In his official statement, Mr Salmond said he had not been allowed to properly challenge the case against him – “I have not been allowed to see the evidence,” he said. And yet in the same statement he said the complaints were patently ridiculous. So, which is it? How can he say the complaints are ridiculous if he has not seen them? He either knows what the complaints are, or he doesn’t.
Well, if he knew himself to be completely innocent of any such behaviour then he could claim they were ridiculous without knowing the details, I suppose.
What I find interesting is the position of Nicola. She has known and worked with this man for decades and must have a detailed knowledge of any foibles that he might have exhibited. She is taking her role as FM very seriously and playing this by the book. Whilst that is the correct thing to do her lack of character witness support for him is very telling.
David , It seems fairly obvious that they have had a wee party and some snogging has taken place and for some bizzare reason the person has decided to rake it up 6 years later and make out it was unwanted attention. When you read what the Record had as the incident it would have to have been some brain dead moron to have allowed it to be as stated. Fairly obvious to anyone that has ever been to a drunken party I am afraid, some people just cannot get over how stupid they were snogging someone.
Ah. The she was wearing a short skirt and had it coming to her defence.
Far from it , says a lot about your mindset that you came to that conclusion. You think stereotype and imagine she was in a coma for six years rather than it was two adults involved.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
So you don't blame May for losing her majority either?
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
***SCREAMS AND THUMPS TABLE***
Politicians! Politicians! No apostrophe!
Write out 100 times...
9am on a bank holiday and I'm very tired, sir, my fingers betrayed me. Can I get one mulligan, sir?
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
Exactly , I never believe the media nowadays , it is full of lying cheating toerags. Certainly puts Sturgeon on the spot and as you say , we no longer have innocent till proven guilty in this country, media have people hung, drawn and quartered regardless of truth.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
So you don't blame May for losing her majority either?
I don't blame her if the result of her losing that majority is we as a country suffer, since she told us to make sure she had one to avoid that. Clearly she is responsible for a bad campaign, and Cameron responsible for not doing a good job convincing people his deal was ok, but the choices in either case belong to the public. I don't think I, or other people, can escape general responsibility for our choices. Those choices might be more understandable particularly where someone like May and Cameron or Corbyn or whoever do a bad job, but they are still our choices.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
***SCREAMS AND THUMPS TABLE***
Politicians! Politicians! No apostrophe!
Write out 100 times...
9am on a bank holiday and I'm very tired, sir, my fingers betrayed me. Can I get one mulligan, sir?
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
Exactly , I never believe the media nowadays , it is full of lying cheating toerags. Certainly puts Sturgeon on the spot and as you say , we no longer have innocent till proven guilty in this country, media have people hung, drawn and quartered regardless of truth.
I'm sure you'll take the same honourable and sensible position when the next similar story comes out about a Conservative or Labour politician.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Not sure I would go that far, but certainly until or unless charges are brought.
Has Salmond been charged yet ? If not, that's a travesty. He now has to defend himself in the court of public opinion on a "charge" he may or may not know about. In the eyes of many he is already guilty. This is a kangaroo "court".
How about putting one such up about 6 months before a general election ?
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
And put the nation's pundits out of business?! The ability to press on without recognition of having been wrong before is vital to the industry. And blog comments.
More seriously, accurately calling events is, I suspect, not a primary part of the role.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
***SCREAMS AND THUMPS TABLE***
Politicians! Politicians! No apostrophe!
Write out 100 times...
9am on a bank holiday and I'm very tired, sir, my fingers betrayed me. Can I get one mulligan, sir?
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
B2334r the Tory party, what about the harm he did to the country!
He offered them a choice, told them not to do it, then they did it. Blame the public, and people like me. I don't believe in giving politician's an easy ride, but if they outright tell the public not to do something, then the public do it, I find it hard to blame that person even if one believes the choice should not have been offered.
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Not sure I would go that far, but certainly until or unless charges are brought.
Has Salmond been charged yet ? If not, that's a travesty. He now has to defend himself in the court of public opinion on a "charge" he may or may not know about. In the eyes of many he is already guilty. This is a kangaroo "court".
How about putting one such up about 6 months before a general election ?
No. He has only just been referred to the police.
Edit - yes, I agree with the rest. That's why I believe in anonymity unless formal indictments are made.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
The striking thing I see is that Tories are much more likely to say the Palestinians are to blame, in contrast to the British population as a whole.
I do wonder if part of the Lib Dem struggle is down to the fact that Corbyn in some ways is a tricky leader for them to combat. His foreign policy views on things like Iraq, the UN, human rights etc. must match with a significant subset of their voters.
A good point. It is worth remembering that when we last had a Labour Government, Mr Corbyn was very often to be found in the same lobby as the Lib Dems, voting against his own government.
So 16% more of the people of Hong Kong back independence from China than the percentage of Scots who voted for independence from the UK in 2014.
More Hong Kong voters back independence thsn the number of Catalans who have ever backed independence from Spain or the number of Quebecois who have ever backed independence from Canada.
The striking thing I see is that Tories are much more likely to say the Palestinians are to blame, in contrast to the British population as a whole.
I do wonder if part of the Lib Dem struggle is down to the fact that Corbyn in some ways is a tricky leader for them to combat. His foreign policy views on things like Iraq, the UN, human rights etc. must match with a significant subset of their voters.
A good point. It is worth remembering that when we last had a Labour Government, Mr Corbyn was very often to be found in the same lobby as the Lib Dems, voting against his own government.
He and his acolytes have a very different view as to the acceptability of voting against the party now, I suspect.
So 16% more of the people of Hong Kong back independence from China than the percentage of Scots who voted for independence from the UK in 2014.
More Hong Kong voters back independence thsn the number of Catalans who have ever backed independence from Spain or the number of Quebecois who have ever backed independence from Canada.
Could get interesting
It says it is only students in that poll? I thought in a recent story about an independence party there that pro-independence groups are fringe.
So 16% more of the people of Hong Kong back independence from China than the percentage of Scots who voted for independence from the UK in 2014.
More Hong Kong voters back independence thsn the number of Catalans who have ever backed independence from Spain or the number of Quebecois who have ever backed independence from Canada.
Could get interesting
Unless the population of HK is entirely made up of students, it isn't '16% more of the people of Hong Kong'.
So 16% more of the people of Hong Kong back independence from China than the percentage of Scots who voted for independence from the UK in 2014.
More Hong Kong voters back independence thsn the number of Catalans who have ever backed independence from Spain or the number of Quebecois who have ever backed independence from Canada.
Could get interesting
It says it is only students in that poll? I thought in a recent story about an independence party there that pro-independence groups are fringe.
Under 60% of under 30s voted for independence in Scotland in 2014 so even if only students 61% for independence in Hong Kong is still an astonishingly high figure
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
It's a leap - but too far? Given UKIP had won the euro-elections in 2014, the voters were coughing *ahem* more loudly each time they were ignored on the EU. If Cameron had not pledged to hold a referendum in 2015 - and then not won a majority in 2015 - with Clegg again demanding no reopening of Europe in any Coalation Take 2, you could by now be seeing some VERY strange polling....
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
The idea of charges being brought in public is, I think, to protect the accused as it prevents the police just arresting people who are then never heard of again until after the trial (if they bother with one).
Isn’t it one of those things which goes back to Magna Carta?
Edit - yes, I agree with the rest. That's why I believe in anonymity unless formal indictments are made.
i'm not sure that people consciously realise that anyone can complain to the police about anyone else, so the "no smoke without fire" reflex kicks in.
I once had a malicious and obviously false complaint made about me by a far-right group who i'd never heard of before. I happened to know the Chief Constable, who checked and said that it was not being treated as high priority but "I wouldn't worry", so i largely didn't, but it took a year for them to get round to looking at it and then instantly chucking it out. If I hadn't known the CC and he hadn't pushed the boundaries of discretion, it would have been a very unpleasant year, since I'm sure I'd have thought "They couldn't believe this...could they?". Since then i've always shrugged when I read that X has made a complaint about Y, unless it at least leads to prosecution.
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
Exactly , I never believe the media nowadays , it is full of lying cheating toerags. Certainly puts Sturgeon on the spot and as you say , we no longer have innocent till proven guilty in this country, media have people hung, drawn and quartered regardless of truth.
I'm sure you'll take the same honourable and sensible position when the next similar story comes out about a Conservative or Labour politician.
Absolutely, unless they have photographic evidence of course.
There’s no single water cooler any more, just a bubbling of separate springs, all with common views congregating separately.
I agree. Every now and again something will cause those water coolers to burst their banks and spread a general consensus but it is, if anything, increasingly rare whilst the self reinforcing echo chambers push people to ever more extreme views.
The current group in charge, Leavers, have shown not the slightest inclination to persuade their defeated opponents to join them or acknowledge their concerns. One wonders how they think a divided country is going to prosper while following this direction but they don’t seem to care about that.
I really don't see it like that. What we actually have in charge are remainers who accept the decision of the referendum but who also seek to mitigate the consequences. So we have the Chequers proposal which many leavers see as not much short of surrender to the extent that some left the government.
This constant dirge of 'Leavers are in charge' ignores the Referendum positions of the majority of the cabinet and all of the great offices of state. Since the referendum some - what shall we call them? - democrats? have said they support implementing the result of the referendum. Yet this is apparently more damaging than ignoring the result of the referendum....Of the prominent LEAVE politicians in May's cabinet - Johnson, Davis, Gove and Fox half are gone.....yet somehow they are still 'in charge'......
The question is whether May's dirty compromise is rejected by both sides, in which event we will have chaos, or accepted by a sufficient majority that it can be delivered. It is not only her future that hangs on the answer to that.
Are there any 'clean' compromises?
The Tory party usually gets into serious trouble when it falls pray to absolutists not pragmatists.
Agreed.
Those of us who know pragmatism is a dirty word, from which no good can come, look down on people like you.
“I had an idea that would make things better, but decided to compromise with people who disagreed with me.”
“My instinct was to stand firm against the Nazi advance, but decided to compromise becuase how much death and destruction digging my heels in would cause, so I contacted the Italian ambassador...”
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
I still cannot believe that that dreadful man Keir Starmer thought it approptriate to announce charges against Huhne at a press conference. What was the point of that?
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
I still cannot believe that that dreadful man Keir Starmer thought it approptriate to announce charges against Huhne at a press conference. What was the point of that?
Because grand-standing was a central part of his time as DPP. It was a platform for Starmer and very little to do with justice.
There’s no single water cooler any more, just a bubbling of separate springs, all with common views congregating separately.
I agree. Every now and again something will cause those water coolers to burst their banks and spread a general consensus but it is, if anything, increasingly rare whilst the self reinforcing echo chambers push people to ever more extreme views.
The current group in charge, Leavers, have shown not the slightest inclination to persuade their defeated opponents to join them or acknowledge their concerns. One wonders how they think a divided country is going to prosper while following this direction but they don’t seem to care about that.
I really don't see it like that. What we actually have in charge are remainers who accept the decision of the referendum but who also seek to mitigate the consequences. So we have the Chequers proposal which many leavers see as not much short of surrender to the extent that some left the government.
This consta charge'......
The question is whether May's dirty compromise is rejected by both sides, in which event we will have chaos, or accepted by a sufficient majority that it can be delivered. It is not only her future that hangs on the answer to that.
Are there any 'clean' compromises?
The Tory party usually gets into serious trouble when it falls pray to absolutists not pragmatists.
Agreed.
Those of us who know pragmatism is a dirty word, from which no good can come, look down on people like you.
If I might take a pragmatic approach, sometimes compromise is necessary to get some of what you want rather than nothing as you shoot for everything and fail as you lack sufficient support. Clearly there will be times when a pragmatic approach is not suitable depending on what compromises are required, as you have to be pragmatic about pragmatism, and it is why people have red lines which they will not compromises beyond as it makes their own stance meaningless, but if you cannot get everything you want, and there is a lesser option you can get, it is surely not inherently leading to 'no good' to go for that as the next best thing.
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
The idea of Brexit as some manner of Ovidian metamorphosis of the country is now dead. Now its a national embarrassment but at least we'll be able to shit in plastic tardis at almost any point on the M11.
If you read the drivel in the Daily Record you would know it was a farce. Why the idiot who complained came forward with such garbage after 6 years is hard to believe. They should have been too embarrassed to even mention how stupid they were even if the pathetic stuff was one sided which is unlikely. Certainly someone after something or bearing a grudge out to scupper Salmond. This country is full of half witted cretins nowadays, it is hard to explain how it can have gone downhill to the cesspit full of morons it is in such a short time. PS: Unionist media have him tarred and feathered already.
I'd be careful about believing anything you read in the media about this case at the moment, either for or against - there's just too much spin on either side. Worse, it might actually interfere with the investigation, allowing an injustice either way.
Let the investigation continue and come up with a result.
I do think Sturgeon has handled this well - and that she didn't have much alternative. It's also terrible for Salmond if the accusations are untrue; then again, it was also horrible for all the other MPs who have had accusations made against them that have been proved untrue.
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Not sure I would go that far, but certainly until or unless charges are brought.
Has Salmond been charged yet ? If not, that's a travesty. He now has to defend himself in the court of public opinion on a "charge" he may or may not know about. In the eyes of many he is already guilty. This is a kangaroo "court".
How about putting one such up about 6 months before a general election ?
No. He has only just been referred to the police.
Edit - yes, I agree with the rest. That's why I believe in anonymity unless formal indictments are made.
It will never come to being charged , police will drop it after a year of doing nothing much. At best it is a she said he said so how could he ever be found guilty of anything. Why wait six years, it was an adult so why if unwanted advances did they not tell him where to F off at the time and make sure they could never be alone in his company.
The striking thing I see is that Tories are much more likely to say the Palestinians are to blame, in contrast to the British population as a whole. I do wonder if part of the Lib Dem struggle is down to the fact that Corbyn in some ways is a tricky leader for them to combat. His foreign policy views on things like Iraq, the UN, human rights etc. must match with a significant subset of their voters.
A good point. It is worth remembering that when we last had a Labour Government, Mr Corbyn was very often to be found in the same lobby as the Lib Dems, voting against his own government.
He and his acolytes have a very different view as to the acceptability of voting against the party now, I suspect.
Maybe, if ever it did happen that we had a Labour Government again, it would be acceptable for Labour MPs to join the Lib Dems in voting against it. Then the Labour government would have to rely on the votes of Conservative MPs to get their motions carried.
Not so daft. It happened before - remember Iraq? - and it is happening now, though it is the Labour MPs who are constantly giving sustenance to Mrs May`s shabby government. It`s a strange old world.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I’m not sure they could have, as any version other than a no deal crash out would have involved negotiations with the rest of the EU. Given their refusal to negotiate before article 50 was invoked, why would they have come up with any sort of realistic deal before we’d even voted?
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
The idea of Brexit as some manner of Ovidian metamorphosis of the country is now dead. Now its a national embarrassment but at least we'll be able to shit in plastic tardis at almost any point on the M11.
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
I’m no pinko, but he’s absolutely right on a macro level. There has been real progress in the developing world on lifespans, literacy, reduction in absolute poverty and the growth of (often imperfect) democracies. That is just as real as the fraught political debate in the West.
Unfortunately most people don’t want to read about it.
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
Yup - me too. Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will.
Your thread header title is very misleading. It should state: "Just 25% of LAB voters take sides on who is to blame for the lack of progress on Middle East peace" That is the key message, and this percentage is little different from those for other parties.
However, of those LAB voters who do take sides, 76% believe Israel is more to blame compared to 24% who believe the Palestinians are more to blame. I suspect that includes many politically engaged activists, and that Corbyn's anti-Zionist stance is popular with Labour members. The LDs show a similar bias, and if Layla Moran becomes their leader, they will also become a target of the Zionist lobby.
Given that most British voters show little concern about this matter, as is evidenced by the lack of impact on Labour's vote share in opinion polls of the attack by the right (including Bliarites) on Corbyn, it would be preferable if there were fewer future threads on this topic.
Threads can be about things that don't concern the British public much. Or anything really, it's his site. In any case, why would it be 'preferable to have fewer threads on the topic? Things don't stay on topic anyway.
I agree with KLE. As I posted up thread, OGH is showing courage and leadership when ostentatiously displaying his pro Israel bias. Just like pretty Patel showed us what she is made of when flaunting hers.
Don’t be bullied by some Corbyn cultist who can’t spell Dodo. Or even Dada.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I’m not sure they could have, as any version other than a no deal crash out would have involved negotiations with the rest of the EU. Given their refusal to negotiate before article 50 was invoked, why would they have come up with any sort of realistic deal before we’d even voted?
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
The striking thing I see is that Tories are much more likely to say the Palestinians are to blame, in contrast to the British population as a whole.
I do wonder if part of the Lib Dem struggle is down to the fact that Corbyn in some ways is a tricky leader for them to combat. His foreign policy views on things like Iraq, the UN, human rights etc. must match with a significant subset of their voters.
A good point. It is worth remembering that when we last had a Labour Government, Mr Corbyn was very often to be found in the same lobby as the Lib Dems, voting against his own government.
Wow, the press should be pushing that.
His poll ratings would fall like, well, like the LDs have in recent years...
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I’m not sure they could have, as any version other than a no deal crash out would have involved negotiations with the rest of the EU. Given their refusal to negotiate before article 50 was invoked, why would they have come up with any sort of realistic deal before we’d even voted?
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
Given leaving free movement in place as is would completely disrespect the Leave vote, EFTA/EEA was obviously not an option until immigration has been brought more under control
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
I must say I am surprised at the virulence of your reaction to his comments, so I have now watched the video - he doesn't come across as mawkish, or dismissive of there being corruption or violence in the world and the things that drive that in humanity, he just seems to think that real progress does get made and that there is a preponderance of good people and things over bad people and things despite all the bad things that exist. Despite his in essence defending the sentimentality of his films, his actual comments in the clip do not appear to be particularly sentimental, merely optimistic. Even if he is wrong - and on there being a lot of progress and good news that is rarer to hear than bad he is not - on his general philosophy, it makes a refreshing counter to grim, depressing 'realists' such as I would often count myself.
Edit: I have never seen Love Actually or Four Weddings and a Funeral
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
Yup - me too. Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will.
I think you are outing yourselves as people who actually enjoyed Love, Actually.
“Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will”. You don’t actually believe that! I would be alarmed if you did. Politics is 99.9% in the real world, Curtis is 99.9% not getting desire, hate, nightmares, fear.
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
Yup - me too. Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will.
I think you are outing yourselves as people who actually enjoyed Love, Actually.
“Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will”. You don’t actually believe that! I would be alarmed if you did. Politics is 99.9% in the real world, Curtis is 99.9% not getting desire, hate, nightmares, fear.
But there is love and progress in the ‘real world’ too. Even grimdark Brexiteers like me can see that.
I really don't see it like that. What we actually have in charge are remainers who accept the decision of the referendum but who also seek to mitigate the consequences. So we have the Chequers proposal which many leavers see as not much short of surrender to the extent that some left the government.
This constant dirge of 'Leavers are in charge' ignores the Referendum positions of the majority of the cabinet and all of the great offices of state. Since the referendum some - what shall we call them? - democrats? have said they support implementing the result of the referendum. Yet this is apparently more damaging than ignoring the result of the referendum....Of the prominent LEAVE politicians in May's cabinet - Johnson, Davis, Gove and Fox half are gone.....yet somehow they are still 'in charge'......
Given that Leavers routinely call Philip Hammond a traitor for seeking to bring some inteelctual rigour to the Leaving process, a better word would be “idiot”. Leavers are setting the direction of the government. Other ministers, including the Prime Minister, are hapless passengers on a runaway charabanc.
Philip Hammond would be better employed seeking to bring some intellectual rigour to the Treasury forecasting department.
The same Treasury forecasting department which said there would be a year long recession immediately after a Leave vote.
Or for that matter seeking to bring some intellectual rigour to the OBR whose post Referendum forecasts have been several tens of billions too negative already.
As he has seemingly not done so I'll not set much store on Hammond's interest in intellectual rigour.
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, Bryant is indeed a silly sausage. Still remember him bleating about Welsh rugby fans singing Delilah because, apparently, it helped normalise domestic abuse.
Presumably Bohemian Rhapsody normalises devils being dispatched to hunt down Zoroastrians.
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
Mr. Richard, I hope the recession is a long way off, just for the amusement of watching some zealots finally get to blame bad economic news on leaving the EU.
Mr. Richard, grimdark always makes me think of the Animals of Farthing Wood. A death toll worse than Game of Thrones, and everyone who dies is a cute furry animal.
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, Bryant is indeed a silly sausage. Still remember him bleating about Welsh rugby fans singing Delilah because, apparently, it helped normalise domestic abuse.
Presumably Bohemian Rhapsody normalises devils being dispatched to hunt down Zoroastrians.
I thought Delilah was about Freddie Mercury’s cat?
Mr. Richard, I hope the recession is a long way off, just for the amusement of watching some zealots finally get to blame bad economic news on leaving the EU.
Mr. Richard, grimdark always makes me think of the Animals of Farthing Wood. A death toll worse than Game of Thrones, and everyone who dies is a cute furry animal.
Also, Watership Down - that film is intense, violent and dark as hell, including psychologically. For the kids!
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
SNIP
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
Given leaving free movement in place as is would completely disrespect the Leave vote, EFTA/EEA was obviously not an option until immigration has been brought more under control
Given most immigration is non EU and increasing it will never be an option
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
It really isn't up to them, that suggests they have any way of making that choice if they want (which I had thought they still did not, despite that poll).
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
Singapore of course broke away from Malaysia.
Malaysia didn’t have the People’s Liberation Army and the iron will of the Chinese Communist Party
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
But Singapore was part of Malaysia which didn't want it whereas Hong Kong is part of China which does want it.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I’m not sure they could have, as any version other than a no deal crash out would have involved negotiations with the rest of the EU. Given their refusal to negotiate before article 50 was invoked, why would they have come up with any sort of realistic deal before we’d even voted?
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
Given leaving free movement in place as is would completely disrespect the Leave vote, EFTA/EEA was obviously not an option until immigration has been brought more under control
A White Paper could have established in advance whether Free Movement was an issue that should be a Red line.
As May prepares to travel to sub Saharan Africa to boost trading links after Brexit, Atiku Abubakar, a Nigerian presidential candidate, claims Brexit can be 'a force for good' by breaking down barriers to Anglo African trade
Britain has enough chaos coming its way without trying to deal with the intractable problems of the rest of the world. If Brexit offers one clear opportunity, it’s the opportunity for Britain to stop having to feebly intervene on everything everywhere. Time to retreat and retrench mentally as well as militarily: Britain has voted to shrink its horizons and it would be a betrayal* of Brexit if the government ignored that.
*[not a betrayal, but it’s the only word Leavers understand as a synonym of “inconsistent with the spirit of”]
Regardless of Brexit, Britain cannot and should not seek to resolve problems like this. Britain is in no position to solve this particular one - or many others. We should have realised this long before Brexit.
There are political implications to this. Those voters are far more anti-Conservative than the existing inhabitants. Seats with an influx of such voters are likely to trend towards Labour in the short to medium term. Amber Rudd looks especially vulnerable.
You assume though that living in a very different part of the UK does not change, maybe only at the margins, your political outlook. Having spent some considerable time in Cumbria in the last year and just starting to become aware of local issues, the national political picture is seen through a different lens. Not easy to say whether that will lead to a political realignment but one should not assume that it might not have some effect on those moving.
For instance, Corbyn may as well be a figure from a distant planet in this very rural and isolated area, where the nuclear industry and nuclear warships are two of the biggest employers. On the other hand he talks about bus services, which is of more concern. The local Tory MP spends a lot of time on local issues and is very active, doubtless because she realises that could be key to her keeping her seat.
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
I must say I am surprised at the virulence of your reaction to his comments, so I have now watched the video - he doesn't come across as mawkish, or dismissive of there being corruption or violence in the world and the things that drive that in humanity, he just seems to think that real progress does get made and that there is a preponderance of good people and things over bad people and things despite all the bad things that exist. Despite his in essence defending the sentimentality of his films, his actual comments in the clip do not appear to be particularly sentimental, merely optimistic.
Edit: I have never seen Love Actually or Four Weddings and a Funeral
Love, actually is set in a London of love, and forgiveness, not one where fear and horror of crime nags away causing depression. Whitewash. Think Amelie’s Paris minus black faces. (Oh Jesus, the same avatars are going to tell me they enjoyed and have no problem with that film as well) Curtis almost confesses in that clip he can make a better film when he or a loved one is mugged or stabbed. For example, burglars crash down the door of his parents home and rob them, causing them to have heart attacks. Will Curtis then forgive, or hate?
Aside from the art, the politics. It is unrealistic to think you can bring a world of compromise, forgiveness and hope into politics. Politics is not the battle against hate, desire, fear and nightmares, but the use of them for advantage.
You are a bee. There is another bee, and one last harvest of pollen on the flower. Do you want to come second? The moral of the story is, the flower is using the bees. For sex.
And there in few words, in one post, is a more realistic and worthy script than Curtis has ever written.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
I’m not sure they could have, as any version other than a no deal crash out would have involved negotiations with the rest of the EU. Given their refusal to negotiate before article 50 was invoked, why would they have come up with any sort of realistic deal before we’d even voted?
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
Given leaving free movement in place as is would completely disrespect the Leave vote, EFTA/EEA was obviously not an option until immigration has been brought more under control
A White Paper could have established in advance whether Free Movement was an issue that should be a Red line.
Obviously it was as without promising to end free movement as it stood before the EU referendum Leave would not have won and got over 50%
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
I still cannot believe that that dreadful man Keir Starmer thought it approptriate to announce charges against Huhne at a press conference. What was the point of that?
Because grand-standing was a central part of his time as DPP. It was a platform for Starmer and very little to do with justice.
I have friends who thought Starmer was going to be the answer to the replacement of Corbyn. The man who would give them their Labour Party back.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
SNIP
It could have appraised EFTA/EEA vs WTO Brexit.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
Given leaving free movement in place as is would completely disrespect the Leave vote, EFTA/EEA was obviously not an option until immigration has been brought more under control
Given most immigration is non EU and increasing it will never be an option
Global net migration to the UK post Brexit is almost 30 000 people lower than it was in 2015
As May prepares to travel to sub Saharan Africa to boost trading links after Brexit, Atiku Abubakar, a Nigerian presidential candidate, claims Brexit can be 'a force for good' by breaking down barriers to Anglo African trade
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
Farage would not have sat on such a commission, and important others would not have served on one with him: any commission would just have ended up giving Farage's view. He is not one for compromise.
Besides, to win leave needed a broader church than just Farage's 'vision' of Brexit. He knows that, would have not sat on any such commission, and would have argued against its findings - because that was the way to get what he wanted: victory.
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
It really isn't up to them, that suggests they have any way of making that choice if they want (which I had thought they still did not, despite that poll).
Given almost a third back armed revolution who knows what they ultimately choose but ultimately it is up to them
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
Singapore of course broke away from Malaysia.
Malaysia didn’t have the People’s Liberation Army and the iron will of the Chinese Communist Party
Of course it is possible to go the authoritarian route as China may well do, as Putin has done with Chechyna and as Spain has done with Catalonia.
We could also send tanks into Glasgow and Edinburgh and arrest Nicola Sturgeon if the government decided to get really tough with Scottish nationalists but long term it is not a viable option. Ultimately the best solution to deal with demands for more independence is to give them more powers as Canada did with Quebec
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
His films were sentimental unrealistic middle class claptrap
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
In his official statement, Mr Salmond said he had not been allowed to properly challenge the case against him – “I have not been allowed to see the evidence,” he said. And yet in the same statement he said the complaints were patently ridiculous. So, which is it? How can he say the complaints are ridiculous if he has not seen them? He either knows what the complaints are, or he doesn’t.
Well, if he knew himself to be completely innocent of any such behaviour then he could claim they were ridiculous without knowing the details, I suppose.
What I find interesting is the position of Nicola. She has known and worked with this man for decades and must have a detailed knowledge of any foibles that he might have exhibited. She is taking her role as FM very seriously and playing this by the book. Whilst that is the correct thing to do her lack of character witness support for him is very telling.
David , It seems fairly obvious that they have had a wee party and some snogging has taken place and for some bizzare reason the person has decided to rake it up 6 years later and make out it was unwanted attention. When you read what the Record had as the incident it would have to have been some brain dead moron to have allowed it to be as stated. Fairly obvious to anyone that has ever been to a drunken party I am afraid, some people just cannot get over how stupid they were snogging someone.
Ah. The she was wearing a short skirt and had it coming to her defence.
Far from it , says a lot about your mindset that you came to that conclusion. You think stereotype and imagine she was in a coma for six years rather than it was two adults involved.
No, you’re victim blaming. If it were a Conservative politician involved you’d no doubt be saying something different.
I don't think we do, and I have seen no indication that she has political ambitions outside her single issue campaign, and party leadership would be a distraction from that.
We are a democratic party and while I am sure that the idea of widening the franchise is worth debating, it is far from certain that the Members will vote to dilute our own influence.
Indeed not and I'd certainly oppose any change to allow non-members or "registered supporters" to have a say on the choice of leader of the Party.
If the organisers of a fringe meeting at Conference have invited Gina Miller to attend and speak, fine, no problem whatsoever. Her insight and perspective would be welcome and if she wants to join the party she'd be very welcome but I don't detect that as likely.
A little nit of mischief-making from the currant bun and kle4 on this - my feeling, speaking to LD members, is any move to broaden the franchise will be rejected though there's little issue with the notion of "registered supporters" and I imagine the more active areas will have something like that in place.
Is not one of the main objectives of canvassing to identify your supporters? I suspect for every member there are 40 to 50 supporters. From time to time we will contact them to see if they want to do more - deliver leaflets, help on GOTV, and eventually become a member.
That really got me. I have other things to do today, but can’t walk away from that.
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
Disagree. I'm with Curtis. You can put me up on your wall.
His films were sentimental unrealistic middle class claptrap
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
It really isn't up to them, that suggests they have any way of making that choice if they want (which I had thought they still did not, despite that poll).
Given almost a third back armed revolution who knows what they ultimately choose but ultimately it is up to them
Go away and learn about one nation PRC politics before giving your opinion on something where you’re just advertising screaming ignorance.
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, Bryant is indeed a silly sausage. Still remember him bleating about Welsh rugby fans singing Delilah because, apparently, it helped normalise domestic abuse.
Presumably Bohemian Rhapsody normalises devils being dispatched to hunt down Zoroastrians.
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
Farage would not have sat on such a commission, and important others would not have served on one with him: any commission would just have ended up giving Farage's view. He is not one for compromise.
Besides, to win leave needed a broader church than just Farage's 'vision' of Brexit. He knows that, would have not sat on any such commission, and would have argued against its findings - because that was the way to get what he wanted: victory.
There was a young man named Farage Who one day got trapped in his garage He campaigned so hard But let down his guard And lost to an electoral barrage
As May prepares to travel to sub Saharan Africa to boost trading links after Brexit, Atiku Abubakar, a Nigerian presidential candidate, claims Brexit can be 'a force for good' by breaking down barriers to Anglo African trade
For those who subscribe to the Times, I strongly recommend Tim Montgomerie’s article as an exercise in intellectual feebleness. Of course, his call to the wisdom of individual members is one which brought the Conservative party Ian Duncan-Smith exemplary leadership which is disappointly not mentioned.
I do think that newspapers should qualify opinion writers’ articles with a list of their previous opinions so one can judge their accuracy.
Tory members also gave us David Cameron
Who has done far more harm to the Tory party than IDS could dream of
I don't think either of them "dream" of harming the Tory party.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
George Osborne tried to talk Cameron out of the referendum, so it cannot have been all that inevitable. And Nigel Farage in Downing Street is a leap too far.
Cameron wouldn’t have got a majority without his referendum pledge, and even then UKIP got 13% of the vote.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
What also sunk Cameron (and the rest of us, whether Remain or Leave) is failing to identify some specific version of Brexit, perhaps by Royal Commission headed by Nigel Farage, to put on the ballot paper. Two years on and a year from Brexit and no-one, least of all the government, has the faintest idea where we will land.
Farage would not have sat on such a commission, and important others would not have served on one with him: any commission would just have ended up giving Farage's view. He is not one for compromise.
Besides, to win leave needed a broader church than just Farage's 'vision' of Brexit. He knows that, would have not sat on any such commission, and would have argued against its findings - because that was the way to get what he wanted: victory.
There was a young man named Farage Who one day got trapped in his garage He campaigned so hard But let down his guard And lost to an electoral barrage
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
It really isn't up to them, that suggests they have any way of making that choice if they want (which I had thought they still did not, despite that poll).
Given almost a third back armed revolution who knows what they ultimately choose but ultimately it is up to them
Go away and learn about one nation PRC politics before giving your opinion on something where you’re just advertising screaming ignorance.
Learn what? China is a One Party State Communist authoritarian dictatorship?
Whether the people of Hong Kong, which has historically been a prosperous liberal democracy, want to remain permanently part of that is up to them
I do believe in the case of sexual harassment and rape charges, the names should be withheld until a successful conviction.
Why not all crimes?
+1 (a judge could order an exception if it might be essential for public safety or to collect more evidence). It's just media selling papers and public prurience. If someone has been falsely accused of anything we don't need to know the allegation at all and it gives a false reward to the accuser by casting a shadow. If he's been correctly accused, we can wait for the verdict.
You want to have secret trials? Really??
Not secret, but with reporting restrictions applied as the default rather than the exception as I understood it.
HK will never be independent. It’s a city in an empire of 1.4 billion people. Economically it’s a nice to have for China, but it’s 2% of GDP vs 20% at the time of the handover.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Hong Kong has about the same population and GDP as Singapore which is an independent city state
It is however part of China, with Chinese sovereignty. The time for independence has gone, if it were ever viable as such.
That is up to the people of Hong Kong.
It really isn't up to them, that suggests they have any way of making that choice if they want (which I had thought they still did not, despite that poll).
Given almost a third back armed revolution who knows what they ultimately choose but ultimately it is up to them
Go away and learn about one nation PRC politics before giving your opinion on something where you’re just advertising screaming ignorance.
Learn what? China is a One Party State Communist authoritarian dictatorship?
Whether the people of Hong Kong, which has historically been a prosperous liberal democracy, want to remain permanently part of that is up to them
What size unit should be allowed to secede from a larger state?
Not withstanding that this sounds like a voodoo poll of students.
As May prepares to travel to sub Saharan Africa to boost trading links after Brexit, Atiku Abubakar, a Nigerian presidential candidate, claims Brexit can be 'a force for good' by breaking down barriers to Anglo African trade
Indeed for the majority of African countries terms of trade with the UK will worsen with Brexit as EBA will no longer apply.
The single market while prompting tariff free trade within Europe has imposed high tariffs on African exports to it, Nigeria is also one of the fastest growing countries economically in the world and it is important post Brexit UK builds good relations with it
Comments
We'll make it ten times.
Cameron was faced with a pressure cooker fast building up steam with the voters. Ignoring a referendum as required by Clegg and urged by Miliband could have given you Prime Minister Farage sometime soon.
Prime Minister Farage would surely be worse than holding a referendum to resolve where we would be within Europe - politically, or just geographically.
"A UN report has said top military figures in Myanmar must be investigated for genocide in Rakhine state and crimes against humanity in other areas.
The report, based on hundreds of interviews, is the strongest condemnation from the UN so far of violence against the Rohingya."
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
Politicians
How about putting one such up about 6 months before a general election ?
For spellings, it's 50 laps of the school field.
Edit - yes, I agree with the rest. That's why I believe in anonymity unless formal indictments are made.
What sunk Cameron was the ‘renegotiation’, and rushing the referendum so that there was no time to make a positive case.
More Hong Kong voters back independence thsn the number of Catalans who have ever backed independence from Spain or the number of Quebecois who have ever backed independence from Canada.
Could get interesting
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2014/09/scotland-voted/
Isn’t it one of those things which goes back to Magna Carta?
I once had a malicious and obviously false complaint made about me by a far-right group who i'd never heard of before. I happened to know the Chief Constable, who checked and said that it was not being treated as high priority but "I wouldn't worry", so i largely didn't, but it took a year for them to get round to looking at it and then instantly chucking it out. If I hadn't known the CC and he hadn't pushed the boundaries of discretion, it would have been a very unpleasant year, since I'm sure I'd have thought "They couldn't believe this...could they?". Since then i've always shrugged when I read that X has made a complaint about Y, unless it at least leads to prosecution.
“I had an idea that would make things better, but decided to compromise with people who disagreed with me.”
“My instinct was to stand firm against the Nazi advance, but decided to compromise becuase how much death and destruction digging my heels in would cause, so I contacted the Italian ambassador...”
Wow. If anyone finds that bourgeois, unrealistic, sentimental drivel uplifting, they are going down on my little list and first up against the wall when the time comes.
No he doesn’t get everything that’s wrong with all his films, why his films can’t do politics at all, on any level. He has no comprehension how the power of nightmares and hatred and desire drives the political world, the real world.
If he wants to find and appreciate hate, he only needed to look inside his own mothers heart. But he didn’t.
The alternatives are to accept mainland rule, knuckle down and hope the mainland eventually reforms, or leave.
Either way, it’s none of our business.
Have a good morning.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/26/brexit-voice-britains-hidden-majority/
I've not read anything on this before. Are there really plans?
Not so daft. It happened before - remember Iraq? - and it is happening now, though it is the Labour MPs who are constantly giving sustenance to Mrs May`s shabby government. It`s a strange old world.
It is not in the EU’s interest to make leaving easy.
Unless the queues are very long indeed!
Unfortunately most people don’t want to read about it.
The theoretical world is abuzz with activity. In reality, however, action is entirely absent.
Don’t be bullied by some Corbyn cultist who can’t spell Dodo. Or even Dada.
It is May's red lines that narrowed our possibilities, other forms of Brexit were always possible choices from a pretty crap menu.
His poll ratings would fall like, well, like the LDs have in recent years...
https://twitter.com/RhonddaBryant/status/1033859440301273088
Or Chris Bryant is dumb as a rock.
Edit: I have never seen Love Actually or Four Weddings and a Funeral
“Curtis gets the public in a way that 99.9% of politicians never will”. You don’t actually believe that! I would be alarmed if you did.
Politics is 99.9% in the real world, Curtis is 99.9% not getting desire, hate, nightmares, fear.
The same Treasury forecasting department which said there would be a year long recession immediately after a Leave vote.
Or for that matter seeking to bring some intellectual rigour to the OBR whose post Referendum forecasts have been several tens of billions too negative already.
As he has seemingly not done so I'll not set much store on Hammond's interest in intellectual rigour.
Presumably Bohemian Rhapsody normalises devils being dispatched to hunt down Zoroastrians.
Mr. Richard, grimdark always makes me think of the Animals of Farthing Wood. A death toll worse than Game of Thrones, and everyone who dies is a cute furry animal.
https://twitter.com/BarcaJim/status/1033987702381789184
Singapore of course broke away from Malaysia.
https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1008586/brexit-news-eu-uk-nigeria-trade-latest/amp
For instance, Corbyn may as well be a figure from a distant planet in this very rural and isolated area, where the nuclear industry and nuclear warships are two of the biggest employers. On the other hand he talks about bus services, which is of more concern. The local Tory MP spends a lot of time on local issues and is very active, doubtless because she realises that could be key to her keeping her seat.
Curtis almost confesses in that clip he can make a better film when he or a loved one is mugged or stabbed. For example, burglars crash down the door of his parents home and rob them, causing them to have heart attacks. Will Curtis then forgive, or hate?
Aside from the art, the politics. It is unrealistic to think you can bring a world of compromise, forgiveness and hope into politics. Politics is not the battle against hate, desire, fear and nightmares, but the use of them for advantage.
You are a bee. There is another bee, and one last harvest of pollen on the flower. Do you want to come second?
The moral of the story is, the flower is using the bees. For sex.
And there in few words, in one post, is a more realistic and worthy script than Curtis has ever written.
Now they just shake their heads in quiet dismay.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eu-migration-falls-to-lowest-level-since-2012-fxx0sgdv6
Besides, to win leave needed a broader church than just Farage's 'vision' of Brexit. He knows that, would have not sat on any such commission, and would have argued against its findings - because that was the way to get what he wanted: victory.
We could also send tanks into Glasgow and Edinburgh and arrest Nicola Sturgeon if the government decided to get really tough with Scottish nationalists but long term it is not a viable option. Ultimately the best solution to deal with demands for more independence is to give them more powers as Canada did with Quebec
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S26LA8Bk14
https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1034013233391259648?s=20
Who one day got trapped in his garage
He campaigned so hard
But let down his guard
And lost to an electoral barrage
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2018/03/19/eu-africa-trade-relations-why-africa-needs-the-economic-partnership-agreements/
Indeed for the majority of African countries terms of trade with the UK will worsen with Brexit as EBA will no longer apply.
Whether the people of Hong Kong, which has historically been a prosperous liberal democracy, want to remain permanently part of that is up to them
Not withstanding that this sounds like a voodoo poll of students.