At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
It's mostly about x86 microprocessors, but it still staggeringly informative and interesting.
No, I haven't. I'll put it on my Amazon list.
It'll be interesting to see how the knowledge I've sucked up over the years matches what's in it. Although having a wife who works in chip design helps.
Incidentally, I learnt lots of stuff from the old Byte magazines. I had access to every copy, and the early copies explained concepts such as pipelining and branch prediction really well. Probably because they were basic back then.
Bear in mind it too is something of a historical footnote now. The inexorable rise of mobile means that the way Intel designed Pentium IV and early Core CPUs is now totally obsolete. An evolutionary dead end. They're only of historical interest.
The book is still very interesting, because it explains a lot of core computing concepts. It also discusses the RISC vs CISC divergence, albeit from a PowerPC perspective.
And it was written by Jon Stokes.
The idea of RISC vs CISC having any meaning at all these days makes little sense.
The ARmv8 ISA has > 100 instructions. Both ARM and x86-64 CPUs have microcode engines, with micro- and macro-op fusion. The terms ceased to have any meaning a long time ago.
When Hannibal wrote the book, CPU design was all about optimising single threaded performance. Now CPU designs are all about power efficiency.
In the last five years Intel have dedicated almost none of the transistor budget afforded by Moore's Law to improving single threaded performance. On the contrary, it's all been about first moving the chipset on board. (IOMMU, GPU, South Bridge, PCH, cache).
That's exactly what the books says!
And it was written by Jon Stokes. Are you sure you've read it?
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
I don't want atrocities to be the grist to the mill for anyone, let alone parties with fascist antecedents. But that is what will happen - sadly - if the authorities don't deal with the issues properly. If fascists start taking charge in European countries, we will all be worse off - not just hated minorities. European history should have taught us that, at the very least.
It's mostly about x86 microprocessors, but it still staggeringly informative and interesting.
No, I haven't. I'll put it on my Amazon list.
It'll be interesting to see how the knowledge I've sucked up over the years matches what's in it. Although having a wife who works in chip design helps.
Incidentally, I learnt lots of stuff from the old Byte magazines. I had access to every copy, and the early copies explained concepts such as pipelining and branch prediction really well. Probably because they were basic back then.
Bear in mind it too is something of a historical footnote now. The inexorable rise of mobile means that the way Intel designed Pentium IV and early Core CPUs is now totally obsolete. An evolutionary dead end. They're only of historical interest.
AIUI, yes and no.
Take pipelining: the concept of doing several things at once to avoid bottlenecks. Whilst the basic fetch-decode-execute three-stage pipeline has been replaced with pipelines of tens or twenties of stages, the concept of pipelines their advantages and disadvantages remains the same.
Likewise branch speculation/prediction and execution.
They're more complex, but the fundamentals are the same. As far as I know; Mrs J works in the analogue world.
There was a time when Intel were going for very long pipelines, 25-30 stages iirc which led to the Pentium 4, it almost led the company to ruin until the skunkworks team came up with a shorter pipeline multi-threaded Conroe and presented it to management. I think longer pipelines are out of fashion and possibly for good.
IPC improvements and power efficiency are going to rule the roost. It leaves AMD in a very tough situation as they are going to depend on other fab processes and they don't have the same engineering expertise to extract maximum IPC performance. Look at the latest Zen rumours, everything seems to be going badly. They might well be bankrupt if it wasn't for the success of the PS4.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
I don't want atrocities to be the grist to the mill for anyone, let alone parties with fascist antecedents. But that is what will happen - sadly - if the authorities don't deal with the issues properly. If fascists start taking charge in European countries, we will all be worse off - not just hated minorities. European history should have taught us that, at the very least.
A key test for the democratic system in the West is whether it can deal with (and survive) a changing world where the balance of economic power shifts away from it to the developing world, ever rising incomes are no longer guaranteed, and serious demographic challenges, that will only get harder, are a fact of life.
The political mainstream and excessive sensitivity was what prevented Rotherham's rape scandal being stopped much sooner, as well as the implications for wider social cohesion and terrorism. If genuine concerns aren't addressed by mainstream politicians then people will vote for those beyond the mainstream.
Mr. T, depends a lot on whether there are more attacks, and their timing, nature and success. Entirely possible attacks will be attempted to try and aid le Pen [obviously not accusing her of collusion], so that she gets in, cracks down, more resentment, more recruitment, more attacks.
Maajid Nawaz is spot on. Those who say there is no connection between Islam and these attacks are as deluded as people claiming the Crusades had nothing to do with Christianity.
Edited extra bit: meant to add: and politicians need to just acknowledge reality, even if it is uncomfortable. Otherwise, voters will, rightly, feel like they're being taken for fools.
Didn't work for Cameron with his wonderful renegotiation and won't work for terrorism.
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
Obviously, it is much easier and more convenient to label her an anti-Semite and be done with it, but I think what she actually says is a much harder thing to say, but also much more likely: she was ignorant, she was unthinking and made no effort to understand what it was she believed she was condemning. Having taken the time, she now does understand, accepts how wrong she was, has reached out tot he Jewish community and has apologised. I applaud that as much as I condemned her for what she originally did.
I raised on the previous thread the fact that the murderer was a Tunisian who had come to France in 2005. Why was he let in? An unskilled Tunisian? What possible skills did he bring that could not be found amongst the many EU citizens already available to work in France?
That woman may be railing wrongly against Schengen but she is right to rail against governments who have failed in their most elementary duty: to determine who is let into the country, in what numbers and that those who are let in are an asset to the country they are joining.
Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? It's not as if terrorism was unknown in 2005, even in France.
That woman's cry is a cry of pain and rage against authorities who have allowed a country's hospitality and openness to be abused and the price is paid in the crushed bodies of children on a sea front in summer.
I'm sure the authorities will believe that the answer lies in "More Europe."
''Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? ''
It is a mark of how times have changed that questions like this are now being considered seriously, as opposed to being buried under a torrent of vilification from the left.
And suddenly the Smith vs Eagle battle is back on again after a strong performance by Eagle at PLP hustings.
Thanks,
Angela Eagle 20.07 £10.00 (Leadership contest)
The difference in the prices of Smith and Eagle does seem very odd. Eagle appears determined to stand and Nick Palmer, in response to a question from me, put the odds of the three contenders at Evens Corbyn, 2/1 Smith, 2/1 Eagle. I think he meant 3/1 Smith and Eagle or else he's actually a bookie running a 116.7% book with just three runners!
Is there any significance to the 3 way split in the labour party over the Trident vote? I don't understand why Corbyn is voting against but Thornberry and Lewis (both close allies) are saying to Abstain instead.
Is Corbyn really so incompotent that amongst his own Politburo there is a division over this? Corbynistas vs Thornberries
My understanding was it is still technically Labour policy to renew Trident, so I assumed Corbyn would speak against because that's what he believes and he won't modulate that, plus it will play well with plenty of members, while the people shadowing Foreign and Defence are trying to distract from the leader going against policy by running the old 'the vote is a trick, ignore it' tactic, and so Corbynistas cannot all be labelled as anti-Trident.
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
From what I recall, Ms Shah probably didn't think about what she was saying and didn't intend to offend. It's a choice between being crass and stupid or knowing what she was doing and malign. AFAIK genuinely the first, but maybe not easy to admit to being stupid if you are politician. Most of the rest of us are crass and stupid on occasion.
Mr. Pulpstar, er, by 'the contest' do you mean to be the rival to Corbyn on the ballot? Otherwise you'd appear to be suggesting they could win the membership vote yet not become leader.
The difference in the prices of Smith and Eagle does seem very odd. Eagle appears determined to stand and Nick Palmer, in response to a question from me, put the odds of the three contenders at Evens Corbyn, 2/1 Smith, 2/1 Eagle. I think he meant 3/1 Smith and Eagle or else he's actually a bookie running a 116.7% book with just three runners!
One possibility is not so much that Angela Eagle was good in the hustings, but that Owen Smith was relatively disappointing. That wouldn't be too surprising: it may be that MPs had been projecting too much on to him.
I'm green on both, but I haven't taken a big position.
Mr. Pulpstar, er, by 'the contest' do you mean to be the rival to Corbyn on the ballot? Otherwise you'd appear to be suggesting they could win the membership vote yet not become leader.
I think Pulps meant what he wrote... but perhaps he can explain what he has in mind
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
I don't want atrocities to be the grist to the mill for anyone, let alone parties with fascist antecedents. But that is what will happen - sadly - if the authorities don't deal with the issues properly. If fascists start taking charge in European countries, we will all be worse off - not just hated minorities. European history should have taught us that, at the very least.
France should learn from its colleagues in the UK security forces, who seem to work together closely and - so far since 2005 - it appears to work.
A recent R4 programme on it was presented by Peter Taylor, who clearly has extremely good sources in MI5. But I listened live & I can't find the link for others to listen to it online, sorry. Come on, BBC, why isn't it possible to search for it?
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
From what I recall, Ms Shah probably didn't think about what she was saying and didn't intend to offend. It's a choice between being crass and stupid or knowing what she was doing and malign. AFAIK genuinely the first, but maybe not easy to admit to being stupid if you are politician..
Particularly as politicians rarely extend the courtesy of accepting the 'they were just being stupid' defence if it is taken by their opponents. I can believe Shah was being stupid, not hateful. A factor in how much to forgive her would be whether she would forgive a political opponent making a similar stupid mistake.
Mr. Pulpstar, er, by 'the contest' do you mean to be the rival to Corbyn on the ballot? Otherwise you'd appear to be suggesting they could win the membership vote yet not become leader.
If Corbyn gets excluded by the courts from the contest, Eagle wins it but doesn't become leader - that is my best scenario right now (Though a hairy one betting wise). Unlikely but this is the Labour party we're gambling on.
Does anyone else think there could be non correlation between the contest and the next Labour leader markets or are these as perfect as "Next Tory leader"/ "Next PM" ?
My gut feeling is that Trump is unlikely to make it. The Republicans have only won the popular vote once and the electoral college twice since 1988(!). I don't think Trump is the candidate to change that. I think America will hold its nose and pick Hilary, by a similar margin to Barack Obama's first narrow victory (or "landslide" as the BBC described it) over McCain.
Incidentally, I'm in Chicago right now, meeting a fair few mostly college-educated friends, and I've yet to meet a single Trump supporter, or even someone who is relatively indifferent. And of all of them, those who have British friends say I'm the only person who voted Leave that they know. What OGH says about the affinities between Trump and Leave are borne out amongst my American friends. (Not that I'd vote Trump were I American as it happens).
White college-educated voters make up around a third of the American electorate (or at least they do according to an article I just read in Fortune.) Romney won 56% of them last time. But looking at polling, and just from talking to friends, from both parties, I don't see him doing as well.
he will fail badly with white graduates the question is can he make it up with wwc. Remember there only 40% of Americans hold degrees and many of them are two year degees, suspect there will be a huge split amongst two year and four year degree holders.
Remember also that turnout isn't likely to be much more than 60% and will be weighted towads higher income/education groups.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
I don't want atrocities to be the grist to the mill for anyone, let alone parties with fascist antecedents. But that is what will happen - sadly - if the authorities don't deal with the issues properly. If fascists start taking charge in European countries, we will all be worse off - not just hated minorities. European history should have taught us that, at the very least.
France should learn from its colleagues in the UK security forces, who seem to work together closely and - so far since 2005 - it appears to work.
A recent R4 programme on it was presented by Peter Taylor, who clearly has extremely good sources in MI5. But I listened live & I can't find the link for others to listen to it online, sorry. Come on, BBC, why isn't it possible to search for it?
Used to work with Peter Taylor a bit - he's a god in those circles. He came back out of retirement when the terrorism threat upped.
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
From what I recall, Ms Shah probably didn't think about what she was saying and didn't intend to offend. It's a choice between being crass and stupid or knowing what she was doing and malign. AFAIK genuinely the first, but maybe not easy to admit to being stupid if you are politician..
Particularly as politicians rarely extend the courtesy of accepting the 'they were just being stupid' defence if it is taken by their opponents. I can believe Shah was being stupid, not hateful. A factor in how much to forgive her would be whether she would forgive a political opponent making a similar stupid mistake.
A Owen Smith or A Eagle win the contest and are not next Labour leader B Or that they lose the contest and do become leader.
I think that A is bigger than B personally, although both are slim.
B is possible, if Corbyn is forced to stand down later, after a second win, for whatever reason.
I don't see how A works. If you win, you get to lead (not least because there's such a short period between declaration and taking up office).
Presumably there is some element of 'actuarial' risk with Corbyn (cf John Smith) - in which case presumably Watson becomes Leader pro-tem whilst the contest continues?
A Owen Smith or A Eagle win the contest and are not next Labour leader B Or that they lose the contest and do become leader.
I think that A is bigger than B personally, although both are slim.
I don't see how A is plausible or larger than B.
B I understand. Corbyn wins the contest, so there is no "next leader" yet and if Smith/A. Eagle win when Corbyn finally is replaced then the bet wins despite them losing this contest.
A though I don't understand. The winner of the contest automatically becomes the new leader, how do they realistically win the contest then not become leader?
Does reaction in Nice also betray a different, more southern temperament among the population there? I have no idea, but the south of France is a very different place to the north, where the big attacks have occurred up to now.
My gut feeling is that Trump is unlikely to make it. The Republicans have only won the popular vote once and the electoral college twice since 1988(!). I don't think Trump is the candidate to change that. I think America will hold its nose and pick Hilary, by a similar margin to Barack Obama's first narrow victory (or "landslide" as the BBC described it) over McCain.
Incidentally, I'm in Chicago right now, meeting a fair few mostly college-educated friends, and I've yet to meet a single Trump supporter, or even someone who is relatively indifferent. And of all of them, those who have British friends say I'm the only person who voted Leave that they know. What OGH says about the affinities between Trump and Leave are borne out amongst my American friends. (Not that I'd vote Trump were I American as it happens).
White college-educated voters make up around a third of the American electorate (or at least they do according to an article I just read in Fortune.) Romney won 56% of them last time. But looking at polling, and just from talking to friends, from both parties, I don't see him doing as well.
he will fail badly with white graduates the question is can he make it up with wwc. Remember there only 40% of Americans hold degrees and many of them are two year degees, suspect there will be a huge split amongst two year and four year degree holders.
Remember also that turnout isn't likely to be much more than 60% and will be weighted towads higher income/education groups.
Trump needs high turnout to win I think. If its over 65% I think he'll do it - but if its regular turnout then shoo in for Hillary.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
I don't want atrocities to be the grist to the mill for anyone, let alone parties with fascist antecedents. But that is what will happen - sadly - if the authorities don't deal with the issues properly. If fascists start taking charge in European countries, we will all be worse off - not just hated minorities. European history should have taught us that, at the very least.
France should learn from its colleagues in the UK security forces, who seem to work together closely and - so far since 2005 - it appears to work.
A recent R4 programme on it was presented by Peter Taylor, who clearly has extremely good sources in MI5. But I listened live & I can't find the link for others to listen to it online, sorry. Come on, BBC, why isn't it possible to search for it?
Does reaction in Nice also betray a different, more southern temperament among the population there? I have no idea, but the south of France is a very different place to the north, where the big attacks have occurred up to now.
The Nicois are considered quite different to the rest of France, so I don't think their reactions can be classed as southern reactions.
I raised on the previous thread the fact that the murderer was a Tunisian who had come to France in 2005. Why was he let in? An unskilled Tunisian? What possible skills did he bring that could not be found amongst the many EU citizens already available to work in France?
That woman may be railing wrongly against Schengen but she is right to rail against governments who have failed in their most elementary duty: to determine who is let into the country, in what numbers and that those who are let in are an asset to the country they are joining.
Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? It's not as if terrorism was unknown in 2005, even in France.
That woman's cry is a cry of pain and rage against authorities who have allowed a country's hospitality and openness to be abused and the price is paid in the crushed bodies of children on a sea front in summer.
I'm sure the authorities will believe that the answer lies in "More Europe."
As I've been saying on pb, since about 2005 (literally), mass immigration from Muslim countries should end, tonight - especially migration from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Bangladesh, Saudi, etc.
Lebanese industrialists and Qatari billionaires, hoping to invest - fine. No one else. We do not need it. So stop it.
PB-ers used to label me a horrible bigot for espousing this. Hear less of that, now.
I finally watched the C4 docu What Muslims Really Think a couple of days ago.
The intv with the Yemeni professor really made an impact on me. She was clearly shocked that the type of Islam taught in many areas of British life was way beyond what she'd consider normal in her own homeland. She was astonished that we tolerate such a hardline alternative culture. Quite an eye-opener.
And suddenly the Smith vs Eagle battle is back on again after a strong performance by Eagle at PLP hustings.
Why is the candidate being selected on the basis of who can speak best to a room of MPs? It's still useful but a bit 19th century in terms of a leaders' skillset.
Does reaction in Nice also betray a different, more southern temperament among the population there? I have no idea, but the south of France is a very different place to the north, where the big attacks have occurred up to now.
The FN poll very well there amongst the indigines. Lots of pied noir there.
And suddenly the Smith vs Eagle battle is back on again after a strong performance by Eagle at PLP hustings.
Why is the candidate being selected on the basis of who can speak best to a room of MPs? It's still useful but a bit 19th century in terms of a leaders' skillset.
Aren't they trying to pick the best candidate to lead them within the HoC....
Miss Plato, I watched that, although I was less surprised than you by the findings.
The Twitter whining about Trevor Philips and his evil use of statistically sound methodology and cruel trickery of asking people what they think was equal parts amusing and ridiculous.
Mr. Pulpstar, that seems bloody long odds to me, to be honest.
But, as you say, this is the Labour Party we're discussing.
Edited extra bit: worth noting we're just six years away from when Labour had 13 years in office, including two landslide victories.
Equivalent of 2003 for the Conservatives, when the Quiet Man was here to stay and turning up the volume.
Mr Dancer - Within a week or so of that speech the Conservatives had defenestrated IDS. Labour have been attempting to ease Corbyn out for nearly a month and are doing more damage to the Labour Party than Corbyn.
I raised on the previous thread the fact that the murderer was a Tunisian who had come to France in 2005. Why was he let in? An unskilled Tunisian? What possible skills did he bring that could not be found amongst the many EU citizens already available to work in France?
That woman may be railing wrongly against Schengen but she is right to rail against governments who have failed in their most elementary duty: to determine who is let into the country, in what numbers and that those who are let in are an asset to the country they are joining.
Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? It's not as if terrorism was unknown in 2005, even in France.
That woman's cry is a cry of pain and rage against authorities who have allowed a country's hospitality and openness to be abused and the price is paid in the crushed bodies of children on a sea front in summer.
I'm sure the authorities will believe that the answer lies in "More Europe."
As I've been saying on pb, since about 2005 (literally), mass immigration from Muslim countries should end, tonight - especially migration from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Bangladesh, Saudi, etc.
Lebanese industrialists and Qatari billionaires, hoping to invest - fine. No one else. We do not need it. So stop it.
PB-ers used to label me a horrible bigot for espousing this. Hear less of that, now.
Political reality needs to start overtaking post colonial guilt and the common cultural memory of WWII - i.e. any form of cultural relativism means you're secretly a bit of a Nazi at heart.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
Jews aren't hated in France by native French people (outside a tiny mad minority). French Muslim anti-Semitism, yes, of course.
You are naïve. The FN have substantial support and anti-Semitism is a core part of their values. The Jews in France are mainly outsiders who moved there less than 100 years ago from North Africa and the Middle East. They would fear a President Le Pen.
Is there any significance to the 3 way split in the labour party over the Trident vote? I don't understand why Corbyn is voting against but Thornberry and Lewis (both close allies) are saying to Abstain instead.
Is Corbyn really so incompotent that amongst his own Politburo there is a division over this? Corbynistas vs Thornberries
My understanding was it is still technically Labour policy to renew Trident, so I assumed Corbyn would speak against because that's what he believes and he won't modulate that, plus it will play well with plenty of members, while the people shadowing Foreign and Defence are trying to distract from the leader going against policy by running the old 'the vote is a trick, ignore it' tactic, and so Corbynistas cannot all be labelled as anti-Trident.
Yes that could well be the reasoning behind it - I think they'd have been better off to just all vote against though. There are serious arguments to be made in favour of scrapping trident (though I personally support renewal), and everyone believes they support scrapping it anyway, so don't see how they benefit from abstaining.
Abstaining rarely works, think of Harman's abstaining on the welfare bill, it looks cowardly. Once again it will be left to the SNP to provide a clear opposition to the Tories (the Lib Dems too, but they don't get enough visibility)
And suddenly the Smith vs Eagle battle is back on again after a strong performance by Eagle at PLP hustings.
Why is the candidate being selected on the basis of who can speak best to a room of MPs? It's still useful but a bit 19th century in terms of a leaders' skillset.
Aren't they trying to pick the best candidate to lead them within the HoC....
God knows what they're trying to do. They ought to be picking the best candidate to win the next election, who is capable of beating Corbyn in a leadership ballot. An effective leader in the country (the real country, not the Labour Party), will have authority with the PLP anyway.
Sooner or later some European country or other is going to make limiting Islamic immigration a part of its official policy. The big problem is that with free movement inside the EU, the only border which really counts is the overall external border of the EU. The one where a gazillion boat people pitch up from May to October each year or simply walk in through utterly under-policed land borders. Or where Frau Merkel decides to let Aleppo move to Frankfurt. The EU as a political body is simply not capable of making a decision to police the external borders properly. So....civil war within the EU looks much more likely first:
Both my Labour leadership and POTUS books are of a similiar value - the big difference is that I have "someone else" for Labour +ve and for POTUS at a reasonable -ve.
Much more likely to be "someone else" with Labour I suspect.
"Labour MPs impressed by both Eagle and Smith". according to George Eaton.
Does that say something about Labour MPs?
I could wander onto the stage at a PLP meeting as a leadership candidate and, after having consumed three pints of lager, just belch a long 'breeeeeaaasts' into the microphone, before walking off again, and Labour MPs would be impressed.
A Owen Smith or A Eagle win the contest and are not next Labour leader B Or that they lose the contest and do become leader.
I think that A is bigger than B personally, although both are slim.
B is possible, if Corbyn is forced to stand down later, after a second win, for whatever reason.
I don't see how A works. If you win, you get to lead (not least because there's such a short period between declaration and taking up office).
Presumably there is some element of 'actuarial' risk with Corbyn (cf John Smith) - in which case presumably Watson becomes Leader pro-tem whilst the contest continues?
I don't think bookies usually pay out on interim leaders (eg Beckett, Harman in the past), unless they're elected leader in their own right.
Does reaction in Nice also betray a different, more southern temperament among the population there? I have no idea, but the south of France is a very different place to the north, where the big attacks have occurred up to now.
I haven't noticed the same kind of anger in Paris, more a sort of numbed sadness - people don't seem to want to talk about it , in contrast with Charlie Hebdo and Bataclan where people everywhere were talking about it for weeks. I'll caveat that by saying that it's just my personal impression and haven't been explicitly canvassing opinion so I could be wide of the mark here!
I raised on the previous thread the fact that the murderer was a Tunisian who had come to France in 2005. Why was he let in? An unskilled Tunisian? What possible skills did he bring that could not be found amongst the many EU citizens already available to work in France?
That woman may be railing wrongly against Schengen but she is right to rail against governments who have failed in their most elementary duty: to determine who is let into the country, in what numbers and that those who are let in are an asset to the country they are joining.
Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? It's not as if terrorism was unknown in 2005, even in France.
That woman's cry is a cry of pain and rage against authorities who have allowed a country's hospitality and openness to be abused and the price is paid in the crushed bodies of children on a sea front in summer.
I'm sure the authorities will believe that the answer lies in "More Europe."
As I've been saying on pb, since about 2005 (literally), mass immigration from Muslim countries should end, tonight - especially migration from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Bangladesh, Saudi, etc.
Lebanese industrialists and Qatari billionaires, hoping to invest - fine. No one else. We do not need it. So stop it.
PB-ers used to label me a horrible bigot for espousing this. Hear less of that, now.
I have agreed with you, independently, since, oh, let's take 9th September 2001 as the baseline. We are just a Beslan or two away from the election of governments in Western Europe that will persecute their muslim minorities. I find the prospect terrifying but if things go on like this that's where we will be at. I will lay most of the blame at the feet of liberals who have waved their hands about this cancer in our midst. They will be the first shouting for draconian action when the final line is crossed.
Mr. Jim, quite. The Parliamentary Labour Party's coup is not yet notable for speed or success.
However, they may beat Corbyn in the forthcoming contest. We shall see.
Mr Dancer any coup needs to obviously succeed or fail quickly. So far the PLP coup against Corbyn has neither succeeded nor failed and probably cannot definitely succeed from here. It's a mess.
Mr. 2013, we saw that 'liberal left' volte-face during the 2011 riots/looting in London when Simon Hughes et al. suddenly became fans of hard-line policing.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
Jews aren't hated in France by native French people (outside a tiny mad minority). French Muslim anti-Semitism, yes, of course.
You are naïve. The FN have substantial support and anti-Semitism is a core part of their values. The Jews in France are mainly outsiders who moved there less than 100 years ago from North Africa and the Middle East. They would fear a President Le Pen.
I disagree completely. I know France quite well, and have a fair number of French friends.
The old style French anti-Semitism of Jean Marie le Pen is fast diminishing to a tiny hardcore. This is in part because the clear and present danger of radical Islam is occupying the mental space reserved for "the Other". The enemy is obvious, and it is not Jews.
I agree. The 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' mentality also applies. I suspect many white Christian or secular French will see Jews as natural allies in a cultural fight with Islam. The reaction in Nice suggests Mossad would be more popular than their own security service efforts right now!
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One.
half of that statement is right
I've said racist unguarded comments in the past. But I'm not a racist.
You are also not an MP (I assume).
MP's make mistakes too.
I'm sure she and her Labour colleagues would be very understanding and forgiving if someone not in their party tried to make a similar distinction/mea non culpa
Too much to hope, I suppose, for the interviewer to have asked her why - if she was not an anti-Semite - she chose to send out this particular material. Did she not think about what it was saying and what she was saying about her views by sending it?
The Tower is a biased source - some may consider it a pro-Zionist rag.
I don't understand why Naz Shah needed to apologise. Many people consider that one plausible solution to the Zionist problem is creation of an Islamic state in the whole of Palestine, with those for whom this would create problems evacuated to the main country that backs the Zionist entity. It is a valid point of view, but not one I share.
Does reaction in Nice also betray a different, more southern temperament among the population there? I have no idea, but the south of France is a very different place to the north, where the big attacks have occurred up to now.
Is the south of France their Lincolnshire I wonder ? Where UKIP got many Cllrs elected. Not that I think ukip is the same as FN. And from Boston UKIP grew to a national force in 2013.
So whilst Provence is not representative yet it could come to be.
Given that Wales voted Leave I'm not massively sympathetic. Scotland/NI have a stronger case given they voted Remain. I think with Brexit people need to understand the consequences.
Given that Wales voted Leave I'm not massively sympathetic. Scotland/NI have a stronger case given they voted Remain. I think with Brexit people need to understand the consequences.
I do think questions about replacement funding are ones that the government has to start answering pretty soon.
Imagine 3 major attacks in the UK in space of 18 months, plus other "minor" acts of terrorism
It doesn;t help if you subsequently tell citizens to 'live with it'
That was the most extraordinary quote. I can kind of see what he was trying to say: there is no quick fix, it's a generational problem, we will endure - but the timing was grotesque and his phrasing (even in French) was ineffably stupid.
No wonder they hate him. And Hollande.
The overwhelming air of despair and defeatism is tangible. Pleas for more reservists as the current base is exhausted, only c100 police turning out to cover 30k Bastille crowd size, talk of awful morale and demoralised security service staff.
I don't blame them - this has been going on for months and months. And they're losing too often as far as Joe Public is concerned.
All the empty gestures and rhetoric are now completely threadbare as a response.
I raised on the previous thread the fact that the murderer was a Tunisian who had come to France in 2005. Why was he let in? An unskilled Tunisian? What possible skills did he bring that could not be found amongst the many EU citizens already available to work in France?
That woman may be railing wrongly against Schengen but she is right to rail against governments who have failed in their most elementary duty: to determine who is let into the country, in what numbers and that those who are let in are an asset to the country they are joining.
Sure many terrorists are French citizens but they are so because their parents were let in. So the question still arises: if this is what happens to the next generation of those coming from certain areas of the world, should we continue to let such people in? It's not as if terrorism was unknown in 2005, even in France.
That woman's cry is a cry of pain and rage against authorities who have allowed a country's hospitality and openness to be abused and the price is paid in the crushed bodies of children on a sea front in summer.
I'm sure the authorities will believe that the answer lies in "More Europe."
As I've been saying on pb, since about 2005 (literally), mass immigration from Muslim countries should end, tonight - especially migration from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Bangladesh, Saudi, etc.
Lebanese industrialists and Qatari billionaires, hoping to invest - fine. No one else. We do not need it. So stop it.
PB-ers used to label me a horrible bigot for espousing this. Hear less of that, now.
At some point, the French people will choose a president who will give the hated Jews and Muslims a good kicking. All these atrocities are grist to the mill for Marine Le Pen.
Jews aren't hated in France by native French people (outside a tiny mad minority). French Muslim anti-Semitism, yes, of course.
You are naïve. The FN have substantial support and anti-Semitism is a core part of their values. The Jews in France are mainly outsiders who moved there less than 100 years ago from North Africa and the Middle East. They would fear a President Le Pen.
I disagree completely. I know France quite well, and have a fair number of French friends.
The old style French anti-Semitism of Jean Marie le Pen is fast diminishing to a tiny hardcore. This is in part because the clear and present danger of radical Islam is occupying the mental space reserved for "the Other". The enemy is obvious, and it is not Jews.
MLP has made great strides towards detoxifying the anti-semitism of the FN (and once her dad dies it will be a lot easier). 2017 too early for it but by 2022 it's possible people will no longer associate it with the FN. Her rallying cry is defending the secular state, and saying how radical Islam is incompatible with that. She's accepted/supported gay marriage to contrast with radical Islam homophobia (in fact I read a while ago she is very popular amongst French LGBT community now). her niece, Marion, is a more old style ultra Catholic type in the mound of Le Pen senior.
Comments
And it was written by Jon Stokes. Are you sure you've read it?
Incidentally - on this whole topic - this article: http://www.thetower.org/article/the-holocaust-the-left-and-the-return-of-hate/ - is a very interesting read.
State by state turnout.
Worst is Hawaii, best Michigan.
IPC improvements and power efficiency are going to rule the roost. It leaves AMD in a very tough situation as they are going to depend on other fab processes and they don't have the same engineering expertise to extract maximum IPC performance. Look at the latest Zen rumours, everything seems to be going badly. They might well be bankrupt if it wasn't for the success of the PS4.
So far, the evidence is not fully encouraging.
The political mainstream and excessive sensitivity was what prevented Rotherham's rape scandal being stopped much sooner, as well as the implications for wider social cohesion and terrorism. If genuine concerns aren't addressed by mainstream politicians then people will vote for those beyond the mainstream.
Mr. T, depends a lot on whether there are more attacks, and their timing, nature and success. Entirely possible attacks will be attempted to try and aid le Pen [obviously not accusing her of collusion], so that she gets in, cracks down, more resentment, more recruitment, more attacks.
Maajid Nawaz is spot on. Those who say there is no connection between Islam and these attacks are as deluded as people claiming the Crusades had nothing to do with Christianity.
Edited extra bit: meant to add: and politicians need to just acknowledge reality, even if it is uncomfortable. Otherwise, voters will, rightly, feel like they're being taken for fools.
Didn't work for Cameron with his wonderful renegotiation and won't work for terrorism.
For all fearful Remainers.
"There are bad times just around the corner"
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lCZCv98XKFs&feature=youtu.be
And suddenly the Smith vs Eagle battle is back on again after a strong performance by Eagle at PLP hustings.
"And there's no use whining
About a silver lining.."
Angela Eagle 20.07 £10.00 (Leadership contest)
https://twitter.com/TennentsLager/status/755024963661340672
It is a mark of how times have changed that questions like this are now being considered seriously, as opposed to being buried under a torrent of vilification from the left.
Does that say something about Labour MPs?
We must hope Eagle gets on the ballot. It's vital for democracy, equality, and to my pecuniary advantage.
A Owen Smith or A Eagle win the contest and are not next Labour leader
B Or that they lose the contest and do become leader.
I think that A is bigger than B personally, although both are slim.
I'm green on both, but I haven't taken a big position.
Labour MPs impressed by dancing frog.
A recent R4 programme on it was presented by Peter Taylor, who clearly has extremely good sources in MI5. But I listened live & I can't find the link for others to listen to it online, sorry. Come on, BBC, why isn't it possible to search for it?
I don't see how A works. If you win, you get to lead (not least because there's such a short period between declaration and taking up office).
Does anyone else think there could be non correlation between the contest and the next Labour leader markets or are these as perfect as "Next Tory leader"/ "Next PM" ?
B I understand. Corbyn wins the contest, so there is no "next leader" yet and if Smith/A. Eagle win when Corbyn finally is replaced then the bet wins despite them losing this contest.
A though I don't understand. The winner of the contest automatically becomes the new leader, how do they realistically win the contest then not become leader?
Do you think we will ever see a UK government with a nation-by-nation immigration policy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36803542
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07dwznx
But, as you say, this is the Labour Party we're discussing.
Edited extra bit: worth noting we're just six years away from when Labour had 13 years in office, including two landslide victories.
Equivalent of 2003 for the Conservatives, when the Quiet Man was here to stay and turning up the volume.
The intv with the Yemeni professor really made an impact on me. She was clearly shocked that the type of Islam taught in many areas of British life was way beyond what she'd consider normal in her own homeland. She was astonished that we tolerate such a hardline alternative culture. Quite an eye-opener.
https://twitter.com/JaneyGodley/status/754388304922079232
The Twitter whining about Trevor Philips and his evil use of statistically sound methodology and cruel trickery of asking people what they think was equal parts amusing and ridiculous.
I suspect that is now starting to happen.
Abstaining rarely works, think of Harman's abstaining on the welfare bill, it looks cowardly. Once again it will be left to the SNP to provide a clear opposition to the Tories (the Lib Dems too, but they don't get enough visibility)
Sooner or later some European country or other is going to make limiting Islamic immigration a part of its official policy. The big problem is that with free movement inside the EU, the only border which really counts is the overall external border of the EU. The one where a gazillion boat people pitch up from May to October each year or simply walk in through utterly under-policed land borders. Or where Frau Merkel decides to let Aleppo move to Frankfurt. The EU as a political body is simply not capable of making a decision to police the external borders properly. So....civil war within the EU looks much more likely first:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-18/frances-homeland-security-chief-re-warns-feckless-hollande-nation-verge-civil-war
However, they may beat Corbyn in the forthcoming contest. We shall see.
Much more likely to be "someone else" with Labour I suspect.
That says something about Jeremy Corbyn.
Not if Trump gets there first. He was dismissed as a dangerous lunatic. Now?
As always though, check the terms of each bet.
Imagine 3 major attacks in the UK in space of 18 months, plus other "minor" acts of terrorism
We are in a war whether we know it or not.
Europe needs to wake up fast.
Still, Merkel has a plan........ oh shit
It doesn;t help if you subsequently tell citizens to 'live with it'
I don't understand why Naz Shah needed to apologise. Many people consider that one plausible solution to the Zionist problem is creation of an Islamic state in the whole of Palestine, with those for whom this would create problems evacuated to the main country that backs the Zionist entity. It is a valid point of view, but not one I share.
http://tinyurl.com/jrewrtv
So whilst Provence is not representative yet it could come to be.
I don't blame them - this has been going on for months and months. And they're losing too often as far as Joe Public is concerned.
All the empty gestures and rhetoric are now completely threadbare as a response.
To think Ed Miliband saw Hollande's government as a model.