Yes. And the first step is getting rid of all faith schools. The idea that children can be spoon fed superstition as fact (by the state in many cases) before they are old enough to make their own mind up is bonkers.
If they choose to be religious, fine. But let that be a private matter.
The LBGT thing in Birmingham is interesting. (And also mildly amusing: there's been a real inversion of the tribes since Section 28 days.)
Here's my question: do we think the government should mandate the teaching of certain things - such as homosexuality being an acceptable lifestyle choice, or indeed, that evolution is a scientific fact - and if so, are we going to be consistent in our application?
Because I can assure you all that the orthodox Jewish schools in North London, or the Reg Vardy Academies*, or religious schools in Northern Ireland, haven't been teaching that homosexuality is acceptable.
And are we going to ask that private schools do similarly?
What is the right balance between the parent and the state in deciding what a child should hear?
* They hate evolution and the gays
And if so, how far do you take it? Would pupils be disciplined for expressing disagreement with orthodoxy? I expect the average Birmingham politician wants nothing to do with this.
Quite. It does seem to me there is no need for anything other than a short extension to get us over the line but that it is the final time, or a complete reset to start over.
The short option seems to be ruled out because realistically the only thing we could do without needing to hold EU elections is pass the deal, and that is not happening.
The long option is a bit of a joke because why would we or the EU start all over again, therefore its only purpose would be to allow GE/referenda. A referendum I am hugely confident remain would win, so no brexit there, and if there was a GE even if, say, Labour won saying they would try for a Labour Brexit wink wink, their support is so much for remain and Brexit still so divisive that no deal would be agreed there either, so would also eventually lead to remain.
Well first thing is that Con will get rid of Theresa May (I tend to think she'll probably resign of her own accord)
Then they'll be a major blood-letting in the Tory Part as they elect a new leader which I would say is then pretty much immediately followed by a general election (so the country gets to have a major blood letting too)
The result of that election would determine what happens next with Brexit or indeed if there is any Brexit...
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
*TIG defection watch* 13 Labour MPs voted to keep the Tiggers on the select committees earlier, which I would guess means they're the most likely to defect themselves:
Adrian Bailey Kevin Barron Chris Bryant Ann Clwyd Louise Ellman Paul Farrelly Jim Fitzpatrick Margaret Hodge David Lammy Steve McCabe Siobhain McDonagh Ian Murray Wes Streeting
168 Labour MPs voted to boot them off, 64 abstained (including both Corbyn and Watson).
Pretty weak indicator of potential defection tendency, but I guess there's not much else to go on. Probably just shows they have more individual sympathy.
Is there any instance at all of the French ever being helpful to the UK?
I really don't think this kind of comment is helpful.
I was pondering my knowledge of history, such as it is. I asked a question. A question to which I didn't know the answer.
I wasn't trying to be helpful, but neither am I trying to be the thought-police.
The most obvious recent example that springs to mind is that during the Falklands War they gave us useful technical information that helped mitigate the effects of the Exocet anti-ship missiles that they'd sold the Argentinians before the war. I dare say Dura Ace could supply the full details.
Is there any instance at all of the French ever being helpful to the UK?
Yes. The Frogs stopped selling the Argies exocets during the Falklands, when the Argentines were about to sink our entire navy.
Fake news.
But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.
In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".
In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".
Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.
In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.
For the love of God, even Margaret Thatcher pointed out in her book that Mitterand was falling over himself to help. The australians and new zealanders were really helpful, the americans were helpful eventually after some difficulty. How many times is this going to crop up?
Scanning through the names I don't think I've ever heard of any of them.
There's a lot of constituency chairmen there (including mine at the top of the list). It looks like pressure might be mounting on the irreconciliables.
I couldn't bet. Very short, probably no. 3m or thereabouts is a runner, 6m-9m probably not. A round 12m attractive, but noones a fan. 18m-30m - lots of fans, but issues. 30m+, well yeah ok we're not leaving.
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
If there's a majority for MV3, it will pass, because the Commons will suspend the relevant standing order, so it can pass.
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
Is there any instance at all of the French ever being helpful to the UK?
Yes. The Frogs stopped selling the Argies exocets during the Falklands, when the Argentines were about to sink our entire navy.
Fake news.
But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.
In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".
In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".
Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.
In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.
For the love of God, even Margaret Thatcher pointed out in her book that Mitterand was falling over himself to help. The australians and new zealanders were really helpful, the americans were helpful eventually after some difficulty. How many times is this going to crop up?
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
If there's a majority for MV3, it will pass, because the Commons will suspend the relevant standing order, so it can pass.
Given how tight it would be even in the best case scenario one wonders when/if the government will be confident enough to try it, as they surely will not be able to be absolutely sure at any time.
That's not quite the same thing though Sunil. If I'm in a trench fighting for my life than I can have no better companion than a Frenchman (or woman). If I'm in a political trench this may change. I genuinely don't understand why.
Is there any instance at all of the French ever being helpful to the UK?
I really don't think this kind of comment is helpful.
I was pondering my knowledge of history, such as it is. I asked a question. A question to which I didn't know the answer.
I wasn't trying to be helpful, but neither am I trying to be the thought-police.
Well the French also sort of ran WWI militarily, at least on the Western Front where we were under command. There was that.
The French took the brunt of the casualties.
One curious feature is that British monthly casualties peaked as the War was being won, from August to November 1918. Squalid and horrible though it was, trench warfare saved lives. Casualties soared as it became a war of manoeuvre.
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
It could feasibly be a gentlemanly draw if the delay is 9 months and we leave at 0000hrs on 31 Dec / 1 Jan
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
If there's a majority for MV3, it will pass, because the Commons will suspend the relevant standing order, so it can pass.
What is the price of a MV3 squeaker vote? May goes for sure. A Tory leadership election. A GE, Chaos in both parties...and bitterness all around. And what have we achieved....the blindest of blind Brexits...that's it.
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
It could feasibly be a gentlemanly draw if the delay is 9 months and we leave at 0000hrs on 31 Dec / 1 Jan
I think that would be a Glenn win, since we'd have been a member until the last second of 2019
Is there any instance at all of the French ever being helpful to the UK?
I really don't think this kind of comment is helpful.
I was pondering my knowledge of history, such as it is. I asked a question. A question to which I didn't know the answer.
I wasn't trying to be helpful, but neither am I trying to be the thought-police.
Well the French also sort of ran WWI militarily, at least on the Western Front where we were under command. There was that.
The French took the brunt of the casualties.
One curious feature is that British monthly casualties peaked as the War was being won, from August to November 1918. Squalid and horrible though it was, trench warfare saved lives. Casualties soared as it became a war of manoeuvre.
I've just read the most stupendous piece of general military history/socio-geopolitics, with added Darwinism, Ian Morris's: WAR
Every page is full of startling insights, or the most gruesome yet compelling factoids. One of my favourites is about Genghis Khan.
We all know that the Mongols were hideously brutal - exterminating every living THING in conquered cities, down to the last cats, dogs and hens, but I never knew THIS: during a war, they would take the fat out of the slain corpses of their enemies, hurl it at the walls of enemy houses and buildings, then set fire to the human fat, thereby burning down the cities.
100% recommended. One of the best books of general history I have read in a decade.
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
It could feasibly be a gentlemanly draw if the delay is 9 months and we leave at 0000hrs on 31 Dec / 1 Jan
I think that would be a Glenn win, since we'd have been a member until the last second of 2019
I think it'd be a Sean win, since we'll in British timezones have left with 1 hour to spare.
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
If there's a majority for MV3, it will pass, because the Commons will suspend the relevant standing order, so it can pass.
Given how tight it would be even in the best case scenario one wonders when/if the government will be confident enough to try it, as they surely will not be able to be absolutely sure at any time.
They would need to start by having a vote to overturn Bercows ruling and that would be hard to win, harder I think than an MV itself. As I am sure Bercow calculated before making his pronouncement.
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
It could feasibly be a gentlemanly draw if the delay is 9 months and we leave at 0000hrs on 31 Dec / 1 Jan
2359hrs on 31 Dec/1 Jan is in 2019 0000hrs on 31 Dec/1 Jan is in 2020 The "end of 2019" is 23:59:59.999999.... The "start of 2020" is 00:00:00
I bet you're glad you reduced your stake from 10 grand with William Glenn?
What are the exact terms of that bet?
IIRC we wagered £1000, at evens, that the UK would have legally left the EU by the end of 2019, with edmundintokyo to umpire any disputes (like the definition of "left"). If we still have MEPs and an EU Commissioner by Jan 1 2020 I will definitely have lost.
It could feasibly be a gentlemanly draw if the delay is 9 months and we leave at 0000hrs on 31 Dec / 1 Jan
I think that would be a Glenn win, since we'd have been a member until the last second of 2019
I think it'd be a Sean win, since we'll in British timezones have left with 1 hour to spare.
Seems like edmundintokyo could be needed.
The counter argument would be that both parties would have agreed that the leaving moment is the first instant of 2020, and since the UK and the EU have agreed to set this on EU time the same convention should be applied to the bet.
If a decision is made with a gun to Parliament’s heads on the 28 March, frankly I will not consider it legitimate.
Whatever that decision is.
Any Deal forced through on coercion and bribery is not going to survive long.
Well, the Act of Union 1707 has had a good run.
Wasn't it shortly followed by the 1715 and 1745 risings, then the suppression of Highland culture at the point of a bayonet?
Culloden was mostly Scotsmen v. Scotsmen?
My own Ross ancestors were washing their hair that day.
The only fighting force we raised was captured by the Jacobites after a weak attempt to hold the fort at Inverness in February 1746 and not released until after Culloden. In retrospect, that was probably a smart move.
Comments
Yes. And the first step is getting rid of all faith schools. The idea that children can be spoon fed superstition as fact (by the state in many cases) before they are old enough to make their own mind up is bonkers.
If they choose to be religious, fine. But let that be a private matter.
The short option seems to be ruled out because realistically the only thing we could do without needing to hold EU elections is pass the deal, and that is not happening.
The long option is a bit of a joke because why would we or the EU start all over again, therefore its only purpose would be to allow GE/referenda. A referendum I am hugely confident remain would win, so no brexit there, and if there was a GE even if, say, Labour won saying they would try for a Labour Brexit wink wink, their support is so much for remain and Brexit still so divisive that no deal would be agreed there either, so would also eventually lead to remain.
Then they'll be a major blood-letting in the Tory Part as they elect a new leader which I would say is then pretty much immediately followed by a general election (so the country gets to have a major blood letting too)
The result of that election would determine what happens next with Brexit or indeed if there is any Brexit...
1. Ask for a short extension (to do the necessary homework) so she can implement her Deal passed in MV3 of March 28th
2. Ask for an optional, longer two year extension, should that Deal fail.
If the EU agrees, it puts huge pressure on Brexiteers to submit to the Deal, on the grounds that a 2 year delay means a massive split in the Tory party and probably No Brexit.
Clever, in a way, but there are many risks. How do they get the Speaker to agree to MV3, how do they get the EU to agree to all these British options, unless we propose something concrete to move things on. TMay will have to offer an election or a referendum. Hmm.
I couldn't bet. Very short, probably no. 3m or thereabouts is a runner, 6m-9m probably not. A round 12m attractive, but noones a fan. 18m-30m - lots of fans, but issues. 30m+, well yeah ok we're not leaving.
I'd guess, but not bet, on around 15m.
I still think I might win, but I'd put it at about 50/50 now.
One curious feature is that British monthly casualties peaked as the War was being won, from August to November 1918. Squalid and horrible though it was, trench warfare saved lives. Casualties soared as it became a war of manoeuvre.
NEW THREAD
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00IOLFGEC/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Every page is full of startling insights, or the most gruesome yet compelling factoids. One of my favourites is about Genghis Khan.
We all know that the Mongols were hideously brutal - exterminating every living THING in conquered cities, down to the last cats, dogs and hens, but I never knew THIS: during a war, they would take the fat out of the slain corpses of their enemies, hurl it at the walls of enemy houses and buildings, then set fire to the human fat, thereby burning down the cities.
100% recommended. One of the best books of general history I have read in a decade.
This is terrible for me to say, but I probably think Boris Johnson would have done a much better job as leader 3 years ago....
Seems like edmundintokyo could be needed.
0000hrs on 31 Dec/1 Jan is in 2020
The "end of 2019" is 23:59:59.999999....
The "start of 2020" is 00:00:00
Pause
I'm being a dick.
Ignore this post...