In the cold war period the "useful idiots" were on the left, but for the last decade, the right.
I disagree. It's not about "what X wants" in terms of policy outcomes, simply sowing discord is highly desirable in itself, and I would say easier to achieve than trying to influence policy in a particular direction.
In the cold war period the "useful idiots" were on the left, but for the last decade, the right.
I disagree. It's not about "what X wants" in terms of policy outcomes, simply sowing discord is highly desirable in itself, and I would say easier to achieve than trying to influence policy in a particular direction.
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
My real name is Dennis Sunilovski. Home for me is a dacha just outside the Russian spa town of Novosunilsk.
I have. I was careful not to repeat the silly accusation that Corbyn sold secrets. But did he consort - chat - with Warsaw Pact intelligence agencies? - the evidence, to me, seems overwhelming that he did. The fact they found him "too stupid" to be that useful is the clincher. Because he is a stupid man. So they obviously met him and knew him well.
Plus he is a friend of Iran, the IRA, Hamas, all the enemies of Britain. All this is on record.
I have called him a traitor on Twitter. I doubt if he cares, or is even aware, I am pretty sure he won't sue, however. Because a trawl of the evidence would not be good. For him.
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
My real name is Dennis Sunilovski. Home for me is a dacha just outside the Russian spa town of Novosunilsk.
Wait, your name and the town you live in both contain 'Sunil'?
Not buying it, comrade!
Although google does suggest an autocorrect of Novosibirsk, third largest city in Russia and the largest in Asian Russia, so I think an investigation is necessary to determine if you are telling the truth.
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
My real name is Dennis Sunilovski. Home for me is a dacha just outside the Russian spa town of Novosunilsk.
Wait, your name and the town you live in both contain 'Sunil'?
Not buying it, comrade!
Although google does suggest an autocorrect of Novosibirsk, third largest city in Russia and the largest in Asian Russia, so I think an investigation is necessary to determine if you are telling the truth.
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
If they only made a 2% difference they made a massive difference!
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
If they only made a 2% difference they made a massive difference!
If Emily Thornberry became Labour leader, I would support the Labour Party again and we would have a decent mainstream Labour leadership once more.
Thornberry is no Corbynista. She's been loyal to the dreadful Corbyn but she isnt from the hard left. For the first time since John Smith died in 1994 we would have a Labour leader on the mainstream, free from the factions of Blairite right and Corbynite hard Marxist left.
Be in no doubt however, Thornberry as leader would mean the vile Mr McDonnell and the hopeless Diane Abbott going too. And eventually she would have to confront and cleanse the party of the poison that is Momentum.
Alas, I doubt if Thornberry will take over soon. Corbyn loves the Stalinist adulation, the youth movements, the songs to the Leader, the Messianic adulation. He is a vain posturing political pygmy but one I suspect who will go on dragging his party down to destruction.
Neither Brown nor Ed Miliband were Blairite right or Corbynista left
Apparently Theresa May has a Physics A Level she disclosed on BBC News for those who say we need more scientists as politicians
I have a Physics A-Level as well - you can skate through surprisingly well with little scientific knowledge. I had to work harder for that A-Level though than any other, and yet received my lowest grade though, forshame.
Looks good value! In particular I think TM has a decent chance of staying on. The Tories will need to portray Brexit as a success, and how do they do that while ejecting its captain?
(And first - trained in speed by the Czech Secret Service, y'know.)
They gratefully say thanks to Mrs May. You're now 60+ with diabetes and deserve more walking holidays with Philip. Off you go.
The process is that 49 MPs say "We have no confidence in Mrs May as PM", shortly after a Brexit that they simply have to declare to be a success, and in the middle of the complex post-Brexit trade talks etc. It'll look desperate, and they'll be asked why they didn't do it before - if they had no confidence inher, why was she leading the negotiations?
That shouldn't be a bloody secret plan, it should BE the plan. And not too much cash even if we do get 'trade' - given that such trade is more beneficial to the EU than it is to us, getting 'trade' is its own reward.
It's a profoundly stupid plan. First of all we would be in clear breach of our treaties if we unilaterally stopped agreed payments. Secondly it's not going to encourage a good trade deal. But I see it's the brainchild of Iain Duncan Smith.
"It said that in the restaurants owned by the chain, staff on short-term contracts would be paid the average hours worked per day over the past 12 weeks, while those on salaries would be paid as normal.
However, 80% of KFC outlets are run on a franchise basis.
"Franchisees will be seeking their own independent advice, but we're encouraging them to adopt this policy too"
Apparently Theresa May has a Physics A Level she disclosed on BBC News for those who say we need more scientists as politicians
I have a Physics A-Level as well - you can skate through surprisingly well with little scientific knowledge. I had to work harder for that A-Level though than any other, and yet received my lowest grade though, forshame.
Makes a change from the usual History or Geography or Latin or English or Politics or Economics most PMs did for A Level
"It said that in the restaurants owned by the chain, staff on short-term contracts would be paid the average hours worked per day over the past 12 weeks, while those on salaries would be paid as normal.
However, 80% of KFC outlets are run on a franchise basis.
"Franchisees will be seeking their own independent advice, but we're encouraging them to adopt this policy too"
This is a $26.3bn company.
I don't see what's wrong with that response.
The minimum would be to force paid leave, which an employer is free to do. Instead it seems KFC will be sending people home on fair pay.
Apparently Theresa May has a Physics A Level she disclosed on BBC News for those who say we need more scientists as politicians
I have a Physics A-Level as well - you can skate through surprisingly well with little scientific knowledge. I had to work harder for that A-Level though than any other, and yet received my lowest grade though, forshame.
Makes a change from the usual History or Geography or Latin or English or Politics or Economics most PMs did for A Level
I was only teasing, although it is still only A-Level. Can't hurt though.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Obviously we have done such things, and indeed continue to do such things. The reason the whole "deep state" meme has gained so much traction is that parts of the US intelligence community have been a law unto themselves and done all kinds of terrible things. So it's easy to believe there are forces at work trying to thwart the "will of the people" by unlawful means. But two wrongs don't make a right.
Interestingly Mueller himself, when at the FBI, pushed back hard against some of the stuff the CIA was doing like enhanced interrogation after 9/11.
"It said that in the restaurants owned by the chain, staff on short-term contracts would be paid the average hours worked per day over the past 12 weeks, while those on salaries would be paid as normal.
However, 80% of KFC outlets are run on a franchise basis.
"Franchisees will be seeking their own independent advice, but we're encouraging them to adopt this policy too"
This is a $26.3bn company.
I don't see what's wrong with that response.
The minimum would be to force paid leave, which an employer is free to do. Instead it seems KFC will be sending people home on fair pay.
Why not pay franchise staff the shortfall?
Why has the risk of corporate f*ckups been offloaded onto the lowest paid via fragile franchises?
We choose to allow these corporate/employment structures. IMO, payment of frontline staff in a situation like this should not be optional. No?
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Do you think the Russians wanted Brexit, and trolled for it to set the millieu?
For sure. The Russians support whatever causes the most trouble for the UK goverment. Any change is disruptive, no matter what the outcome is in the long term. So Brexit suits Russia. I don't think they made much difference, as it's not as though the UK was a big fan of the EU up until 2016.
I think that's spot on.
People seem to think that the EU referendum was close. It was not. Leave got almost 10% more votes than Remain. In absolute terms, the gap was almost exactly the same as the number of votes the SNP got in their record 2015 result.
It's also worth remembering that the US has been pretty keen on interfering in other countries elections in the past. There were active campaigns in Greece and Italy to keep the Communists out of power in the post war period. And these were rather more active campaigns than a few fake tweeters.
I have little doubt that we have also messed in other countries democratic elections, so I find this outrageous a little odd.
Perhaps the issue is simpler: the Russians managed to fuck up this time by getting caught. And so the US government daren't appear pro-Russian now.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
Are you suggesting that Vladimir Putin has not enriched himself while President?
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Obviously we have done such things, and indeed continue to do such things. The reason the whole "deep state" meme has gained so much traction is that parts of the US intelligence community have been a law unto themselves and done all kinds of terrible things. So it's easy to believe there are forces at work trying to thwart the "will of the people" by unlawful means. But two wrongs don't make a right.
Interestingly Mueller himself, when at the FBI, pushed back hard against some of the stuff the CIA was doing like enhanced interrogation after 9/11.
As for Mueller and his chicanery, I think this article best sums up my views:
Let's have a public trial where his allegations would have to be proven. Mueller knows very well that we won't get that, given that there is no US-Russia extradition treaty.
Soviet and current Russian espionage MO is built on mass rather than precision. One espionage objective is the undermining of the institutions and foundations of Western democratic society. Cause disruption, unrest and division. The Soviet bloc did it then and Russia does it today.
Get as many people of influence you can working with you in some way. Only a handful of people are ever truly high level, high value spies. The rest, however, have uses.
The idea that there was no point in establishing a relationship with Corbyn because he was some dodgeball backbencher who didn't hold a position of state doesn't hold water. In fact he was and is a perfectly logical subject for approach given the objectives and strategy outlined above.
The more important question is why is something that Western intelligence services knew back then coming out now.
You have to scroll through two pages, down to the seventeenth paragraph, to discover that the Guardian admits that "There is no suggestion that Davis breached any rules."
And they have the nerve to get all het up about the Mail.
Are you suggesting that Vladimir Putin has not enriched himself while President?
No all those palaces, aircraft, cars and the like aren't Putin's. They belong to his close lifelong friends who all became inexplicably rich at about the same time.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
Well as somebody once put it succinctly to me, "petrol and alcohol don't mix".
As always, I follow the money. That gets you to the true story and the true motivations. Talk is cheap, especially when it comes to the mainstream media and a lot of the alternative media as well, I regret to say.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
Are you suggesting that Vladimir Putin has not enriched himself while President?
If so, I have a bridge you might want to buy.
Of course Putin has enriched himself. At least that's far more in the open, when compared to a lot of Western politicians who act holier than thou, yet are playing exactly the same games, and in a far more duplicitous manner as well.
I'm pleased that Andrew Bridgen, one of the decent Tories, is continuing to go after Keith Vaz:
A few weeks back, Vaz opened a swimming pool in his constituency, when he was supposedly too ill to attend parliament, behaviour par for the course with him.
The idea that Corbyn will voluntarily step down before the next election is bizarre. He has spent 30 off years as a backbench nobody. Now he is within a relative whisker of being PM. Why would he go? And he has shown that being pushed wouldn't work either.
From The Sun: He was also described as handing communist agents a newspaper article about an MI5 operation against an East German spy.
Is that it? Did the Czech embassy not buy its own newspapers? At best, or worst, it shows Corbyn was an innocent abroad who thought he was discussing the news with fellow lefties; certainly not revealing state secrets to foreign spies.
Of course, the beauty of it is that Corbyn can hardly sue because away from the lurid headline, the details are quite mundane and the Sun even includes a sort-of denial from the Czechs: Svetlana Ptacnikova, of the Czech intelligence archives in Prague, said: “We don’t have any documents which state that Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant, but we can’t be sure.”
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
Are you suggesting that Vladimir Putin has not enriched himself while President?
If so, I have a bridge you might want to buy.
Of course Putin has enriched himself. At least that's far more in the open, when compared to a lot of Western politicians who act holier than thou, yet are playing exactly the same games, and in a far more duplicitous manner as well.
I'm pleased that Andrew Bridgen, one of the decent Tories, is continuing to go after Keith Vaz:
A few weeks back, Vaz opened a swimming pool in his constituency, when he was supposedly too ill to attend parliament, behaviour par for the course with him.
Stealing billions: excellent work, strong leadership, to be admired. Opening a swimming pool: corrupt bastard.
Germany is the pre-eminent economic power in Europe but it is France and the UK who are the leading military powers, for obvious reasons Germany has little interest in expanding its armed forces and interventions abroad
Have you noticed the Mueller enquiry, and wondered what the same Russians did here?
They dynamics are rather different here, for starters because we have a much more heavily regulated media and political campaigning than in the US. But I'm sure that the Russians are pushing propaganda in the UK, and in the West in general.
We are certainly supposed to "have a much more heavily regulated media and political campaigning than in the US", Mr GLW. Recent events, however, suggest that this might not be the case.
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
Are you suggesting that Vladimir Putin has not enriched himself while President?
If so, I have a bridge you might want to buy.
Of course Putin has enriched himself. At least that's far more in the open, when compared to a lot of Western politicians who act holier than thou, yet are playing exactly the same games, and in a far more duplicitous manner as well.
I'm pleased that Andrew Bridgen, one of the decent Tories, is continuing to go after Keith Vaz:
A few weeks back, Vaz opened a swimming pool in his constituency, when he was supposedly too ill to attend parliament, behaviour par for the course with him.
Critics of Western politicians tend not to meet violent deaths, either.
Or is Putin refreshingly out in the open about that, too ?
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
Berlusconi has 100x more skill than than any of the multitude of Italian politicians that inhabited the PM spot in the 1980s or 1990s. Yet the Italians were far better served by weak government than strong.
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
Berlusconi - you're having a laugh aren't you?! Any half-competent political opponent who did their own research could nail him on his corruption. I've done it myself. Search the record on David Mackenzie Donald Mills and you'll be on the right track.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
Well as somebody once put it succinctly to me, "petrol and alcohol don't mix"...
Literally untrue. In Brazil, they add a large percentage of alcohol to their petrol.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
A lot of tiresome anti-Russian propaganda on here tonight. Nobody has remotely proved anything about Russian collusion in UK and / or US elections. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black. We've never intervened in other countries affairs have we?! Obama didn't intervene in the EU referendum debate did he?! Lavrov and Putin have got more political skill in their little fingers compared to the appalling lack of talent of the likes of May, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris, Corbyn and Thornberry.
The book which Putin's ideological cornerstone and that has formed his to-do list for the past 15 years is "Osnovi Geopolitiki" written by Aleksandr Dugin in 1997. That work, which is now a textbook in many Russian institutions, has entire section on how important it is for Russia to sever the UK from Europe as it provides a bridge to Atlanticist ideals. It would be more curious if Russia hadn't tried to influence the Brexit referendum.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
Shows his utter lack of understanding of how economics works. Unless we have wealth creators, there will be no-one to tax heavily enough to pay for his pie in the sky schemes.
This sort of approach is potentially more damaging to the long-term future of the UK economy than anything Brexit can throw at us.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
Shows his utter lack of understanding of how economics works. Unless we have wealth creators, there will be no-one to tax heavily enough to pay for his pie in the sky schemes.
This sort of approach is potentially more damaging to the long-term future of the UK economy than anything Brexit can throw at us.
It is also far more dangerous that sticking up income tax a bit.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
But if he wants to kill off the evil spins and bankers in the City, what does he intend to do, to replace the hundred billion they pay every year in taxes? The entire NHS budget is basically paid for by the City.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
But if he wants to kill off the evil spins and bankers in the City, what does he intend to do, to replace the hundred billion they pay every year in taxes? The entire NHS budget is basically paid for by the City.
This is how Corbyn becomes PM....
The brexiteer rightwingers get boxed into defending the interests of the city.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
But if he wants to kill off the evil spins and bankers in the City, what does he intend to do, to replace the hundred billion they pay every year in taxes? The entire NHS budget is basically paid for by the City.
This is how Corbyn becomes PM....
The brexiteer rightwingers get boxed into defending the interests of the city.
They're playing this game of chess very poorly.
Nah, wanting the City closed down just leaves Corbyn with another £100bn hole in his spending numbers. That’s about £200bn so far, isn’t it?
It’s a fair point to say that the economy should be rebalanced over time, but Corbyn has no idea how the government actually earns money.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
There's an excellent case that much of the financial innovation we've seen over the past 2/3 decades has been either socially useless, or even actively harmful to the economy.
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
There's an excellent case that much of the financial innovation we've seen over the past 2/3 decades has been either socially useless, or even actively harmful to the economy.
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
+1 Typical of this government, sound and fury, signifying nothing!
On the city, economically Corbyn is pursuing a nonsense policy. But alot of the Brexit vote, after immigration was about taking London down a peg or two. So today's announcement will do well with the Labour leave hinterlands methinks.. .
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
Reviews don’t *decide* they provide political cover
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
I'm not convinced there's much strategy going on.
It's almost as if she's well out of her depth in most non-HO policy areas and didn't really grasp the logic behind the new tuition fee/loans structure when she announced the 25k threshold.
The cynical genius of Osbornes loan structure was that the threshold would effectively decay over time, significantly increasing the sale value of the loans - and the amount the treasury could bank. So long as the core fee/loan structure wasn't altered, the treasury could afford the odd £bn as a bribe whenever the political temperature rose.
Strange, considering she had a private sector background in economics/finance before entering parliament.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Where do I find out about this model that JC and Venezuela have in common?
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Where do I find out about this model that JC and Venezuela have in common?
There is a case that the economic nationalism pursued by Venezuela has more in common with the Brexiteer arguments of BJ, JRM and Fox.....reduce your ties to your trading partners, develop a radical national rhetoric, make life harder for the poor and blame foreigners,,,,if you ask me, Venezuela looks more like elements of the Tory right's programme than anything JC et al have to say.
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
I'm not convinced there's much strategy going on.
It's almost as if she's well out of her depth in most non-HO policy areas and didn't really grasp the logic behind the new tuition fee/loans structure when she announced the 25k threshold.
The cynical genius of Osbornes loan structure was that the threshold would effectively decay over time, significantly increasing the sale value of the loans - and the amount the treasury could bank. So long as the core fee/loan structure wasn't altered, the treasury could afford the odd £bn as a bribe whenever the political temperature rose.
Strange, considering she had a private sector background in economics/finance before entering parliament.
All she has done is draw more attention to tuition fees as an issue, without doing anything about it. She really has the negative Midas touch.
Jezza's economic popularism may well prove quite popular. Not many Britons have any great love of it, even defenders consider it a dirty neccesity.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Where do I find out about this model that JC and Venezuela have in common?
There is a case that the economic nationalism pursued by Venezuela has more in common with the Brexiteer arguments of BJ, JRM and Fox.....reduce your ties to your trading partners, develop a radical national rhetoric, make life harder for the poor and blame foreigners,,,,if you ask me, Venezuela looks more like elements of the Tory right's programme than anything JC et al have to say.
The Tory right are proposing to seize all foreign owned industry and run it to siphon billions off into their own Panamanian bank accounts for the benefit of the people?
That's an announcement I'm sorry I missed. The look on Hammond's face would have been worth five years' licence fees.
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
I'm not convinced there's much strategy going on.
It's almost as if she's well out of her depth in most non-HO policy areas and didn't really grasp the logic behind the new tuition fee/loans structure when she announced the 25k threshold.
The cynical genius of Osbornes loan structure was that the threshold would effectively decay over time, significantly increasing the sale value of the loans - and the amount the treasury could bank. So long as the core fee/loan structure wasn't altered, the treasury could afford the odd £bn as a bribe whenever the political temperature rose.
Strange, considering she had a private sector background in economics/finance before entering parliament.
All she has done is draw more attention to tuition fees as an issue, without doing anything about it. She really has the negative Midas touch.
Jezza's economic popularism may well prove quite popular. Not many Britons have any great love of it, even defenders consider it a dirty neccesity.
Yep. She is a genius. May has basically accepted that there is a major problem and then done nothing. Not only ceding the ground to Jezza, but moving the Overton Window on the issue. Maybe, to be charitable, it had already moved and the public wants rid of fees altogether.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Where do I find out about this model that JC and Venezuela have in common?
There is a case that the economic nationalism pursued by Venezuela has more in common with the Brexiteer arguments of BJ, JRM and Fox.....reduce your ties to your trading partners, develop a radical national rhetoric, make life harder for the poor and blame foreigners,,,,if you ask me, Venezuela looks more like elements of the Tory right's programme than anything JC et al have to say.
Personally I think all these “we will be like country x or country y” comparisons are largely useless and the public ignores them.
Possibly the only area where the British public has a firm view of this type IMO is that they don’t want a health system like the USA.
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
this concept of the "real economy" is very interesting, for about 30 years we have been told that the City and the Financial sector are fundamental to the UK economy....in that time it has grown significantly larger, has generated a massive bubble in central London and parts of the South East but most voters see very little physical benefit - hence the dire warnings about BREXIT and the City did not bother many....
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
JC doesn't have a point. He has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how to build a successful economy. He believes that Venezuela is the model we should follow. The man is seriously deluded.
Where do I find out about this model that JC and Venezuela have in common?
There is a case that the economic nationalism pursued by Venezuela has more in common with the Brexiteer arguments of BJ, JRM and Fox.....reduce your ties to your trading partners, develop a radical national rhetoric, make life harder for the poor and blame foreigners,,,,if you ask me, Venezuela looks more like elements of the Tory right's programme than anything JC et al have to say.
Personally I think all these “we will be like country x or country y” comparisons are largely useless and the public ignores them.
Possibly the only area where the British public has a firm view of this type IMO is that they don’t want a health system like the USA.
Hmm. This is quite an interesting suggestion. My only counterpoint would be whether or not Labour MPs would back her to be on the shortlist. Are there sufficient old lefties and new socialist idiots who think more of the far left in charge is a good thing? If so, she'd stand a great chance with the £3 membership.
I dont understandn't what the Govt is doing wrt tuition fees. Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table. Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review) Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
Reviews don’t *decide* they provide political cover
I know you're an intelligent man Charles, pray tell - precisely WHAT will this review give cover for.
It's hardly just the 52% though is it? Remainers are being in effect led by Corbyn - who for all his denials is clearly a Leaver - and leavers by May who is a Remainer. They are also both autocratic muppets with neither imagination or vision and one of them completely lacks integrity.
As a nation, I get the feeling we're more royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards.
Spot on. The Tories are just going to end up annoying everyone with this.
A journalist can write a 500 word summary of why this review was a crap idea in a couple of hours, whereas May's advisors have spent weeks coming up with the idea. They even engineered the moving of Jo Johnson to allow a review to go ahead.
Pathetic.
If the alternative wasn't JRM then it is time the Tories put the country out of its misery over May.
Comments
Irish newspapers!!
https://www.foxestalk.co.uk/topic/115010-fa-cup-quater-final-draw-745pm-uk-time/?do=findComment&comment=4663848
One Judge dissented - saying that as lawmakers could not agree on a new map then the old (unconstitutional) map should be used one more time.
Not buying it, comrade!
Although google does suggest an autocorrect of Novosibirsk, third largest city in Russia and the largest in Asian Russia, so I think an investigation is necessary to determine if you are telling the truth.
If he wins he will be PM, if he loses Thornberry is now too closely associated with him to offer a significant chsnge
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/965408156624019456
New archive files allege the then backbench MP was one of the top contacts of Czech State Security agents
LABOUR chief Jeremy Corbyn had an “active supply of information on British intelligence services” for Soviet-backed spies, new archive files allege.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5617866/jeremy-corbyn-british-intelligence-spies-communism/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43110910
"It said that in the restaurants owned by the chain, staff on short-term contracts would be paid the average hours worked per day over the past 12 weeks, while those on salaries would be paid as normal.
However, 80% of KFC outlets are run on a franchise basis.
"Franchisees will be seeking their own independent advice, but we're encouraging them to adopt this policy too"
This is a $26.3bn company.
The minimum would be to force paid leave, which an employer is free to do. Instead it seems KFC will be sending people home on fair pay.
Interestingly Mueller himself, when at the FBI, pushed back hard against some of the stuff the CIA was doing like enhanced interrogation after 9/11.
Why has the risk of corporate f*ckups been offloaded onto the lowest paid via fragile franchises?
We choose to allow these corporate/employment structures. IMO, payment of frontline staff in a situation like this should not be optional. No?
Why on earth would you expect strong government to be good government?
People seem to think that the EU referendum was close. It was not. Leave got almost 10% more votes than Remain. In absolute terms, the gap was almost exactly the same as the number of votes the SNP got in their record 2015 result.
It's also worth remembering that the US has been pretty keen on interfering in other countries elections in the past. There were active campaigns in Greece and Italy to keep the Communists out of power in the post war period. And these were rather more active campaigns than a few fake tweeters.
I have little doubt that we have also messed in other countries democratic elections, so I find this outrageous a little odd.
Perhaps the issue is simpler: the Russians managed to fuck up this time by getting caught. And so the US government daren't appear pro-Russian now.
As for strong government, you're equating strong to big. That isn't the case at all. Strong small government is far more preferable to weak bungling big government, which is what we have today in the UK sadly.
If so, I have a bridge you might want to buy.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/mueller-creates-his-own-conspiracy/
Let's have a public trial where his allegations would have to be proven. Mueller knows very well that we won't get that, given that there is no US-Russia extradition treaty.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43113900
Get as many people of influence you can working with you in some way. Only a handful of people are ever truly high level, high value spies. The rest, however, have uses.
The idea that there was no point in establishing a relationship with Corbyn because he was some dodgeball backbencher who didn't hold a position of state doesn't hold water. In fact he was and is a perfectly logical subject for approach given the objectives and strategy outlined above.
The more important question is why is something that Western intelligence services knew back then coming out now.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/19/westminster-councillor-received-gifts-and-hospitality-514-times-in-three-years
You have to scroll through two pages, down to the seventeenth paragraph, to discover that the Guardian admits that "There is no suggestion that Davis breached any rules."
And they have the nerve to get all het up about the Mail.
As always, I follow the money. That gets you to the true story and the true motivations. Talk is cheap, especially when it comes to the mainstream media and a lot of the alternative media as well, I regret to say.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-most-isolated-tree-in-the-world-was-killed-by-a-probably-drunk-driver-5369329/
I'm pleased that Andrew Bridgen, one of the decent Tories, is continuing to go after Keith Vaz:
https://order-order.com/2018/02/17/vaz-reported-national-crime-agency-finances/
A few weeks back, Vaz opened a swimming pool in his constituency, when he was supposedly too ill to attend parliament, behaviour par for the course with him.
Is that it? Did the Czech embassy not buy its own newspapers? At best, or worst, it shows Corbyn was an innocent abroad who thought he was discussing the news with fellow lefties; certainly not revealing state secrets to foreign spies.
Of course, the beauty of it is that Corbyn can hardly sue because away from the lurid headline, the details are quite mundane and the Sun even includes a sort-of denial from the Czechs: Svetlana Ptacnikova, of the Czech intelligence archives in Prague, said: “We don’t have any documents which state that Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant, but we can’t be sure.”
Opening a swimming pool: corrupt bastard.
Life in hunchman land.
Or is Putin refreshingly out in the open about that, too ?
Mr Corbyn has often criticised bankers, and promised a "fundamental shift" in economic policy if he wins power.
A Labour government, he will say, "will take decisive action to make finance the servant of industry, not the masters of us all".
In a speech to the EEF manufacturers' organisation on Tuesday, he will say his administration would be the first in 40 years - a period which includes 13 years of Labour government - to "stand up for the real economy".
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43121199
And, yob tvoyu mat', to your Putin-worship.
This sort of approach is potentially more damaging to the long-term future of the UK economy than anything Brexit can throw at us.
Perhaps JC has a point, the CIty has perhaps overblown its value the UK economy, RBS certainly
The brexiteer rightwingers get boxed into defending the interests of the city.
They're playing this game of chess very poorly.
It’s a fair point to say that the economy should be rebalanced over time, but Corbyn has no idea how the government actually earns money.
Why call for a review of the policy of scrapping them is completely off.the table.
Why put the threshold up from 21 to 25k (A massive comparative change art median earnings and hence total cost of the scheme before the review)
Why state greater variety is needed in the fees BEFORE the review.
I am not saying fees are good or bad, but seriously don't get what the review is meant to decide, and why it has been called if govt policy is decided beforehand.
Typical of this government, sound and fury, signifying nothing!
It's almost as if she's well out of her depth in most non-HO policy areas and didn't really grasp the logic behind the new tuition fee/loans structure when she announced the 25k threshold.
The cynical genius of Osbornes loan structure was that the threshold would effectively decay over time, significantly increasing the sale value of the loans - and the amount the treasury could bank. So long as the core fee/loan structure wasn't altered, the treasury could afford the odd £bn as a bribe whenever the political temperature rose.
Strange, considering she had a private sector background in economics/finance before entering parliament.
Jezza's economic popularism may well prove quite popular. Not many Britons have any great love of it, even defenders consider it a dirty neccesity.
to siphon billions off into their own Panamanian bank accountsfor the benefit of the people?That's an announcement I'm sorry I missed. The look on Hammond's face would have been worth five years' licence fees.
Possibly the only area where the British public has a firm view of this type IMO is that they don’t want a health system like the USA.
Hmm. This is quite an interesting suggestion. My only counterpoint would be whether or not Labour MPs would back her to be on the shortlist. Are there sufficient old lefties and new socialist idiots who think more of the far left in charge is a good thing? If so, she'd stand a great chance with the £3 membership.
As a nation, I get the feeling we're more royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards.
Pathetic.
If the alternative wasn't JRM then it is time the Tories put the country out of its misery over May.