people either stay in Nice and commute by train, or club together to get one room with a view and all pile in there to watch. A bog-standard room in the Fairmont is something silly like €3000 a night this weekend - with four nights' minimum stay!
NEW THREAD
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.131100521
Good luck getting that laid.
Here in Canada the media are showing Trudeau leaving for both meetings and saying that the Manchester attack will be the main subject in both meetings and that Theresa May will chair the meeting on security at the G7.
These meetings are going to dominate the media crowding out the GE campaigns. Theresa May will be on the World stage with many photo ops and no doubt press conferences.
Manchester has changed everything in my opinion
You have to assume 80 per cent of the Independent vote is Conservative in West/Mid Wales.
I don't have a problem with people being questioned assertively and within reasonable bounds where there's good reason but giving formal carte blanche to act like the thugs of Pinochet, Saddam or the Soviets is unacceptable and probably counter-productive.
Where there is a very serious and imminent threat to national security - where the potential deaths of hundreds of people or more are at stake and time is critical - then yes, extraordinary methods might be justified. But in those (hopefully extremely rare) cases, I'd rather tidy things up after the event than create a framework for them in advance.
new thread