Isn't that story already known, and that two of the four were the Salisbury suspects? Or was that another OPCW site?
The Dutch have just held a press conference and the US are following up with criminal inditements this afternoon......so it may be more flesh on the story....
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
I have no doubt that the fight against 'cultural marxism' is a goal shared by too many on the right...
He posted the second one after a negative reaction to the first one which he then deleted and blamed on a staffer... I guess some of us snowflakes tyrants on the left were shutting down good ol' freedom of speech using political correctness.
But a no deal Brexit would not benefit France. They are no more ready for that than we are. Of course it would probably disbenefit us more but the implications for them would be significant, as they seem to be waking up too.
France warned on Wednesday that it would prefer Britain to crash out of Europe without a deal rather than accept a compromise that undermined the integrity of the European Union.
The stark warning from Nathalie Loiseau, the country’s Europe minister, came as both sides prepared for a crucial fortnight of negotiation following the close of the Conservative party conference.
“No deal would be better than a bad deal,” Ms Loiseau told a French radio station, turning familiar Brexiteers’ own mantra back on the UK, before warning that “time is running out” for Theresa May to strike a deal with Brussels.
When will the Maybot understand the phrase "no cherry picking"?
The compromise that is likely to upset the fewest number of people and be acceptable to the EU would be FM membership in a "Norway-style" deal, with any Customs border in the Irish Sea. The DUP's bluff needs to be called.
A Norway style deal means staying in the SM anyway and FoM.
What you actually mean is a Canada-style deal with a Customs border in the Irish Sea
No, I didn't - I meant remaining in the single market with FoM for workers, but with GB outside the Customs Union, which is Norway's situation. This would much more popular with Remainers and business than a Canada-style arrangement, although this is the other option.
It would also be utterly pointless and unacceptable without a Customs Union as it still fails to fully solve the Irish border problem.
Plus Canada has a net +20% approval with voters to +7% for Norway according to ICM
F**k the DUP. Any border should be in the Irish Sea. The 6 counties can remain as an overseas territory administered by GB (in conjunction with Eire), until such time as Irish re-unification is acceptable to most people in that territory.
I hate to break it to you, but NI is a fundamental part of the United Kingdom.
So was Southern Ireland. It only remains so if it continues to hold parliamentary support
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
Never having heard of the Bruges Group I thought I'd take a quick look.
Judging by the summary it doesn't look like the kind of book I would want my wife or servants to read. It certainly doesn't look like the kind of thing a mainstream political party should be interested in.
Though of course party conferences are magnets for weirdos so I don't blame the Tories if they haven't managed to keep all the nutters out.
I have tactically voted LAB in Bedford at the last two elections and saw the party gain the seat last year by a narrow majority. Under the new boundaries the margin between LAB & CON is projected at just nine.
Next time I can assure you that my vote will not go to LAB if Corbyn is still leader whatever the TV coverage. His whole handling of the antisemitism issue has failed to convince me that he is not a racist.
You're probably one of the most politically engaged people in the country living in a marginal constituency. I don't see that your personal experience is representative.
My central point is, I think Corbyn's ratings will improve significantly when the election comes around, as they did last time because coverage will shift to policies/be more balanced etc.
So, respectfully, I think you are placing undue weight on leadership ratings at the moment.
"DUP would prefer no deal Brexit to 'border down Irish Sea', says Dodds"
This is the whole ball game now folks.
I think it's a question of how not if May throws the DUP under the bus here. They were always utterly unsuitable partners to rely on in government support, not just for the bind they have put May in on the backstop question, but for their 40+ years of regressive, sectarian history.
Remember these are the same charlatans that wanted corporation tax harmonisation with Southern Ireland but now reject any solution on the border problem.
The Unionist community in NI really need their own F. W. de Klerk to come forward who can speak real home truths about their perilous situation, not just in terms of changing demographics but also the academic achievement gap opening up between the two communities. Instead they are stuck with ideologues who encourage rioting when a flag is taken down over Belfast city hall.
Northern Ireland has in many ways a golden opportunity to 'have it's cake and eat it' by remaining part of the United Kingdom while staying in the customs union and the free market. A purely economic reading of this says they'd be mad to not take it, but Arlene Foster would rather see NI sink into economic depression.
Having said all this, these are the elected representatives of the people of NI, so maybe this is the will of the unionist people? Does sectarianism still trump prosperity and economics? Sadly it seems that way.
Although it is important to point out that the DUP are not the only strand of Unionism, albeit the currently dominant one. There are plenty who wish to remain in the UK who would share many of your views. When added to the Nationalists, they are far from representative of majority opinion. On which subject has there been any recent NI polling? And what happened to the OUP guy who used to post regularly...Lucian was it?
Lucid Talk have just published a poll showing 41% in NI want to leave the EU, 56% wish to remain, almost identical to 2016.
Thanks for that. So no change then. Similar to Britain. However, I was thinking more Party specific. Has the DUP being so pro Brexit, and seemingly pro hard Brexit had any affect on their support, given that the majority of their countrymen seem to disagree with their stance? And I understand there is probably a majority of Unionists for leave. But on those figures there must be a significant pro-Union and pro-Remain constituency.
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
I have no doubt that the fight against 'cultural marxism' is a goal shared by too many on the right...
He posted the second one after a negative reaction to the first one which he then deleted and blamed on a staffer... I guess some of us snowflakes tyrants on the left were shutting down good ol' freedom of speech using political correctness.
Please explain how a racist American mitigates your support of a British one?
"DUP would prefer no deal Brexit to 'border down Irish Sea', says Dodds"
This is the whole ball game now folks.
I think it's a question of how not if May throws the DUP under the bus here. They were always utterly unsuitable partners to rely on in government support, not just for the bind they have put May in on the backstop question, but for their 40+ years of regressive, sectarian history.
Remember these are the same charlatans that wanted corporation tax harmonisation with Southern Ireland but now reject any solution on the border problem.
.
Northern Ireland has in many ways a golden opportunity to 'have it's cake and eat it' by remaining part of the United Kingdom while staying in the customs union and the free market. A purely economic reading of this says they'd be mad to not take it, but Arlene Foster would rather see NI sink into economic depression.
Having said all this, these are the elected representatives of the people of NI, so maybe this is the will of the unionist people? Does sectarianism still trump prosperity and economics? Sadly it seems that way.
Although it is important to point out that the DUP are not the only strand of Unionism, albeit the currently dominant one. There are plenty who wish to remain in the UK who would share many of your views. When added to the Nationalists, they are far from representative of majority opinion. On which subject has there been any recent NI polling? And what happened to the OUP guy who used to post regularly...Lucian was it?
Lucid Talk have just published a poll showing 41% in NI want to leave the EU, 56% wish to remain, almost identical to 2016.
Thanks for that. So no change then. Similar to Britain. However, I was thinking more Party specific. Has the DUP being so pro Brexit, and seemingly pro hard Brexit had any affect on their support, given that the majority of their countrymen seem to disagree with their stance? And I understand there is probably a majority of Unionists for leave. But on those figures there must be a significant pro-Union and pro-Remain constituency.
They won 36% last June, and would probably win something similar in a general election today (polling for the Assembly by Lucid Talk has put them on 30-35%). I would guess Unionists split about 70/30 in favour of Brexit, Nationalists 90/10 against. Paradoxically, Sinn Fein were, until recently, very much opposed to EU membership, but as usual, my enemy's enemy is my friend.
Isn't that story already known, and that two of the four were the Salisbury suspects? Or was that another OPCW site?
The Dutch have just held a press conference and the US are following up with criminal inditements this afternoon......so it may be more flesh on the story....
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
Wow. I think the rest of Scotland has its area cut in half to accommodate this change in a map. It sounds like all people would bed to do is print a footnote to state that they were using a box to avoid loss of detail, but that is quite some absurdity.
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
I have no doubt that the fight against 'cultural marxism' is a goal shared by too many on the right...
He posted the second one after a negative reaction to the first one which he then deleted and blamed on a staffer... I guess some of us snowflakes tyrants on the left were shutting down good ol' freedom of speech using political correctness.
Please explain how a racist American mitigates your support of a British one?
I have decided I am not interested enough in the Bruges Group or cultural marxism to research them any further, but it is obvious that they are getting their inspiration from America. I don't think I want that even if they aren't racist.
Would I be right in concluding that the Russians have got some reasonably advanced kit and techniques, but very poor training and operational security?
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
Isn't that story already known, and that two of the four were the Salisbury suspects? Or was that another OPCW site?
The Dutch have just held a press conference and the US are following up with criminal inditements this afternoon......so it may be more flesh on the story....
Tbh, Russian spying looks a bit amateurish and thuggish - although when playing with radioactive or chemical weaponary - that's not necessarily a good thing.
Chinese spying - as shown by today's Bloomberg story - looks like the bigger threat.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
I don't personally believe that Corbyn is an anti-semite, but he is either grossly incompetent or excessively tolerant when it comes to the question of ensuring that anti-semites are not welcome in the Labour Party. That is indictment enough for me and I certainly won't consider voting Labour while this is the case (as I did at the last Scottish Parliament election).
It is possible that the change in broadcasting coverage necessitated by an election campaign will have a similar effect next time as in 2017. However, last time it will have been the first that most people saw of Corbyn so if they have subsequently decided against him they are less likely to be persuaded to return, as he isn't an unknown quantity now.
Isn't that story already known, and that two of the four were the Salisbury suspects? Or was that another OPCW site?
The Dutch have just held a press conference and the US are following up with criminal inditements this afternoon......so it may be more flesh on the story....
Tbh, Russian spying looks a bit amateurish and thuggish - although when playing with radioactive or chemical weaponary - that's not necessarily a good thing.
Chinese spying - as shown by today's Bloomberg story - looks like the bigger threat.
Plot twist: the Russian deputy prosecutor general, Saak Karapetyan, who was investigating the #Skripal case, died in a helicopter crash last night - Interfax
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
I think I have posted enough on here to make it clear I'm an out and out remainer. But I am suspicious of an offer that the EU are pushing so hard. Is there something in the Canada deal that appeals to them that I don't know about? I would have thought Norway would have been their preference.
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
Never having heard of the Bruges Group I thought I'd take a quick look.
Judging by the summary it doesn't look like the kind of book I would want my wife or servants to read. It certainly doesn't look like the kind of thing a mainstream political party should be interested in.
Though of course party conferences are magnets for weirdos so I don't blame the Tories if they haven't managed to keep all the nutters out.
But, you’re basing that on your prejudice and not on evidence.
I’ve read several interesting and insightful Bruges Group publications.
Would I be right in concluding that the Russians have got some reasonably advanced kit and techniques, but very poor training and operational security?
Possibly. Unless it is part of the strategy to conduct some activities semi-openly as a way of sending a message. Give the counter-espionage people in the West some easy stuff to concentrate on and hope to sneak some other stuff under the radar.
Isn't that story already known, and that two of the four were the Salisbury suspects? Or was that another OPCW site?
The Dutch have just held a press conference and the US are following up with criminal inditements this afternoon......so it may be more flesh on the story....
Tbh, Russian spying looks a bit amateurish and thuggish - although when playing with radioactive or chemical weaponary - that's not necessarily a good thing.
Chinese spying - as shown by today's Bloomberg story - looks like the bigger threat.
One thing that got totally overlooked in the hacking scandal, there was serious company espionage going on, with the aid of often unwitting / very poor standards within the phone companies.
Only the Indy really looked into it and it looked like a lot of UK companies were very very weak....but jumping on the outrage bus over which z-list celeb was shagging with other z-list celeb was far more important.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
Surely at some point someone is going to point out that despite the government's protestations the EU have been consistent and the deal is sat there waiting to be signed. Business leaders are quickly running out of patience and even if some Tories / Tory voters are stupid enough to believe the spin from Downing Street, they aren't. What May is asking for is impossible, and the consequence of her continuing to say the opposite is catastrophic.
Yes, a complete U-Turn may bring about her / her government's demise. But when you are considering the fate of the UK car industry as one its leading manufacturers, thats not likely to be a concern any more. So what if telling the truth brings about PM Johnson or Corbyn if the alternative is that you have to shut down.
That the Tory Party seems insistent on smashing the Union AND business simultaneously beggars belief.
They won 36% last June, and would probably win something similar in a general election today (polling for the Assembly by Lucid Talk has put them on 30-35%). I would guess Unionists split about 70/30 in favour of Brexit, Nationalists 90/10 against. Paradoxically, Sinn Fein were, until recently, very much opposed to EU membership, but as usual, my enemy's enemy is my friend.
Dixiedean:
So the DUP represent around 1/3 of the people of NI, and considerably fewer than 2 in 3 Unionists. There is perhaps, a danger of them overplaying their hand, as much as anyone else then. The very last thing they would want is any kind of GE. They would be extremely fortunate indeed to hit the sweet spot of holding the balance of power a second time. Wasn't SF miraculous conversion to the EU as much about winning seats in the Republic as it was about opposing the DUP?
Would I be right in concluding that the Russians have got some reasonably advanced kit and techniques, but very poor training and operational security?
Possibly. Unless it is part of the strategy to conduct some activities semi-openly as a way of sending a message. Give the counter-espionage people in the West some easy stuff to concentrate on and hope to sneak some other stuff under the radar.
That would be a *very* expensive way of doing it: burning four operatives and disclosing targets of interest.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
Also really don't understand the far right hang up regarding communism/marxism still, its useful because it makes a mockery of the far right support Corbyn smear that has come up now and again but on a practical level surely the modern day far right would be better off tactically concentrating their fire elsewhere, I don't think we will fight the commies is the rallying call it was in 30's Germany as the threat really isn't there like it was.
I’m willing to bet that think-tank pamphlet by the Bruges Group (and Robert Oulds) is neither far right, racist or anti-Semitic but instead makes some robust criticism of cultural Marxism, which absolutely needs to be said and is actually what’s the basis of the opposition to it in that rant of an article.
Never having heard of the Bruges Group I thought I'd take a quick look.
Judging by the summary it doesn't look like the kind of book I would want my wife or servants to read. It certainly doesn't look like the kind of thing a mainstream political party should be interested in.
Though of course party conferences are magnets for weirdos so I don't blame the Tories if they haven't managed to keep all the nutters out.
But, you’re basing that on your prejudice and not on evidence.
I’ve read several interesting and insightful Bruges Group publications.
Of course, that doesn’t mean all of them are.
How can I be prejudiced against a group I have never heard of? My knowledge of them extends to having read one abstract and the post up this thread that tries rather tenuously to link them to an American racist. I'll admit that isn't much evidence but it is all I have. If it turns out that they are a noble bunch of upstanding citizens with fine morals, public spiritedness and good singing voices I'll be happy to change my mind.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
I think I have posted enough on here to make it clear I'm an out and out remainer. But I am suspicious of an offer that the EU are pushing so hard. Is there something in the Canada deal that appeals to them that I don't know about? I would have thought Norway would have been their preference.
Norway blows past all of May's red lines. So proposing Canada+ respects those. It's just that it wouldn't avoid the need* for the backstop - which Chequers was an attempt to do.
* Of course an irregular verb: my need, her red line, their completely unacceptable demand.
Yep. Not the only case, either, though it's a rather obvious one ...
It's getting worse. Almost all significant chips have functional blocks, and to save design time design houses often buy in functional blocks from other companies; e.g. a WiFi block, or even something as 'simple' as a VCO. You may ask what happens if that 'block' has a little extra circuitry in it, which then gets embedded invisibly within the main chip ...
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
May can just ridicule and ignore it as they have with our proposals...
Our proposals which sit outside their red lines which they set out long before the referendum?
Surely the ridicule is (a) our proposing them and (b) our expecting the EU would just fold because they need us more than we need them.
May was right to talk about our humiliation. But its entirely self-inflicted.
No matter how many times you order Duck in Orange sauce at the counter in McDonalds, they cannot or will not serve it.
Our approch to Brexit negotiations seems similar!
Having said that I tried on a number of occasions to order a Big Mac with bacon only to be told that wasn't available and I would need to order a Big Tasty with Bacon instead. Only last year the ability to "cherrypick" bacon into my Big Mac was accepted as an option in my local McDonald's.
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
I still think the Tory party have barely worked out how to attack Corbyn even after all this time. The name calling - Marxist, Russia loving, security threat etc. on display in May's and Boris's speeches plays to over 50s who have their own reference points for these labels, but not to those younger than that.
The prominence of the anti--semitism row has cut through a little: in my day, WW2 learning was oral history and you were 13 or 14 before you graduated to 20th Century history at school, if you even took the subject. Now, History from about age 8 onwards seems to teeter on the edge of Hitlerporn at times. So, branding Corbynista behaviour as anti-semitic does cut with younger voters too.
As for elsewhere, Corbyn's other foreign policy views are often still seen as eccentric rather than malign - it's all just Jam, Broccoli and Hamas - and not so relevant to his running of the UK. The fact that he has consistently sided with anti-West, anti--democratic, violent organisations, the fact his career as 'peacemaker' has been so cursorally explained - what was he doing, what were his thoughts and aims at each juncture, how was he feeding back to people talking with the other sides? That questions on his peacemaking have been met with the same passive resistance that you see on Brexit and anti-Semitism and that speaks to his real views. The fact that his Venezuela or Cuba or Russia or Iran fanboyism can be seen as peacemaking?
How is all that relevant? He operates as an MP in a democratic system, he uses talk of open democracy to further his aims in the Labour party. But he is shown as an anti-democrat, and that is deeply relevant, not to far flung lands, but to the UK itself. I cannot be confident that, were Corbyn to be elected, that the normal democratic cycle, democracy itself, would survive. Balance of probability, it would, but hand on heart I cannot be beyond reasonable doubt. That is not a place to be.
I declared I was considering the Tories next time round, even if it's Boris, and got a few 'steady ons'. But if I believe Corbyn is an existential threat to domestic democracy, and yet can be beyond reasonable doubt that Boris is not, then how can I not consider him? And how can I not be frustrated about the Tories framing their attacks on Corbyn in terms of the battles of the 70s, not of the clear dangers in the here and now.
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Which election did they win? I don't believe they're part of either the government or EU's red lines.
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Which election did they win? I don't believe they're part of either the government or EU's red lines.
Not wrecking the economy is (I hope!) very much a government red line, and Theresa May and Greg Clark have explicitly promised the car industry that the supply chains won't be disrupted. It would be very unfortunate indeed if that promise gets broken, not least because it would lead to a Corbyn government.
Yep. Not the only case, either, though it's a rather obvious one ...
It's getting worse. Almost all significant chips have functional blocks, and to save design time design houses often buy in functional blocks from other companies; e.g. a WiFi block, or even something as 'simple' as a VCO. You may ask what happens if that 'block' has a little extra circuitry in it, which then gets embedded invisibly within the main chip ...
Apple really act like twats when it comes to national security...
"Because Apple didn’t, according to a U.S. official, provide government investigators with access to its facilities or the tampered hardware, the extent of the attack there remained outside their view."
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Which election did they win? I don't believe they're part of either the government or EU's red lines.
Not wrecking the economy is (I hope!) very much a government red line, and Theresa May and Greg Clark have explicitly promised the car industry that the supply chains won't be disrupted. It would be very unfortunate indeed if that promise gets broken, not least because it would lead to a Corbyn government.
And why would Tusk's promised Canada+++ break that promise?
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Which election did they win? I don't believe they're part of either the government or EU's red lines.
Not wrecking the economy is (I hope!) very much a government red line, and Theresa May and Greg Clark have explicitly promised the car industry that the supply chains won't be disrupted. It would be very unfortunate indeed if that promise gets broken, not least because it would lead to a Corbyn government.
And why would Tusk's promised Canada+++ break that promise?
It won't, if it ends up with enough pluses to be similar to Chequers. That's my point: we could be converging on a deal. Fingers crossed.
Wow. I think the rest of Scotland has its area cut in half to accommodate this change in a map. It sounds like all people would bed to do is print a footnote to state that they were using a box to avoid loss of detail, but that is quite some absurdity.
Not as absurd when phoned from Carlisle by a friend from London on his first trip to Edinburgh that he had just checked the map and he would be with us in 30 minutes. Or, a request from a head office in deepest Surrey to deliver a package to Arbroath as it was just up the road from Edinburgh. Oh, how I laughed...
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Which election did they win? I don't believe they're part of either the government or EU's red lines.
Not wrecking the economy is (I hope!) very much a government red line, and Theresa May and Greg Clark have explicitly promised the car industry that the supply chains won't be disrupted. It would be very unfortunate indeed if that promise gets broken, not least because it would lead to a Corbyn government.
And why would Tusk's promised Canada+++ break that promise?
It won't, if it ends up with enough pluses to be similar to Chequers. That's my point: we could be converging on a deal. Fingers crossed.
How many plus signs in a Canada+++ deal before you get to Chequers-?
We just need one plus sign that is a border free Ireland.
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
Except those of the car and aerospace industries.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
Car and aerospace will have slightly more complex supply chains and need more delivery planning.
That won’t be the only deciding factor for them, and is more of an issue for volume carmakers compared to aerospace anyway, where order lead times and manufacture/delivery timescales are much longer.
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
I think that the sensible solution is that Shetland will no longer appear on these maps at all. The Scottish Parliament has passed some spectacularly stupid legislation but this one arguably sets a new level for them to aim at.
I still think the Tory party have barely worked out how to attack Corbyn even after all this time. The name calling - Marxist, Russia loving, security threat etc. on display in May's and Boris's speeches plays to over 50s who have their own reference points for these labels, but not to those younger than that.
The prominence of the anti--semitism row has cut through a little: in my day, WW2 learning was oral history and you were 13 or 14 before you graduated to 20th Century history at school, if you even took the subject. Now, History from about age 8 onwards seems to teeter on the edge of Hitlerporn at times. So, branding Corbynista behaviour as anti-semitic does cut with younger voters too.
As for elsewhere, Corbyn's other foreign policy views are often still seen as eccentric rather than malign - it's all just Jam, Broccoli and Hamas - and not so relevant to his running of the UK. The fact that he has consistently sided with anti-West, anti--democratic, violent organisations, the fact his career as 'peacemaker' has been so cursorally explained - what was he doing, what were his thoughts and aims at each juncture, how was he feeding back to people talking with the other sides? That questions on his peacemaking have been met with the same passive resistance that you see on Brexit and anti-Semitism and that speaks to his real views. The fact that his Venezuela or Cuba or Russia or Iran fanboyism can be seen as peacemaking?
How is all that relevant? He operates as an MP in a democratic system, he uses talk of open democracy to further his aims in the Labour party. But he is shown as an anti-democrat, and that is deeply relevant, not to far flung lands, but to the UK itself. I cannot be confident that, were Corbyn to be elected, that the normal democratic cycle, democracy itself, would survive. Balance of probability, it would, but hand on heart I cannot be beyond reasonable doubt. That is not a place to be.
I declared I was considering the Tories next time round, even if it's Boris, and got a few 'steady ons'. But if I believe Corbyn is an existential threat to domestic democracy, and yet can be beyond reasonable doubt that Boris is not, then how can I not consider him? And how can I not be frustrated about the Tories framing their attacks on Corbyn in terms of the battles of the 70s, not of the clear dangers in the here and now.
Bet, there's a new thread by now!
I would need considerably convincing that Corbyn, and even more so the cult-like idiocy of his many supporters, is not a clear and present danger to our liberal democracy.
They hate, for example, the free press.
I have seen nothing in recent weeks to change my mind.
I still think the Tory party have barely worked out how to attack Corbyn even after all this time. The name calling - Marxist, Russia loving, security threat etc. on display in May's and Boris's speeches plays to over 50s who have their own reference points for these labels, but not to those younger than that.
The prominence of the anti--semitism row has cut through a little: in my day, WW2 learning was oral history and you were 13 or 14 before you graduated to 20th Century history at school, if you even took the subject. Now, History from about age 8 onwards seems to teeter on the edge of Hitlerporn at times. So, branding Corbynista behaviour as anti-semitic does cut with younger voters too.
As for elsewhere, Corbyn's other foreign policy views are often still seen as eccentric rather than malign - it's all just Jam, Broccoli and Hamas - and not so relevant to his running of the UK. The fact that he has consistently sided with anti-West, anti--democratic, violent organisations, the fact his career as 'peacemaker' has been so cursorally explained - what was he doing, what were his thoughts and aims at each juncture, how was he feeding back to people talking with the other sides? That questions on his peacemaking have been met with the same passive resistance that you see on Brexit and anti-Semitism and that speaks to his real views. The fact that his Venezuela or Cuba or Russia or Iran fanboyism can be seen as peacemaking?
How is all that relevant? He operates as an MP in a democratic system, he uses talk of open democracy to further his aims in the Labour party. But he is shown as an anti-democrat, and that is deeply relevant, not to far flung lands, but to the UK itself. I cannot be confident that, were Corbyn to be elected, that the normal democratic cycle, democracy itself, would survive. Balance of probability, it would, but hand on heart I cannot be beyond reasonable doubt. That is not a place to be.
I declared I was considering the Tories next time round, even if it's Boris, and got a few 'steady ons'. But if I believe Corbyn is an existential threat to domestic democracy, and yet can be beyond reasonable doubt that Boris is not, then how can I not consider him? And how can I not be frustrated about the Tories framing their attacks on Corbyn in terms of the battles of the 70s, not of the clear dangers in the here and now.
Bet, there's a new thread by now!
That is right -- and also explains why Boris will never be leader because he is too vulnerable to the same line of attack.
Wow. I think the rest of Scotland has its area cut in half to accommodate this change in a map. It sounds like all people would bed to do is print a footnote to state that they were using a box to avoid loss of detail, but that is quite some absurdity.
Not as absurd when phoned from Carlisle by a friend from London on his first trip to Edinburgh that he had just checked the map and he would be with us in 30 minutes. Or, a request from a head office in deepest Surrey to deliver a package to Arbroath as it was just up the road from Edinburgh. Oh, how I laughed...
"Scotland is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to Scotland."
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
May can just ridicule and ignore it as they have with our proposals...
Our proposals which sit outside their red lines which they set out long before the referendum?
Surely the ridicule is (a) our proposing them and (b) our expecting the EU would just fold because they need us more than we need them.
May was right to talk about our humiliation. But its entirely self-inflicted.
Their proposals sit outside our red lines - why are they proposing them ?
It's a negotiation - until it isn't..
Their proposals outside our red lines are a response to our proposals outside their red lines.
We knew before the start how the EU would treat the Four Freedoms. We knew before the start how the EU treats third countries. We knew before the start what the WTO requires on trade and borders.
That we set red lines ignoring all we know insisting that what we know isn't true does not make for a negotiation. It makes for a comedy. The EU not moving is not them refusing to negotiate. Its us not knowing how to negotiate. They cannot give what they cannot give, and them not giving what they can't give is not them humiliating the UK, its the UK humiliating itself asking for them.
Fast Food Strike... the employees want £10ph, and Labour are backing them... Surely the owners of the outlets can use FoM to employ thousands of EU nationals to replace them at min wage?
Fast Food Strike... the employees want £10ph, and Labour are backing them... Surely the owners of the outlets can use FoM to employ thousands of EU nationals to replace them at min wage?
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
I think that the sensible solution is that Shetland will no longer appear on these maps at all. The Scottish Parliament has passed some spectacularly stupid legislation but this one arguably sets a new level for them to aim at.
Couldn’t we give it back to Norway and let them worry about the map? After all, it would make their maps considerably squarer.
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
May can just ridicule and ignore it as they have with our proposals...
Our proposals which sit outside their red lines which they set out long before the referendum?
Surely the ridicule is (a) our proposing them and (b) our expecting the EU would just fold because they need us more than we need them.
May was right to talk about our humiliation. But its entirely self-inflicted.
Their proposals sit outside our red lines - why are they proposing them ?
It's a negotiation - until it isn't..
Their proposals outside our red lines are a response to our proposals outside their red lines.
We knew before the start how the EU would treat the Four Freedoms. We knew before the start how the EU treats third countries. We knew before the start what the WTO requires on trade and borders.
That we set red lines ignoring all we know insisting that what we know isn't true does not make for a negotiation. It makes for a comedy. The EU not moving is not them refusing to negotiate. Its us not knowing how to negotiate. They cannot give what they cannot give, and them not giving what they can't give is not them humiliating the UK, its the UK humiliating itself asking for them.
Why are you so bothered about "humiliation" during the negotiations ? We will be the ones laughing in the future as we prosper outside the protectionist cartel.
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
I think that the sensible solution is that Shetland will no longer appear on these maps at all. The Scottish Parliament has passed some spectacularly stupid legislation but this one arguably sets a new level for them to aim at.
Couldn’t we give it back to Norway and let them worry about the map? After all, it would make their maps considerably squarer.
Or perhaps Northern American and Icelandic maps ? The OS could call it the Canada+++ range.
Fast Food Strike... the employees want £10ph, and Labour are backing them... Surely the owners of the outlets can use FoM to employ thousands of EU nationals to replace them at min wage?
There will be more of this incoming...the number of shops here in the NE advertising for staff in their windows is something I do not remember in my lifetime. The only solution is to outbid the competition on pay and conditions.
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
I think that the sensible solution is that Shetland will no longer appear on these maps at all. The Scottish Parliament has passed some spectacularly stupid legislation but this one arguably sets a new level for them to aim at.
Couldn’t we give it back to Norway and let them worry about the map? After all, it would make their maps considerably squarer.
I fear that this trend might catch on. A map of France showing Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Réunion and Mayotte in their rightful places would be challenging to the cartographers.
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
I think that the sensible solution is that Shetland will no longer appear on these maps at all. The Scottish Parliament has passed some spectacularly stupid legislation but this one arguably sets a new level for them to aim at.
Couldn’t we give it back to Norway and let them worry about the map? After all, it would make their maps considerably squarer.
I fear that this trend might catch on. A map of France showing Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Réunion and Mayotte in their rightful places would be challenging to the cartographers.
When one thinks about it, a map of Norway must be mostly of Sweden anyway.
- Range anxiety.I'd not go with one with range under 200 miles, unless you're certain that's all you need. Real-world ranges of 250 miles-300 miles+ are already available, and that's fine for me.
- Recharging times. Lengthy recharging en-route is a pain and very inconvenient. Tesla's realisation that their Supercharger network was a key element was necessary. You can recharge in about 20-30 minutes, and their intent was to have the Superchargers available on all major networks. For me, that's still a bit too long, and they don't quite have enough yet, but Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen are striking back with their Ionity network. With 350kW ultrachargers, you should be able to recharge their vehicles in around 12 minutes. The key is whether/how soon they get them widely rolled out.
- Shifting emissions to power stations. It's a valid point, but the key is that the electric car element is necessary but not sufficient. With a hydrocarbon-powered car, it has to burn hydrocarbons (sort of by definition, I guess...), power stations can be powered by a variety of methods, with better or worse emissions levels. Shifting the emissions there means they can be controlled/reduced simply and directly - if we so choose.
- Recharging at home. A genuine issue for those without ready access/driveways and one that has to be overcome for some people. I've seen some initiatives being mentioned in some local governments; it remains to be seen how successful these are.
- Emissions in manufacturing/ecological damage in manufacturing. Can be an issue, but Tesla, for example, do a very high level of recycling for their batteries. Even with the existing mix of power generation in power stations, the whole-life CO2 cost for an electric car (including manufacturing and power) is less than half that of a petrol car.
- Longevity of batteries. I was highly sceptical here, but it does seem like the longevity is very much higher than I'd have feared.
Overall, I'd be content with one of the long-range electrical cars now. I'm fortunate to be able to recharge at home, and the few times I'll need to recharge away, I can take the wait time on the chin.
Fast Food Strike... the employees want £10ph, and Labour are backing them... Surely the owners of the outlets can use FoM to employ thousands of EU nationals to replace them at min wage?
That's a good summary, but I think that the factor which is going to be most decisive in pushing society over to electric cars is one you don't mention: air pollution in big cities.
Mr. Nabavi, that's a valid point but it could lead to a very bad decision. If there's a nationwide ban, for example, on petrol cars then that can work relatively quickly for a city. Population density means it's efficient to set up charging stations so low range is less of a problem.
But in rural areas the costs of a new charging station will be significantly higher and the drawback of low range significantly worse.
Of course, it'd be sensible to just focus on a city-by-city approach, then widen the network, but transport decisions, particularly with the incumbent Homer Simpson impersonator in Cabinet, can sometimes be quite stupid.
- Range anxiety.I'd not go with one with range under 200 miles, unless you're certain that's all you need. Real-world ranges of 250 miles-300 miles+ are already available, and that's fine for me.
- Recharging times. Lengthy recharging en-route is a pain and very inconvenient. Tesla's realisation that their Supercharger network was a key element was necessary. You can recharge in about 20-30 minutes, and their intent was to have the Superchargers available on all major networks. For me, that's still a bit too long, and they don't quite have enough yet, but Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen are striking back with their Ionity network. With 350kW ultrachargers, you should be able to recharge their vehicles in around 12 minutes. The key is whether/how soon they get them widely rolled out.
- Shifting emissions to power stations. It's a valid point, but the key is that the electric car element is necessary but not sufficient. With a hydrocarbon-powered car, it has to burn hydrocarbons (sort of by definition, I guess...), power stations can be powered by a variety of methods, with better or worse emissions levels. Shifting the emissions there means they can be controlled/reduced simply and directly - if we so choose.
- Recharging at home. A genuine issue for those without ready access/driveways and one that has to be overcome for some people. I've seen some initiatives being mentioned in some local governments; it remains to be seen how successful these are.
- Emissions in manufacturing/ecological damage in manufacturing. Can be an issue, but Tesla, for example, do a very high level of recycling for their batteries. Even with the existing mix of power generation in power stations, the whole-life CO2 cost for an electric car (including manufacturing and power) is less than half that of a petrol car.
- Longevity of batteries. I was highly sceptical here, but it does seem like the longevity is very much higher than I'd have feared.
Overall, I'd be content with one of the long-range electrical cars now. I'm fortunate to be able to recharge at home, and the few times I'll need to recharge away, I can take the wait time on the chin.
I think that's a very fair summary.
I would add one thing though: the cost. We're looking for a new car, and I'd love to go electric - except we just cannot justify the price of one. We can get a really nice Fiesta that'll do exactly what we need for £20k. The Tesla Model 3 isn't available in the UK yet, and even when it is it'll be double that price. We're lucky enough that we could afford one (or two!), but it'd just be an utter waste of money.
That's a good summary, but I think that the factor which is going to be most decisive in pushing society over to electric cars is one you don't mention: air pollution in big cities.
That's an excellent point - as well as being able to change the mix of emissions-producing power, you can physically move it away from the vehicle and concentrations of vehicles.
If there is anyone left parroting Corbyn's approach, I would suggest medical testing.
Mr Milne of North London still isn't convinced...
Milne and Corbyn would have done better to have tacked towards agreeing with May, and then playing the card the response from her government to Russia, and Russian money and influence in Britain has been very weak. Which it has been.
Personally I come from the point of view when GRU came up with the Skripal plan, they wanted the whole world to know. Even if they succeeded, the method chosen was like leaving a calling card rather than untraceable mystery behind. If I’m right, then we are still being played. But what is the game?
It seems to me that most people commenting on the DUP's stance have things exactly the wrong way round. Their clear position makes it easier, not harder, for Theresa May to continue to reject the EU's unacceptable demands on the border question.
If the Commission publishes a draft text on the future relationship next week along those lines it will put the cat among the pigeons.
May can just ridicule and ignore it as they have with our proposals...
Our proposals which sit outside their red lines which they set out long before the referendum?
Surely the ridicule is (a) our proposing them and (b) our expecting the EU would just fold because they need us more than we need them.
May was right to talk about our humiliation. But its entirely self-inflicted.
No matter how many times you order Duck in Orange sauce at the counter in McDonalds, they cannot or will not serve it.
Our approch to Brexit negotiations seems similar!
Having said that I tried on a number of occasions to order a Big Mac with bacon only to be told that wasn't available and I would need to order a Big Tasty with Bacon instead. Only last year the ability to "cherrypick" bacon into my Big Mac was accepted as an option in my local McDonald's.
Perhaps they were originally considering your wellbeing... ?
Though the introduction of bacon as a metaphor into the Brexit debate is appealing in a perverse way. Anyone for cherry-bacon fudge ?
- Range anxiety.I'd not go with one with range under 200 miles, unless you're certain that's all you need. Real-world ranges of 250 miles-300 miles+ are already available, and that's fine for me.
- Recharging times. Lengthy recharging en-route is a pain and very inconvenient. Tesla's realisation that their Supercharger network was a key element was necessary. You can recharge in about 20-30 minutes, and their intent was to have the Superchargers available on all major networks. For me, that's still a bit too long, and they don't quite have enough yet, but Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen are striking back with their Ionity network. With 350kW ultrachargers, you should be able to recharge their vehicles in around 12 minutes. The key is whether/how soon they get them widely rolled out.
- Shifting emissions to power stations. snip this bit
- Recharging at home. A genuine issue for those without ready access/driveways and one that has to be overcome for some people. I've seen some initiatives being mentioned in some local governments; it remains to be seen how successful these are.
- Emissions in manufacturing/ecological damage in manufacturing. Can be an issue, but Tesla, for example, do a very high level of recycling for their batteries. Even with the existing mix of power generation in power stations, the whole-life CO2 cost for an electric car (including manufacturing and power) is less than half that of a petrol car.
- Longevity of batteries. I was highly sceptical here, but it does seem like the longevity is very much higher than I'd have feared.
Overall, I'd be content with one of the long-range electrical cars now. I'm fortunate to be able to recharge at home, and the few times I'll need to recharge away, I can take the wait time on the chin.
In a rather perverse twist, electric cars are probably more practical in U.K. than many other parts of the EU. We are small, compact, crowded, lots of people squashed into a small area. In the EU they have vast swathes of isolated and rural countryside with large distances between major conurbations. Our (and Netherlands) conditions are far better for electric cars although those advantages for the electric car turn into disadvantages for high speed rail.
I drove from Hertfordshire to somewhere 200 km east of Poznan in Poland in August. One day I drove about 1100km (about 675 miles) from east of Poznan to Arras in France. It was either highish speed (uses more power) or traffic stop start (uses more power). Not something I could have done in an electric vehicle.
I would add one thing though: the cost. We're looking for a new car, and I'd love to go electric - except we just cannot justify the price of one. We can get a really nice Fiesta that'll do exactly what we need for £20k. The Tesla Model 3 isn't available in the UK yet, and even when it is it'll be double that price. We're lucky enough that we could afford one (or two!), but it'd just be an utter waste of money.
If there is anyone left parroting Corbyn's approach, I would suggest medical testing.
Mr Milne of North London still isn't convinced...
Milne and Corbyn would have done better to have tacked towards agreeing with May, and then playing the card the response from her government to Russia, and Russian money and influence in Britain has been very weak. Which it has been.
Personally I come from the point of view when GRU came up with the Skripal plan, they wanted the whole world to know. Even if they succeeded, the method chosen was like leaving a calling card rather than untraceable mystery behind. If I’m right, then we are still being played. But what is the game?
My own view is that they've been doing this for some time, and aside from Litvinenko and a few others have not even been suspected. They want to send a message to people they see as traitors or threats, and are basically acting as thugs.
But now they've been caught out. The question is whether our responses are enough: I guess not, as they simply don't seem to care.
I would add one thing though: the cost. We're looking for a new car, and I'd love to go electric - except we just cannot justify the price of one. We can get a really nice Fiesta that'll do exactly what we need for £20k. The Tesla Model 3 isn't available in the UK yet, and even when it is it'll be double that price. We're lucky enough that we could afford one (or two!), but it'd just be an utter waste of money.
It's around £30k, which may not yet be quite low enough, but is getting there.
Yes thanks. Still a bit out of our price league.
I've never had a brand new car, and now Mr J's Jazz is getting a little long in the tooth, am looking for a new one for her. I quite fancy spending a little more and getting a brand new one for her. But not that much.
I also wonder about depreciation. I can see the car after this one being hybrid or electric.
If there is anyone left parroting Corbyn's approach, I would suggest medical testing.
Mr Milne of North London still isn't convinced...
Milne and Corbyn would have done better to have tacked towards agreeing with May, and then playing the card the response from her government to Russia, and Russian money and influence in Britain has been very weak. Which it has been.
Personally I come from the point of view when GRU came up with the Skripal plan, they wanted the whole world to know. Even if they succeeded, the method chosen was like leaving a calling card rather than untraceable mystery behind. If I’m right, then we are still being played. But what is the game?
My own view is that they've been doing this for some time, and aside from Litvinenko and a few others have not even been suspected. They want to send a message to people they see as traitors or threats, and are basically acting as thugs.
But now they've been caught out. The question is whether our responses are enough: I guess not, as they simply don't seem to care.
Litvinenko Is a good starting point. They got caught out, but rather than our response proved to make them stop, they became emboldened, such as their treatment of the man we accused.
But I think thugs is the wrong word entirely, it implies a violence and barbarity that is aimless, thoughtless. GRU/KGB/Checka could be as well funded and powerful today than any time in last hundred years. Probably hierarchical, and serving a political agenda from above, whereas McMafia likely a Camorra flatter structure without aims from above, yet all three of these elements overlap in practice. If you were to say to me state funded intelligence GRU/CIA/MI5&6 never engage with and use criminal elements I will laugh at you. But when the agencies choose to do it themselves in such a showy fashion, I think May and her government have been wise to pull their punches and park a line under it. With Corbyns gaff they got plenty political capital out of it. I don’t know what, because I can’t see it even though I suspect something more is there than Skripal going round East Europe states as security advisor. I’m guessing but Maybe like in last series of Blinders when Thomas shot Alf, a threat had been made and ignored, a threat made to MI6. I know how it works. R - - - - - t.
And the problem for the UK government is the timeline. Everything else that has come out is rubbish Let us discuss the few things we know to be factual, the Skripals were discovered sitting on a bench, in what is agreed now, with their arms raised and dying. Two police officers attempted to resuscitate them, one quickly became ill, the other only mildly so, both survived, 1 in a worse condition than the other. From this, the poison used was fast acting, and degraded quickly - and very likely adapted from military grade toxin, highly probably Russian.
I can only surmise that the Skripals were attacked with some form of aerosol spray, fast acting and undetectable delivery method in the weather conditions at the time.
So questions have to be asked, why were 2 police officers assumed to be in uniform, in close attendance and why conveniently have they disappeared from the public consciousness, were they actually Special Branch tasked with keeping an eye on the two Skripals because of their interesting behaviours. Why did it take over 2 weeks for the specialists from Porton Down to discover all those traces of the chlorinated phosphate compounds which make up Novachok on places which had been thoroughly washed with heavy rain, or on tables and furniture in restaurants, pubs and other places - and no one else became even mildly sick or, due to the lethal potential of the poison, die. Yes, I am aware of the unfortunate death of the lady who sprayed her self with the "perfume" that she found, which was fast acting, lethal, and as her friend survived trying to help her, fast degradation.
All in all, the two GRU agents, who oh so conveniently smiled for all those cameras, almost as if they knew where they were, got themselves tagged and information, so easily obtained, proving their actual identity and blown their covers. Why, when you realise that all restaurants, pubs and other premises, even households and car washes, use mildly chlorinated cleaning liquids to disinfect and thourghly clean, do the government still spout rubbish about finding traces of Novachok everywhere, of course they do, it's the chlorine. They could go to the local swimming pool and find massive traces of it.
We are being played. I would suggest that the actual killers were well planned, tasked and got in and out without discovery. Quite simply distract with flummery while others stick the knife in.
Which leads us to the final set, for now. Why on earth did Boris get involved? This was pure Home Office, Ml5 and Special Branch stuff, nothing whatsoever to do with the Foreign Office or MI6. Again, looking at Boris' record, he opened his mouth and shot himself in both feet. Difficult, but only he could manage it.
Comments
More:
https://twitter.com/annaholligan/status/1047787912945979392
https://twitter.com/ronpaul/status/1013804224382201856?lang=en
Or maybe the slightly more honest first version....
https://twitter.com/jackdwagner/status/1013806765383663622
He posted the second one after a negative reaction to the first one which he then deleted and blamed on a staffer... I guess some of us snowflakes tyrants on the left were shutting down good ol' freedom of speech using political correctness.
https://www.brugesgroup.com/media-centre/papers/8-papers/1292-moralitis-a-cultural-virus
Judging by the summary it doesn't look like the kind of book I would want my wife or servants to read. It certainly doesn't look like the kind of thing a mainstream political party should be interested in.
Though of course party conferences are magnets for weirdos so I don't blame the Tories if they haven't managed to keep all the nutters out.
My central point is, I think Corbyn's ratings will improve significantly when the election comes around, as they did last time because coverage will shift to policies/be more balanced etc.
So, respectfully, I think you are placing undue weight on leadership ratings at the moment.
However, I was thinking more Party specific. Has the DUP being so pro Brexit, and seemingly pro hard Brexit had any affect on their support, given that the majority of their countrymen seem to disagree with their stance?
And I understand there is probably a majority of Unionists for leave. But on those figures there must be a significant pro-Union and pro-Remain constituency.
https://twitter.com/JunckerEU/status/1047814973714518016
Chinese spying - as shown by today's Bloomberg story - looks like the bigger threat.
It is possible that the change in broadcasting coverage necessitated by an election campaign will have a similar effect next time as in 2017. However, last time it will have been the first that most people saw of Corbyn so if they have subsequently decided against him they are less likely to be persuaded to return, as he isn't an unknown quantity now.
Amie Ferris-Rotman
@Amie_FR
Plot twist: the Russian deputy prosecutor general, Saak Karapetyan, who was investigating the #Skripal case, died in a helicopter crash last night - Interfax
I’d be delighted.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies
I’ve read several interesting and insightful Bruges Group publications.
Of course, that doesn’t mean all of them are.
Only the Indy really looked into it and it looked like a lot of UK companies were very very weak....but jumping on the outrage bus over which z-list celeb was shagging with other z-list celeb was far more important.
Yes, a complete U-Turn may bring about her / her government's demise. But when you are considering the fate of the UK car industry as one its leading manufacturers, thats not likely to be a concern any more. So what if telling the truth brings about PM Johnson or Corbyn if the alternative is that you have to shut down.
That the Tory Party seems insistent on smashing the Union AND business simultaneously beggars belief.
They won 36% last June, and would probably win something similar in a general election today (polling for the Assembly by Lucid Talk has put them on 30-35%). I would guess Unionists split about 70/30 in favour of Brexit, Nationalists 90/10 against. Paradoxically, Sinn Fein were, until recently, very much opposed to EU membership, but as usual, my enemy's enemy is my friend.
Dixiedean:
So the DUP represent around 1/3 of the people of NI, and considerably fewer than 2 in 3 Unionists. There is perhaps, a danger of them overplaying their hand, as much as anyone else then. The very last thing they would want is any kind of GE. They would be extremely fortunate indeed to hit the sweet spot of holding the balance of power a second time.
Wasn't SF miraculous conversion to the EU as much about winning seats in the Republic as it was about opposing the DUP?
* Of course an irregular verb: my need, her red line, their completely unacceptable demand.
It's getting worse. Almost all significant chips have functional blocks, and to save design time design houses often buy in functional blocks from other companies; e.g. a WiFi block, or even something as 'simple' as a VCO. You may ask what happens if that 'block' has a little extra circuitry in it, which then gets embedded invisibly within the main chip ...
Surely the ridicule is (a) our proposing them and (b) our expecting the EU would just fold because they need us more than we need them.
May was right to talk about our humiliation. But its entirely self-inflicted.
Our approch to Brexit negotiations seems similar!
Canada with no Irish border and no backstop meets everyone's red lines.
But I think what we are seeing is probably the (unfortunately belated) dance towards a deal. Call it Chequers or Canada++, whatever spin in most helpful, it all comes down to much the same thing.
It's a negotiation - until it isn't..
The prominence of the anti--semitism row has cut through a little: in my day, WW2 learning was oral history and you were 13 or 14 before you graduated to 20th Century history at school, if you even took the subject. Now, History from about age 8 onwards seems to teeter on the edge of Hitlerporn at times. So, branding Corbynista behaviour as anti-semitic does cut with younger voters too.
As for elsewhere, Corbyn's other foreign policy views are often still seen as eccentric rather than malign - it's all just Jam, Broccoli and Hamas - and not so relevant to his running of the UK. The fact that he has consistently sided with anti-West, anti--democratic, violent organisations, the fact his career as 'peacemaker' has been so cursorally explained - what was he doing, what were his thoughts and aims at each juncture, how was he feeding back to people talking with the other sides? That questions on his peacemaking have been met with the same passive resistance that you see on Brexit and anti-Semitism and that speaks to his real views. The fact that his Venezuela or Cuba or Russia or Iran fanboyism can be seen as peacemaking?
How is all that relevant? He operates as an MP in a democratic system, he uses talk of open democracy to further his aims in the Labour party. But he is shown as an anti-democrat, and that is deeply relevant, not to far flung lands, but to the UK itself. I cannot be confident that, were Corbyn to be elected, that the normal democratic cycle, democracy itself, would survive. Balance of probability, it would, but hand on heart I cannot be beyond reasonable doubt. That is not a place to be.
I declared I was considering the Tories next time round, even if it's Boris, and got a few 'steady ons'. But if I believe Corbyn is an existential threat to domestic democracy, and yet can be beyond reasonable doubt that Boris is not, then how can I not consider him? And how can I not be frustrated about the Tories framing their attacks on Corbyn in terms of the battles of the 70s, not of the clear dangers in the here and now.
Bet, there's a new thread by now!
"Because Apple didn’t, according to a U.S. official, provide government investigators with access to its facilities or the tampered hardware, the extent of the attack there remained outside their view."
I, for one, look forward to the excellent new Ordinance Survey maps of the sea.
https://twitter.com/tgruener/status/1047765819009241089
That won’t be the only deciding factor for them, and is more of an issue for volume carmakers compared to aerospace anyway, where order lead times and manufacture/delivery timescales are much longer.
They hate, for example, the free press.
I have seen nothing in recent weeks to change my mind.
We knew before the start how the EU would treat the Four Freedoms. We knew before the start how the EU treats third countries. We knew before the start what the WTO requires on trade and borders.
That we set red lines ignoring all we know insisting that what we know isn't true does not make for a negotiation. It makes for a comedy. The EU not moving is not them refusing to negotiate. Its us not knowing how to negotiate. They cannot give what they cannot give, and them not giving what they can't give is not them humiliating the UK, its the UK humiliating itself asking for them.
The only solution is to outbid the competition on pay and conditions.
- Range anxiety.I'd not go with one with range under 200 miles, unless you're certain that's all you need. Real-world ranges of 250 miles-300 miles+ are already available, and that's fine for me.
- Recharging times. Lengthy recharging en-route is a pain and very inconvenient. Tesla's realisation that their Supercharger network was a key element was necessary. You can recharge in about 20-30 minutes, and their intent was to have the Superchargers available on all major networks. For me, that's still a bit too long, and they don't quite have enough yet, but Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen are striking back with their Ionity network. With 350kW ultrachargers, you should be able to recharge their vehicles in around 12 minutes. The key is whether/how soon they get them widely rolled out.
- Shifting emissions to power stations. It's a valid point, but the key is that the electric car element is necessary but not sufficient. With a hydrocarbon-powered car, it has to burn hydrocarbons (sort of by definition, I guess...), power stations can be powered by a variety of methods, with better or worse emissions levels. Shifting the emissions there means they can be controlled/reduced simply and directly - if we so choose.
- Recharging at home. A genuine issue for those without ready access/driveways and one that has to be overcome for some people. I've seen some initiatives being mentioned in some local governments; it remains to be seen how successful these are.
- Emissions in manufacturing/ecological damage in manufacturing. Can be an issue, but Tesla, for example, do a very high level of recycling for their batteries. Even with the existing mix of power generation in power stations, the whole-life CO2 cost for an electric car (including manufacturing and power) is less than half that of a petrol car.
- Longevity of batteries. I was highly sceptical here, but it does seem like the longevity is very much higher than I'd have feared.
Overall, I'd be content with one of the long-range electrical cars now. I'm fortunate to be able to recharge at home, and the few times I'll need to recharge away, I can take the wait time on the chin.
https://www.justice.gov/live
But in rural areas the costs of a new charging station will be significantly higher and the drawback of low range significantly worse.
Of course, it'd be sensible to just focus on a city-by-city approach, then widen the network, but transport decisions, particularly with the incumbent Homer Simpson impersonator in Cabinet, can sometimes be quite stupid.
I would add one thing though: the cost. We're looking for a new car, and I'd love to go electric - except we just cannot justify the price of one. We can get a really nice Fiesta that'll do exactly what we need for £20k. The Tesla Model 3 isn't available in the UK yet, and even when it is it'll be double that price. We're lucky enough that we could afford one (or two!), but it'd just be an utter waste of money.
Personally I come from the point of view when GRU came up with the Skripal plan, they wanted the whole world to know. Even if they succeeded, the method chosen was like leaving a calling card rather than untraceable mystery behind. If I’m right, then we are still being played.
But what is the game?
Though the introduction of bacon as a metaphor into the Brexit debate is appealing in a perverse way.
Anyone for cherry-bacon fudge ?
I drove from Hertfordshire to somewhere 200 km east of Poznan in Poland in August. One day I drove about 1100km (about 675 miles) from east of Poznan to Arras in France. It was either highish speed (uses more power) or traffic stop start (uses more power). Not something I could have done in an electric vehicle.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/hyundai/kona-electric/first-drives/hyundai-kona-electric-64kwh-premium-se-2018-uk-review
It's around £30k, which may not yet be quite low enough, but is getting there.
But now they've been caught out. The question is whether our responses are enough: I guess not, as they simply don't seem to care.
I've never had a brand new car, and now Mr J's Jazz is getting a little long in the tooth, am looking for a new one for her. I quite fancy spending a little more and getting a brand new one for her. But not that much.
I also wonder about depreciation. I can see the car after this one being hybrid or electric.
But I think thugs is the wrong word entirely, it implies a violence and barbarity that is aimless, thoughtless. GRU/KGB/Checka could be as well funded and powerful today than any time in last hundred years. Probably hierarchical, and serving a political agenda from above, whereas McMafia likely a Camorra flatter structure without aims from above, yet all three of these elements overlap in practice. If you were to say to me state funded intelligence GRU/CIA/MI5&6 never engage with and use criminal elements I will laugh at you. But when the agencies choose to do it themselves in such a showy fashion, I think May and her government have been wise to pull their punches and park a line under it. With Corbyns gaff they got plenty political capital out of it. I don’t know what, because I can’t see it even though I suspect something more is there than Skripal going round East Europe states as security advisor. I’m guessing but Maybe like in last series of Blinders when Thomas shot Alf, a threat had been made and ignored, a threat made to MI6.
I know how it works. R - - - - - t.
I can only surmise that the Skripals were attacked with some form of aerosol spray, fast acting and undetectable delivery method in the weather conditions at the time.
So questions have to be asked, why were 2 police officers assumed to be in uniform, in close attendance and why conveniently have they disappeared from the public consciousness, were they actually Special Branch tasked with keeping an eye on the two Skripals because of their interesting behaviours. Why did it take over 2 weeks for the specialists from Porton Down to discover all those traces of the chlorinated phosphate compounds which make up Novachok on places which had been thoroughly washed with heavy rain, or on tables and furniture in restaurants, pubs and other places - and no one else became even mildly sick or, due to the lethal potential of the poison, die. Yes, I am aware of the unfortunate death of the lady who sprayed her self with the "perfume" that she found, which was fast acting, lethal, and as her friend survived trying to help her, fast degradation.
All in all, the two GRU agents, who oh so conveniently smiled for all those cameras, almost as if they knew where they were, got themselves tagged and information, so easily obtained, proving their actual identity and blown their covers. Why, when you realise that all restaurants, pubs and other premises, even households and car washes, use mildly chlorinated cleaning liquids to disinfect and thourghly clean, do the government still spout rubbish about finding traces of Novachok everywhere, of course they do, it's the chlorine. They could go to the local swimming pool and find massive traces of it.
We are being played. I would suggest that the actual killers were well planned, tasked and got in and out without discovery. Quite simply distract with flummery while others stick the knife in.
Which leads us to the final set, for now. Why on earth did Boris get involved? This was pure Home Office, Ml5 and Special Branch stuff, nothing whatsoever to do with the Foreign Office or MI6. Again, looking at Boris' record, he opened his mouth and shot himself in both feet. Difficult, but only he could manage it.