He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
Larger than Truro or Lichfield.
But smaller than many towns (c.f. my home town Hastings at 98,000).
Ii has great facilities though - good museums, shops, restaurants (mainly chains tbf), cafes, and has to be one of the prettiest small city centres in England.
It's got a jolly nice cathedral. Much appreciated by Russian connoisseurs of Early English Gothic, I understand.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
Larger than Truro or Lichfield.
But smaller than many towns (c.f. my home town Hastings at 98,000).
Ii has great facilities though - good museums, shops, restaurants (mainly chains tbf), cafes, and has to be one of the prettiest small city centres in England.
It's got a jolly nice cathedral. Much appreciated by Russian connoisseurs of Early English Gothic, I understand.
On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same.
My inexpert views: ... How would I combat it? One easy thing: immediately announce a reward of a million pounds to anyone not directly involved who gives evidence that leads to the jailing of the people doing this. It'll be far less than its cost people and airlines.
I would send up my drone and set it to follow their drone as it flies back to them. These things can auto-follow an object.
Or it could just be that the Government is floundering? It wouldn't exactly be the first time.
Regardless, serious questions will be asked if an incident like this is allowed to occur again.
How do you propose to stop it? There is essentially nothing you can do to prevent a drone being flown into an airport if someone wants to do it.
This feels like what could be the first of many disruptions of this sort. It causes massive inconvenience and it is easy to do.
A number of technical solutions have recently been proposed, including targeting the things with lasers and using signal jamming to cut them off from whoever's controlling them. Regardless, even if we've been doing little or no work on the problem in this country I'm sure the Americans at least have been applying themselves to it. It can't be beyond the wit of man to prevent a twat with a few hundred grams of remote-controlled flying plastic from shutting down an international airport for an entire day.
In the longer term the authorities need to give more thought to what to do about the threat posed by drones. The things are a menace. People have already strapped guns to drones and fired them mid-air. It's only a matter of time before one is used to deliver an explosive device.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
Larger than Truro or Lichfield.
But smaller than many towns (c.f. my home town Hastings at 98,000).
Ii has great facilities though - good museums, shops, restaurants (mainly chains tbf), cafes, and has to be one of the prettiest small city centres in England.
It's got a jolly nice cathedral. Much appreciated by Russian connoisseurs of Early English Gothic, I understand.
Only from a distance of about half a mile as I understand it.
Anyway off for some Christmas drinks now with the neighbours, one of whom is an ex-Navy jet pilot who now tests commercial drone pilots for their licence... be interesting to get his views!
Or it could just be that the Government is floundering? It wouldn't exactly be the first time.
Regardless, serious questions will be asked if an incident like this is allowed to occur again.
How do you propose to stop it? There is essentially nothing you can do to prevent a drone being flown into an airport if someone wants to do it.
This feels like what could be the first of many disruptions of this sort. It causes massive inconvenience and it is easy to do.
A number of technical solutions have recently been proposed, including targeting the things with lasers and using signal jamming to cut them off from whoever's controlling them. Regardless, even if we've been doing little or no work on the problem in this country I'm sure the Americans at least have been applying themselves to it. It can't be beyond the wit of man to prevent a twat with a few hundred grams of remote-controlled flying plastic from shutting down an international airport for an entire day.
In the longer term the authorities need to give more thought to what to do about the threat posed by drones. The things are a menace. People have already strapped guns to drones and fired them mid-air. It's only a matter of time before one is used to deliver an explosive device.
Didn’t that already get tried against Maduro in Venezuela a little while ago?
On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same.
That 52/48 was really 60/40. At least.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
My inexpert views: ... How would I combat it? One easy thing: immediately announce a reward of a million pounds to anyone not directly involved who gives evidence that leads to the jailing of the people doing this. It'll be far less than its cost people and airlines.
I would send up my drone and set it to follow their drone as it flies back to them. These things can auto-follow an object.
That assume that they're silly enough to have the things go directly back to their home. Better to write off the money they cost and crash them, or have them land on an area of waste land / countryside where you can watch to see if anyone's about before collecting.
Or if you really want to be evil, land it in the garden of the local MP, and throw a r/t set to the correct frequency over the fence.
There are lots of ways you could be really evil with this.
A big worry for airport operators will be for Gatwick copycats. Now it is apparent that for the relatively low cost of a quadcopter, on a one way mission, you can take out a major airport for many hours. You can launch a cheap pre programmed craft from 5-6 miles away, and turn off your transmitter after 20 secs, and drive home. The craft would then complete its mission and cause chaos. It would be very difficult to trace the perpetrator. You would of course have to hack the geofence system of the firmware, but thanks to hackers, this is possible. Sad day, and horrible for people trying to travel.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
London?
Wow - I'm impressed. I didn't expect anyone to get it that fast. With a population of 9,401 it is indeed the City of London.
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
Lancaster is a city...
So it is. I thought it wasn't. When did that happen?
Technically of course Rochester was a city until 1996.
As far as the drones are concerned, I have a friend who runs a mapping service allowing organisations to map and survey their land using a drone.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
I hope the Brexiteers are proud that they have advanced the foreign policy agenda of a very hostile foreign power. To think that they have the gall to call remainers "traitors"
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
He's used nerve agents in a small UK town, and his cyber warfare experts regularly try to disrupt Western economies and probably elections, so I wouldn't put it past him.
I agree with @Richard_Tyndall that it could be airport protesters of some sort, but this seems to be on a rather large scale, over an extended period, and using heavy drones. That points to some well-funded and organised group.
I would strongly advise you not to let anyone from Salisbury hear you calling it 'a small town.'
It's technically a city of course but it is small - 2011 census population 40,302, which I confess was much lower than I had assumed.
EDIT: tbf the Salisbury 'urban zone' had a population of over 62,000 in 2011, which seems more reasonable.
That would make it comparable in size to Hereford, Carlisle, Rochester, Durham, possibly Lancaster although that depends on how you measure it. Much bigger than say, Ely.
But Rochester is not a city.
Nor is Lancaster, although both have cathedrals.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
Lancaster is a city...
Wells.
In ascending order the list is London, Wells, Ripon, Truro, Ely, Chichester, Lichfield, Salisbury, Hereford, Chester.
I hope the Brexiteers are proud that they have advanced the foreign policy agenda of a very hostile foreign power. To think that they have the gall to call remainers "traitors"
So what exactly have you done to oppose the Putin led kleptocracy in Russia? Wrote a letter?
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
...On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same...
Where is "The Jezziah" this evening? I wanted to ask him what he first found attractive in the septuagenarian terrorist-sympathising anti-Semite misogynistic liar Jeremy Corbyn?
As far as the drones are concerned, I have a friend who runs a mapping service allowing organisations to map and survey their land using a drone.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
"I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields "
Right, IANAE, but there are several things to say about this. Firstly, AIUI civilian systems generally don't rely on radar per se; they rely on the planes broadcasting their identity versus a transponder. In fact, I believe many airports don't even have radars.
As for the military: many military radar systems are so powerful they can cause significant problems for civilian systems if set at full power so they're rarely used in such a manner, especially in built-up areas. Then there's the question of whether airfield ones are on all the time, even at low power, and whether they depend on other systems to detect incoming planes.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
...On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same...
Where is "The Jezziah" this evening? I wanted to ask him what he first found attractive in the septuagenarian terrorist-sympathising anti-Semite misogynistic liar Jeremy Corbyn?
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
Well Trump is Putin's best placed asset, so of course he agrees with his master.
...On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same...
As far as the drones are concerned, I have a friend who runs a mapping service allowing organisations to map and survey their land using a drone.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
"I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields "
Right, IANAE, but there are several things to say about this. Firstly, AIUI civilian systems generally don't rely on radar per se; they rely on the planes broadcasting their identity versus a transponder. In fact, I believe many airports don't even have radars.
As for the military: many military radar systems are so powerful they can cause significant problems for civilian systems if set at full power so they're rarely used in such a manner, especially in built-up areas. Then there's the question of whether airfield ones are on all the time, even at low power, and whether they depend on other systems to detect incoming planes.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
They do have radars, but they don't work like military ones. What happens - IIRC - is that when the radar beam hits the plane, then the plane "responds" with its sqwark (or transponder code) and its position and speed.
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
Well Trump is Putin's best placed asset, so of course he agrees with his master.
That makes about as much sense as Remain’s Project Fear campaign. Still, if you want to wallow in your bile because you lost, go ahead. America will still be our strongest ally.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
It seems drones can be jammed using radio frequency sensors which can be integrated into the main airport operating systems providing a range of several miles (in theory). Essentially, the drone signal is jammed and it defaults to returning to its point of origin.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
...On the referendum. The 2016 one where 52 played 48. Sounds quite close but what about passion? Take two people, Belinda and Brian. Belinda is not too into politics, she's not apathetic, not at all, but she tends to focus more on other things. She voted Remain because, well, it seemed a bit of a risk to do otherwise, and certainly the government seemed to think so. She had no love for the EU, in fact there was a part of Belinda that rather fancied being out of it, but push comes to shove, no, stick with what you know. She had gotten a bit bored by the debate, in truth, and she found herself yawning as she marked her ballot. Brian, whole different can of peaches. In Brian's breast there raged a burning desire for this country, his country, to become an independent coastal state free from the yoke of Brussels. He thought about it all day every day. Even as he was going around and doing things that were nothing whatsoever to do with the EU, which to be fair meant pretty much everything, he was brooding about it. So Brian voted Leave, of course he did, and when he did the deed he felt a little dizzy at the prospect of victory. So much oomph behind his vote. So little behind Belinda's. And yet they count the same...
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
It seems drones can be jammed using radio frequency sensors which can be integrated into the main airport operating systems providing a range of several miles (in theory). Essentially, the drone signal is jammed and it defaults to returning to its point of origin.
Right, again, IANAE, so feel free to accept contradictory information from someone knowledgable.
I believe some drones can be set on a prearranged course using GPS, and therefore not rely on radio signals. Any in-built behaviour in firmware for how to act on (say) losing radio signal or entering a forbidden area could be overwritten by someone clever enough (potentially in software or hardware).
These would be quite easy to do. If done in software or hardware, though, it'll provide some rather useful information to the police if they get suspects ("How come you had the source code for that model of drone on your computer, and how come you have a programmer for it?) or ("The wire used to bypass the receiver is the same sort on the spool in your garage, and the solder the same used on the wires.")
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
So you think votes should be weighted by the intensity of the voter? I dislike that stance intensely...
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
Well Trump is Putin's best placed asset, so of course he agrees with his master.
That makes about as much sense as Remain’s Project Fear campaign. Still, if you want to wallow in your bile because you lost, go ahead. America will still be our strongest ally.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
It seems drones can be jammed using radio frequency sensors which can be integrated into the main airport operating systems providing a range of several miles (in theory). Essentially, the drone signal is jammed and it defaults to returning to its point of origin.
That assumes certain RFs are in use to manage the drones.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
The US was not in favour of Brexit you dimwit. Donald "I respect Putin" Trump is in favour of it, in close alignment with Vladimir , a man who oddly, is equally admired by Nigel Farage
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
Excellent event with John McDonnell this afternoon. He is very switched on, and you can tell that he fully believes in what he says.
He gave an interesting perspective on Labour's approach to Brexit. One step at a time, and don't give right-wingers a chance to cry 'foul'.
Did you get a sense of how he feels about a referendum?
A referendum would be the last resort. He hopes that parliament can take over from the executive to come forward with a Brexit plan that protects jobs and the economy.
If that doesn't happen, and there is no GE, then yes, a referendum. If it is May's deal or Remain then what else can Labour do but campaign for Remain.
Corbyn lies again. He can't help himself. I think Bill Clinton's protestations about his fidelity have more credibility than anything Corbyn has to say.
As far as the drones are concerned, I have a friend who runs a mapping service allowing organisations to map and survey their land using a drone.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
"I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields "
Right, IANAE, but there are several things to say about this. Firstly, AIUI civilian systems generally don't rely on radar per se; they rely on the planes broadcasting their identity versus a transponder. In fact, I believe many airports don't even have radars.
As for the military: many military radar systems are so powerful they can cause significant problems for civilian systems if set at full power so they're rarely used in such a manner, especially in built-up areas. Then there's the question of whether airfield ones are on all the time, even at low power, and whether they depend on other systems to detect incoming planes.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
They do have radars, but they don't work like military ones. What happens - IIRC - is that when the radar beam hits the plane, then the plane "responds" with its sqwark (or transponder code) and its position and speed.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
It is not credible to believe that the bad losers would accept defeat the second time any more than they did the first.
They do have radars, but they don't work like military ones. What happens - IIRC - is that when the radar beam hits the plane, then the plane "responds" with its sqwark (or transponder code) and its position and speed.
Yes, which I wouldn't call traditional radar as it does not rely on the same signal returning (I might be wrong on that). AIUI it means that if the object does not have a transponder, or the transponder is switched off, it can essentially be unidentified or invisible if the object is small.
Incidentally, there are weird ATC navaid VHF beacons dotted around the country. Blooming alien-looking things:
As far as the drones are concerned, I have a friend who runs a mapping service allowing organisations to map and survey their land using a drone.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
"I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields "
Right, IANAE, but there are several things to say about this. Firstly, AIUI civilian systems generally don't rely on radar per se; they rely on the planes broadcasting their identity versus a transponder. In fact, I believe many airports don't even have radars.
As for the military: many military radar systems are so powerful they can cause significant problems for civilian systems if set at full power so they're rarely used in such a manner, especially in built-up areas. Then there's the question of whether airfield ones are on all the time, even at low power, and whether they depend on other systems to detect incoming planes.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
They do have radars, but they don't work like military ones. What happens - IIRC - is that when the radar beam hits the plane, then the plane "responds" with its sqwark (or transponder code) and its position and speed.
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
The US was not in favour of Brexit you dimwit. Donald "I respect Putin" Trump is in favour of it, in close alignment with Vladimir , a man who oddly, is equally admired by Nigel Farage
Ah yes, the insults that led to you losing the referendum in the first place. So much easier than making a credible argument. Still, if you haven’t learnt from the mistakes you made last time, no reason to believe a second referendum would give a different result. Better to save the taxpayers money and honour the result of the first.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
If Remain win a #peoplesvote it would be because the people agree that they got it wrong first time.
Brexiteers have nothing to fear if the mood hasn't changed.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
So you think votes should be weighted by the intensity of the voter? I dislike that stance intensely...
...which is ironic when you think about it...
I think the point is simply that far more people feel passionately against the EU than for it, which is why remainers should be fearful of calling a second referendum. Nothing has changed since the first one. "Planes will be grounded and you will starve in the street if you don't change your minds" is not a great message to go with when the first referendum was pretty much a massive two fingers up to the establishment. Nobody made the positive case for the EU then. They're still not making it now.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
It is not credible to believe that the bad losers would accept defeat the second time any more than they did the first.
Let us know when you come across some good winners.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
Only if it’s Remain against May’s deal. As remain lost the first referendum it has no legitimate right to be included on the second.
Excellent event with John McDonnell this afternoon. He is very switched on, and you can tell that he fully believes in what he says.
He gave an interesting perspective on Labour's approach to Brexit. One step at a time, and don't give right-wingers a chance to cry 'foul'.
Did you get a sense of how he feels about a referendum?
A referendum would be the last resort. He hopes that parliament can take over from the executive to come forward with a Brexit plan that protects jobs and the economy.
If that doesn't happen, and there is no GE, then yes, a referendum. If it is May's deal or Remain then what else can Labour do but campaign for Remain.
McDonnell and Corbyn do care about jobs and the economy, but it ain't the way you suggest it. They would be very happy if No Deal crashes the economy. It is what they want. A few million out of work would be the equivalent of the Great Leap Forward. Painful but necessary
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
Only it’s Remain against May’s deal. As remain lost the first referendum it has no legitimate right to be included on the second.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
So you think votes should be weighted by the intensity of the voter? I dislike that stance intensely...
...which is ironic when you think about it...
I think the point is simply that far more people feel passionately against the EU than for it, which is why remainers should be fearful of calling a second referendum. Nothing has changed since the first one. "Planes will be grounded and you will starve in the street if you don't change your minds" is not a great message to go with when the first referendum was pretty much a massive two fingers up to the establishment. Nobody made the positive case for the EU then. They're still not making it now.
I don’t. He was an abysmal Chancellor. Of course he could have said our strongest ally, the US is also in favour of Brexit but like a pedant he didn’t. Still bent out of shape that his scare tactics didn’t work. Tory Party is in a real state at the moment but it’s better off without him.
The US was not in favour of Brexit you dimwit. Donald "I respect Putin" Trump is in favour of it, in close alignment with Vladimir , a man who oddly, is equally admired by Nigel Farage
Ah yes, the insults that led to you losing the referendum in the first place. So much easier than making a credible argument. Still, if you haven’t learnt from the mistakes you made last time, no reason to believe a second referendum would give a different result. Better to save the taxpayers money and honour the result of the first.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
na, vacuous argument. "The people voted, but we mustn't let the bastards have another go incase they change their minds because I like the result" is what those opposed to another vote are actually saying. If Brexit is so wonderful the people can endorse it. If it is the right decision they will vote for it again. Some just fear they won't without significant assistance form Vlad
I think the point is simply that far more people feel passionately against the EU than for it, which is why remainers should be fearful of calling a second referendum. Nothing has changed since the first one.
I don't remember 700,000 people ever marching in the UK in support of the EU before the referendum. Do you?
A referendum would be the last resort. He hopes that parliament can take over from the executive to come forward with a Brexit plan that protects jobs and the economy.
By that does he mean that a VONC brings down the govt and a JC minority govt is formed without a GE?
Or does he mean this govt of national unity coalition type thing?
An astonishing and outspoken warning from the SMMT regarding no deal and car manufacturing . In a nutshell a catastrophe ! But I expect the no deal fantasists to come in here proclaiming it’s project fear and they know better than the experts who run the industry ,
In other news a cross party amendment has been put down on the finance bill to stop a no deal . The crucial name on that is Oliver Letwin .
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
If Remain win a #peoplesvote it would be because the people agree that they got it wrong first time.
Brexiteers have nothing to fear if the mood hasn't changed.
Democrats have everything to fear. What if a future government is voted out at a general election but uses this precedent to demand a new election?
You are literally calling for the nullification of democracy. The discarding of the people's decision. Setting the precedent that the people voting for something is no longer enough for it to happen. For the politicians to be the bosses of the people, not the other way round.
And why?
Because thirty months on you still haven't got over the fact that we had a referendum, the rules of which were clear - this is it, no second chances - and you lost.
And you don't even have the guts to call for what you really want - the politicians to just ignore the vote themselves. You think that making the people vote again because the stupid racist plebs got it wrong the first time applies some sort of democratic veneer to your attempted coup.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
na, vacuous argument. "The people voted, but we mustn't let the bastards have another go incase they change their minds because I like the result" is what those opposed to another vote are actually saying. If Brexit is so wonderful the people can endorse it. If it is the right decision they will vote for it again. Some just fear they won't without significant assistance form Vlad
If it had 52% Remain would you now want the Referendum to be repeated ?
Excellent event with John McDonnell this afternoon. He is very switched on, and you can tell that he fully believes in what he says.
He gave an interesting perspective on Labour's approach to Brexit. One step at a time, and don't give right-wingers a chance to cry 'foul'.
Did you get a sense of how he feels about a referendum?
A referendum would be the last resort. He hopes that parliament can take over from the executive to come forward with a Brexit plan that protects jobs and the economy.
If that doesn't happen, and there is no GE, then yes, a referendum. If it is May's deal or Remain then what else can Labour do but campaign for Remain.
This is pretty poor from him and I think this kind of response is really not helping the Labour party; they really need to be pro-active not reactive here
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
So you think votes should be weighted by the intensity of the voter? I dislike that stance intensely...
...which is ironic when you think about it...
I think the point is simply that far more people feel passionately against the EU than for it, which is why remainers should be fearful of calling a second referendum. Nothing has changed since the first one. "Planes will be grounded and you will starve in the street if you don't change your minds" is not a great message to go with when the first referendum was pretty much a massive two fingers up to the establishment. Nobody made the positive case for the EU then. They're still not making it now.
And polls are meaningless when only one side is campaigning.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Why would the result of a second referendum be respected if the result of the first is not ?
Because the second will be the first to decide for or against a specific proposal.
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
Only it’s Remain against May’s deal. As remain lost the first referendum it has no legitimate right to be included on the second.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
na, vacuous argument. "The people voted, but we mustn't let the bastards have another go incase they change their minds because I like the result" is what those opposed to another vote are actually saying. If Brexit is so wonderful the people can endorse it. If it is the right decision they will vote for it again. Some just fear they won't without significant assistance form Vlad
See my response to Foxy. Every word applies to you.
Corbyn lies again. He can't help himself. I think Bill Clinton's protestations about his fidelity have more credibility than anything Corbyn has to say.
I think the Corbyn team like this story and are happy for it to run.
They are guessing that a lot of people think his muttered 'stupid woman' comment was (i) not particularly offensive and (ii) was in any case bang on the money.
Someone had their tongue in their cheek when they were imagining Brian (52% of the active electorate in 2016 did not consist of Ukip district councillors,) but the general point is true: an awful lot of people loathed the EU, not many loved it. That's the entire reason why it was so vulnerable to rejection as soon as it began to struggle.
Bit of licence, sure, often can't help myself, but I think you do get my point. Most of the 'not that bothered one way or another' people would have gone with Remain, plus almost the whole of the establishment, political, business, arts & crafts, were steering the result that way.
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
I think it has changed. Why not a #peoplesvote to resolve our disagreement.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
Because the people voted - having been promised this was it, this was the decision - and saying "you got it wrong, vote again" is a terrible, terrible idea.
If Remain win a #peoplesvote it would be because the people agree that they got it wrong first time.
Brexiteers have nothing to fear if the mood hasn't changed.
Democrats have everything to fear. What if a future government is voted out at a general election but uses this precedent to demand a new election?
You are literally calling for the nullification of democracy. The discarding of the people's decision. Setting the precedent that the people voting for something is no longer enough for it to happen. For the politicians to be the bosses of the people, not the other way round.
And why?
Because thirty months on you still haven't got over the fact that we had a referendum, the rules of which were clear - this is it, no second chances - and you lost.
And you don't even have the guts to call for what you really want - the politicians to just ignore the vote themselves. You think that making the people vote again because the stupid racist plebs got it wrong the first time applies some sort of democratic veneer to your attempted coup.
You are a disgrace.
You just don't want it because you will lose.
It is not anti-democratic to have a vote, and is anti democratic to deny it.
An astonishing and outspoken warning from the SMMT regarding no deal and car manufacturing . In a nutshell a catastrophe ! But I expect the no deal fantasists to come in here proclaiming it’s project fear and they know better than the experts who run the industry ,
In other news a cross party amendment has been put down on the finance bill to stop a no deal . The crucial name on that is Oliver Letwin .
Already discussed hours ago. It does nothing to stop "no deal", it just stops the government dealing with "no deal".
The simple fact remains that only two things can stop "no deal": ratification of the deal or A50 revocation. Everything else is noise.
Corbyn lies again. He can't help himself. I think Bill Clinton's protestations about his fidelity have more credibility than anything Corbyn has to say.
I think the Corbyn team like this story and are happy for it to run.
They are guessing that a lot of people think his muttered 'stupid woman' comment was (i) not particularly offensive and (ii) was in any case bang on the money.
I wonder if they are guessing right?
Let me answer that question by asking you one. How does such a story solve his dilemmas over Brexit, or advance his policy agenda, or heal the gaping divisions in his party?
Comments
That 52/48 was really 60/40. At least.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjF1NzKhK_fAhWxuXEKHS6JDUMQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45077057&psig=AOvVaw2n5hwKxjkS_iktkAnQcP4T&ust=1545416863563219
Anyway off for some Christmas drinks now with the neighbours, one of whom is an ex-Navy jet pilot who now tests commercial drone pilots for their licence... be interesting to get his views!
Have a good evening everyone
What if Corbyn pivoted to a second referendum this weekend?
No Parliament for weeks. No grid. MPs back home in their constituencies.
Families together - just right for the younguns to work on their parents.
And May on the back foot with no chance to unveil a counter move until Parliament returns.
I really don’t think it’ll happen. But it would be a hell of a gambit.
Fun quiz question - what is the smallest city in England (so discounting St Davids) in terms of population?
Or if you really want to be evil, land it in the garden of the local MP, and throw a r/t set to the correct frequency over the fence.
There are lots of ways you could be really evil with this.
Now it is apparent that for the relatively low cost of a quadcopter, on a one way mission, you can take out a major airport for many hours.
You can launch a cheap pre programmed craft from 5-6 miles away, and turn off your transmitter after 20 secs, and drive home. The craft would then complete its mission and cause chaos. It would be very difficult to trace the perpetrator.
You would of course have to hack the geofence system of the firmware, but thanks to hackers, this is possible.
Sad day, and horrible for people trying to travel.
https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1075815906918453249?s=19
Technically of course Rochester was a city until 1996.
There are a lot of rules and regulations around proper commercial operation of a drone - not least because it would contravene data protection law to capture someone's image or enable an individual to be identified (car registration for example) without their consent.
Part of that is CAA training so clearly the drone is either being used mischievously or (possibly) by someone who doesn't know what he or she is doing.
Drones or UAS (Unmanned Aerial Surveillance) systems are incredibly useful - property companies use them to carry out initial roof inspection and the emergency services use them extensively.
As to their detection - I'd be astonished if military technology can't detect drones near military airfields - the point I made earlier was if the technology exists and is in use elsewhere the question has to be asked why it isn't in use here. Anyone knowing that British airports aren't as well protected has had an opportunity.
https://twitter.com/abradacabla/status/1075829213301796867
Right, IANAE, but there are several things to say about this. Firstly, AIUI civilian systems generally don't rely on radar per se; they rely on the planes broadcasting their identity versus a transponder. In fact, I believe many airports don't even have radars.
As for the military: many military radar systems are so powerful they can cause significant problems for civilian systems if set at full power so they're rarely used in such a manner, especially in built-up areas. Then there's the question of whether airfield ones are on all the time, even at low power, and whether they depend on other systems to detect incoming planes.
Then there are problems with radar itself. It can be brilliant when used at height. When used near the ground, you get all sorts of nasty reflections and artefacts such as multipaths. In fact, I believe some systems automatically filter out small objects as otherwise you are picking up every bird.
A friends of ours helped develop some rather nifty tech that allows wind turbines to be placed near airfields; otherwise they interfere with airports' systems. The same tech is also rather useful for detecting low-flying objects against waves, allegedly ...
http://www.aveillant.com/
Horrible news out of Germany
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1075814722111500288
https://newsthump.com/2018/12/20/drones-over-gatwick-found-to-be-new-ryanair-super-economy-flights/
And yet it went 52% the other way. So IMO the mood* of the people was very clear, and certainly much more definitive than 52/48. It was a landslide for Leave, in a sense.
* I use the word 'mood' with great care. It was a mood not a view. View implies all sorts of carefully calibrated and worked out things. This was a mood.
And has it changed materially? Has it hell.
That research you had done into work activity levels among immigrants certainly deserves one.
He gave an interesting perspective on Labour's approach to Brexit. One step at a time, and don't give right-wingers a chance to cry 'foul'.
If the mood has changed so be it., and if it hasn't changed Brexiteers have nothing to fear.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/retailindustry/bulletins/retailsales/november2018
I believe some drones can be set on a prearranged course using GPS, and therefore not rely on radio signals. Any in-built behaviour in firmware for how to act on (say) losing radio signal or entering a forbidden area could be overwritten by someone clever enough (potentially in software or hardware).
These would be quite easy to do. If done in software or hardware, though, it'll provide some rather useful information to the police if they get suspects ("How come you had the source code for that model of drone on your computer, and how come you have a programmer for it?) or ("The wire used to bypass the receiver is the same sort on the spool in your garage, and the solder the same used on the wires.")
...which is ironic when you think about it...
Because the second will be decisive whereas the first was not.
If that doesn't happen, and there is no GE, then yes, a referendum. If it is May's deal or Remain then what else can Labour do but campaign for Remain.
Incidentally, there are weird ATC navaid VHF beacons dotted around the country. Blooming alien-looking things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHF_omnidirectional_range
https://vc.airvectors.net/ttwiz_10.html
https://www.nats.aero/services/information/surveillance-data/
https://www.bloomberg.com/energy
Brexiteers have nothing to fear if the mood hasn't changed.
:-(
Or is it :-)
Yes let's go with :-)
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/12/20/national/japanese-government-calls-safe-use-snow-blowers-citing-fatal-accidents-last-winter/
Or does he mean this govt of national unity coalition type thing?
In other news a cross party amendment has been put down on the finance bill to stop a no deal . The crucial name on that is Oliver Letwin .
You are literally calling for the nullification of democracy. The discarding of the people's decision. Setting the precedent that the people voting for something is no longer enough for it to happen. For the politicians to be the bosses of the people, not the other way round.
And why?
Because thirty months on you still haven't got over the fact that we had a referendum, the rules of which were clear - this is it, no second chances - and you lost.
And you don't even have the guts to call for what you really want - the politicians to just ignore the vote themselves. You think that making the people vote again because the stupid racist plebs got it wrong the first time applies some sort of democratic veneer to your attempted coup.
You are a disgrace.
They are guessing that a lot of people think his muttered 'stupid woman' comment was (i) not particularly offensive and (ii) was in any case bang on the money.
I wonder if they are guessing right?
It is not anti-democratic to have a vote, and is anti democratic to deny it.
The simple fact remains that only two things can stop "no deal": ratification of the deal or A50 revocation. Everything else is noise.
And this time the left wing vote might actually be split....
Because that's what retail spending is at.
And yes there will be big names to go under as big names have gone under before and as big names will go under in the future.