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.
Pied Noir is a key to the whole thing. To understand what this is all about you have to know the History of Algeria.
Basically, imagine if South Africa had been declared an integral part of the UK in 1930 (and had Rhodesian style short of apartheid instituionalised discrimination including in who is allowed to vote) and that the black people were muslims.
Imagine then that what happened in Rhodesia in the 1970s (with the bush war and horrible massacres by both sides) had happened on a much bigger scale in South Africa in the 1950s and then in 1962 the UK had given in and given them independence.
And that immediately after independence the whites (equivalent of pied noirs) - over a milion of them and an equal amount of black and mixed race people (with links to the old regime) had fled to the UK virtually overnight to escape a vengeful Zanu-pf.
And that most of the black and mixed race people were housed in banlieues upon arrival in the UK which in some ways were little better than townships like Soweto. And that they had had more children than indigenous population and there were about 4 million, mostly poor, few jobs and still regarded as Kaffirs by many of the indidgenous population.
That is France today.
I'd say that the FLN's victory was one of the worst things to have ever happened. The ruling group in pre 5th Republic Algeria were not your classic colonial overlords. Algeria was not a French colony. It was a Department of the French Republic. The FLN were/are your classic Maoist/kleptocratic reavers. You don't see much in the way of islamist insurgency in Algeria since they crushed/co-opted the GIS in the 90s. Some of the most black-hearted men in the world rule the roost there.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
"I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support."
Citation please.
"I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon."
Citation please.
"Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country?"
You might, if that country would develop them anyway, you trust them, and this means extra moolah for your industry.
I've just watched May's replay to the SNP question about "would she kill trillions of babies", and the her timing of her one word answer YES is immaculate. She pauses, deliberately, for a measured moment, to give it maximum effect.
I hate to say it, but that exchange was Thatcher-esque. She should have sat down after the YES to make it even more impressive, but nonetheless: not a bad start.
It's actually helpful for the SNP to have asked the question so bluntly. High minded talk aside, that's what the deterrent comes down to, acknowledging that many many people would die if it were ever used, and are we willing to do that. Honourable people will disagree on whether we should be, but that did cut to the heart of things.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
We have been through this before. In what way is the UK nuclear deterrent not independent? Where is the back door?
There's no point. Some people are flat earthers on this subject. Save your breath.
Apparently, the fact that Apple can lock iPhones means the yanks can prevent us from launching Trident.
That was the argument.
And we don't have PAL on our nukes.
I have one advantage in this debate. I used to work for an intelligence service. Hearing muggles pronounce on this is fucking tedious. The counter argument is simple. We don't buy anything foreign without carrying out mind-numbingly thorough assurance work. Whether its Watchkeeper or Trident, doesn't matter.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Corbyn is having the occasional stumble, looking irritated at times, but he's honestly not been that bad. When he gets a chance to flow, his obvious sincerity and simplicity, a simplicity many yearn for on such issues, can be effective.
I see Bercow was having some fun with his latest intervention. Probably the only thing that gets him through these debates.
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.
Pied Noir is a key to the whole thing. To understand what this is all about you have to know the History of Algeria.
Basically, imagine if South Africa had been declared an integral part of the UK in 1930 (and had Rhodesian style short of apartheid instituionalised discrimination including in who is allowed to vote) and that the black people were muslims.
Imagine then that what happened in Rhodesia in the 1970s (with the bush war and horrible massacres by both sides) had happened on a much bigger scale in South Africa in the 1950s and then in 1962 the UK had given in and given them independence.
And that immediately after independence the whites (equivalent of pied noirs) - over a milion of them and an equal amount of black and mixed race people (with links to the old regime) had fled to the UK virtually overnight to escape a vengeful Zanu-pf.
And that most of the black and mixed race people were housed in banlieues upon arrival in the UK which in some ways were little better than townships like Soweto. And that they had had more children than indigenous population and there were about 4 million, mostly poor, few jobs and still regarded as Kaffirs by many of the indidgenous population.
That is France today.
I'd say that the FLN's victory was one of the worst things to have ever happened. The ruling group in pre 5th Republic Algeria were not your classic colonial overlords. Algeria was not a French colony. It was a Department of the French Republic. The FLN were/are your classic Maoist/kleptocratic reavers. You don't see much in the way of islamist insurgency in Algeria since the crushed/co-opted the GIS in the 90s. Some of the most black-hearted men in the world rule the roost there.
Hence why I compared the FLN with the maoist zanu-pf and pre independence Algeria with the more paternalistic Rhodesian government than the hardline apartheidists.
Unfortunately the 4 million or descendants of the million black and mix raced people who fled to France after the FLN victory are second class disaffected citizens so ripe for exploitation by islamonutters.
How on earth can this state of affairs continue in labour - they must be heading for a split
You'd assume so, but I'd bet against it personally. If defeated even more fully, I see it as more likely Lab MPs would simply not fight deselection rather than break from beloved Labour. After all, if Corbyn wins, its because the members want him, and therefore the 'problem' is not Corbyn but tens of thousands of members.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
We have been through this before. In what way is the UK nuclear deterrent not independent? Where is the back door?
There's no point. Some people are flat earthers on this subject. Save your breath.
Apparently, the fact that Apple can lock iPhones means the yanks can prevent us from launching Trident.
That was the argument.
And we don't have PAL on our nukes.
I have one advantage in this debate. I used to work for an intelligence service. Hearing muggles pronounce on this is fucking tedious. The counter argument is simple. We don't buy anything foreign without carrying out mind-numbingly thorough assurance work. Whether its Watchkeeper or Trident, doesn't matter.
It's almost as if the Navy aren't totally stupid? Who'd have thought we'd have exports checking this stuff.
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 listened to that programme broadcast on Friday morning last. The most staggering statement from the programme was that the heads of the EU states had never met previously to January 2016 and there was a complete lack of coordination of information. This affected all levels and where a person was known to one state this was not passed onto another state.
Remain told us that we were more secure in Europe but that plainly was not the case. Irrespective this mis management of essential information is an absolute scandal.
How on earth can this state of affairs continue in labour - they must be heading for a split
You'd assume so, but I'd bet against it personally. If defeated even more fully, I see it as more likely Lab MPs would simply not fight deselection rather than break from beloved Labour. After all, if Corbyn wins, its because the members want him, and therefore the 'problem' is not Corbyn but tens of thousands of members.
Stuff all the bad news and stories of deceit, murder and the like. I bring you tidings of great joy! The Gresham College Catalogue for 2016/17 turned up in the post this morning.
For those that don't know Gresham College was founded in 1597 to provide free education to the denizens of London in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, history, philosophy and so forth. The College now discharges its function by providing free lectures by very clever people on said subjects to anyone who wants to turn up (though for some lectures it is sensible to book a seat in advance).
Just quickly browsing through the catalogue this year looks like hosting a bumper crop. Who could resist "Curves in Honour of Leibniz'a Tercentenary"? How about The Port of London, history and future", or "the Challenge of Big Data - a mathematical perspective", "Did Sir Walter Scott invent Scotland?", or "The expanding Universe". and much, much more.
If you don't know Gresham College and are in striking distance of London I commend it to you.
How on earth can this state of affairs continue in labour - they must be heading for a split
You'd assume so, but I'd bet against it personally. If defeated even more fully, I see it as more likely Lab MPs would simply not fight deselection rather than break from beloved Labour. After all, if Corbyn wins, its because the members want him, and therefore the 'problem' is not Corbyn but tens of thousands of members.
Hundreds of thousands of members.
I was going to put that, but I wasn't sure of the current membership total, and therefore if he won, say, 65% of it, whether that would reach 100000.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
How on earth can this state of affairs continue in labour - they must be heading for a split
You'd assume so, but I'd bet against it personally. If defeated even more fully, I see it as more likely Lab MPs would simply not fight deselection rather than break from beloved Labour. After all, if Corbyn wins, its because the members want him, and therefore the 'problem' is not Corbyn but tens of thousands of members.
Hundreds of thousands of members.
But not voters who will ever give this labour party power - turned into a protest party of the far left
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
We have been through this before. In what way is the UK nuclear deterrent not independent? Where is the back door?
There's no point. Some people are flat earthers on this subject. Save your breath.
Apparently, the fact that Apple can lock iPhones means the yanks can prevent us from launching Trident.
That was the argument.
And we don't have PAL on our nukes.
I have one advantage in this debate. I used to work for an intelligence service. Hearing muggles pronounce on this is fucking tedious. The counter argument is simple. We don't buy anything foreign without carrying out mind-numbingly thorough assurance work. Whether its Watchkeeper or Trident, doesn't matter.
It's almost as if the Navy aren't totally stupid? Who'd have thought we'd have exports checking this stuff.
The motto is 'Trust, but verify'. Opponents of Trident assume that the UK defence establishment are credulous morons. We don't have the defence industrial base that we used to, so we've had to establish assurance programs for pretty much everything we source. The same applies to the US - we're all trying to use COTS in defence applications.
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 listened to that programme broadcast on Friday morning last. The most staggering statement from the programme was that the heads of the EU states had never met previously to January 2016 and there was a complete lack of coordination of information. This affected all levels and where a person was known to one state this was not passed onto another state.
Remain told us that we were more secure in Europe but that plainly was not the case. Irrespective this mis management of essential information is an absolute scandal.
Not only that, the French spent a great deal of time and effort trying to scupper US UK intelligence alliances. Primarily because the yanks won't trust the French.
Surely *nobody* takes Rasmussen seriously? Even Republicans are sick of the unhelpful delusions of closeness their shitstack-awful methods are designed to elicit.
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 listened to that programme broadcast on Friday morning last. The most staggering statement from the programme was that the heads of the EU states had never met previously to January 2016 and there was a complete lack of coordination of information. This affected all levels and where a person was known to one state this was not passed onto another state.
Remain told us that we were more secure in Europe but that plainly was not the case. Irrespective this mis management of essential information is an absolute scandal.
Not only that, the French spent a great deal of time and effort trying to scupper US UK intelligence alliances. Primarily because the yanks won't trust the French.
The French were denied entry into the "Five Eyes" intelligence sharing agreement on that basis.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
Very incisive, I really ought to pay more attention to your posts than I do.
Mr. Owls, not a Corbyn fan (as you may have noticed) but it does seem a shambles. The site going down, the bizarre retroactive prevention of voting (those joining in January this year and later would've had no idea there'd be another leadership contest), it's indefensible.
But, what happens if it goes ahead as planned and Eagle or Smith win? Isn't that game over for Corbyn as the PLP will cling desperately to the new leader?
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
I can only assume Miss Austen was a unilateralist and I've misunderstood Pride and Prejudice all these years thinking it was just about sex.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
Very incisive, I really ought to pay more attention to your posts than I do.
Your list had not one fact in it, what you believe is not a fact. Give me some facts and I will reply to them. But not really expecting much.
Early days but May's first performance comes across as awkward though that is comparing it to Cameron who was a master at the despatch box so perhaps unfair. Time to grow into it though.
May's Major. Grey, inexplicable and useless.
Point of order. Major wasn't useless: with the significant exception of Maastricht, he was a pretty competent PM. By 1997 the UK had enjoyed years of continued growth under his leadership, the deficit was shrunk, unemployment was low, so much so, the Civil Service famously told Gordon Brown, when he entered Number 11, that he had inherited a "golden economic legacy"
To which he replied, "What do you want me to do, send them a fucking thankyou letter?"
There's a lot to be said for dull competence, especially at the moment. I'd be very happy if the UK returned to, say, 1996, when our main worry was the Cones Hotline.
The Cones Hotline presaged a lot of the "smart cities" and "responsive government" stuff we get today. Before widespread internet adoption, it was an idea slightly ahead of its time.
Looking at the Corbyn shambles this afternoon in the Commons, I suspect that what will end up happening is that he will win the leadership election again but then the unions (minus Unite) will find a way to engineer him out of the position. What a complete mess.
How on earth can a party leader speak out directly against party policy that was agreed by Conference?
Corbyn will clearly only advocate policies he agrees with and is not capable of any kind of compromise.
I've just watched May's replay to the SNP question about "would she kill trillions of babies", and the her timing of her one word answer YES is immaculate. She pauses, deliberately, for a measured moment, to give it maximum effect.
I hate to say it, but that exchange was Thatcher-esque. She should have sat down after the YES to make it even more impressive, but nonetheless: not a bad start.
It's actually helpful for the SNP to have asked the question so bluntly. High minded talk aside, that's what the deterrent comes down to, acknowledging that many many people would die if it were ever used, and are we willing to do that. Honourable people will disagree on whether we should be, but that did cut to the heart of things.
Would a nuclear war head on the end of our missiles kill hundreds of thousands?
Anyhoo no point building a detterent if you are not happy to use it.
Worth noting that the 1 million pied noirs (European settlers in Algeria originally from France) who fled at independence comprised 10% of the entire population of Algeria at the time and the majority of the population in cities such as Algiers.
Virtually the entire 130,000 Jewish population also fled to france.
Roughly 1 million indigenous Algerians emigrated to France between independence in 1962 and 1975.
By the 1990s, approximately 50% of algerian immigrants were unemployed with the rest mostly doing travaux penibles jobs (crappy jobs the French don't want to do)
When France conquered Algeria in 1830 they confiscated the land and handed it to the settlers dispossessing the indigenous Algerians (another parallel with Rhodesia)
for anyone interested, "The Agony of Algeria" on Google Books is worth looking at
I fear France is a powderkeg and could go the same way Northern Ireland did in the 1960s on a gigantic scale. I hope the UK are working out what to do about the possibility of a French Refugee Crisis on our doorstep before too long.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
I've just watched May's replay to the SNP question about "would she kill trillions of babies", and the her timing of her one word answer YES is immaculate. She pauses, deliberately, for a measured moment, to give it maximum effect.
I hate to say it, but that exchange was Thatcher-esque. She should have sat down after the YES to make it even more impressive, but nonetheless: not a bad start.
It's actually helpful for the SNP to have asked the question so bluntly. High minded talk aside, that's what the deterrent comes down to, acknowledging that many many people would die if it were ever used, and are we willing to do that. Honourable people will disagree on whether we should be, but that did cut to the heart of things.
Would a nuclear war head on the end of our missiles kill hundreds of thousands?
Anyhoo no point building a detterent if you are not happy to use it.
I've just watched May's replay to the SNP question about "would she kill trillions of babies", and the her timing of her one word answer YES is immaculate. She pauses, deliberately, for a measured moment, to give it maximum effect.
I hate to say it, but that exchange was Thatcher-esque. She should have sat down after the YES to make it even more impressive, but nonetheless: not a bad start.
It's actually helpful for the SNP to have asked the question so bluntly. High minded talk aside, that's what the deterrent comes down to, acknowledging that many many people would die if it were ever used, and are we willing to do that. Honourable people will disagree on whether we should be, but that did cut to the heart of things.
Would a nuclear war head on the end of our missiles kill hundreds of thousands?
Anyhoo no point building a detterent if you are not happy to use it.
Depends where you let it off. Letting one of on the equivalent of your enemies Scottish Highlands or Dartmoor as a warning would likely be a first strike.
Stuff all the bad news and stories of deceit, murder and the like. I bring you tidings of great joy! The Gresham College Catalogue for 2016/17 turned up in the post this morning.
For those that don't know Gresham College was founded in 1597 to provide free education to the denizens of London in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, history, philosophy and so forth. The College now discharges its function by providing free lectures by very clever people on said subjects to anyone who wants to turn up (though for some lectures it is sensible to book a seat in advance).
Just quickly browsing through the catalogue this year looks like hosting a bumper crop. Who could resist "Curves in Honour of Leibniz'a Tercentenary"? How about The Port of London, history and future", or "the Challenge of Big Data - a mathematical perspective", "Did Sir Walter Scott invent Scotland?", or "The expanding Universe". and much, much more.
If you don't know Gresham College and are in striking distance of London I commend it to you.
I've just watched May's replay to the SNP question about "would she kill trillions of babies", and the her timing of her one word answer YES is immaculate. She pauses, deliberately, for a measured moment, to give it maximum effect.
I hate to say it, but that exchange was Thatcher-esque. She should have sat down after the YES to make it even more impressive, but nonetheless: not a bad start.
It's actually helpful for the SNP to have asked the question so bluntly. High minded talk aside, that's what the deterrent comes down to, acknowledging that many many people would die if it were ever used, and are we willing to do that. Honourable people will disagree on whether we should be, but that did cut to the heart of things.
Would a nuclear war head on the end of our missiles kill hundreds of thousands?
Anyhoo no point building a detterent if you are not happy to use it.
Depending on warhead, the yield can be anywhere from 100kt to 475kt. Answer: yes.
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
Yes we had a lot of that on this site ahead of the EU referendum.
@faisalislam: Herman Hauser helped create Arm Holdings - one of the architects of Silicon Fen... interesting that he says this: https://t.co/dLf6L8Oz07
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 listened to that programme broadcast on Friday morning last. The most staggering statement from the programme was that the heads of the EU states had never met previously to January 2016 and there was a complete lack of coordination of information. This affected all levels and where a person was known to one state this was not passed onto another state.
Remain told us that we were more secure in Europe but that plainly was not the case. Irrespective this mis management of essential information is an absolute scandal.
Not only that, the French spent a great deal of time and effort trying to scupper US UK intelligence alliances. Primarily because the yanks won't trust the French.
The French were denied entry into the "Five Eyes" intelligence sharing agreement on that basis.
And quite right too. Mr, Max. Nobody trusts the Frogs.
I remember that in the run up to Gulf War1 the French defence minister was a senior member of the Franco-Iranian Friendship Society. Yet he still wanted France to be included in the planning of the take back of Kuwait (they weren't).
On average, how well do serious US election polls compare with British ones?
Five Thirty-Eight's poll averages, combined with other factors they take into account, are currently rating a Trump win at 35-37%. The Betfair market says 29%.
The Real Clear Politics average puts Trump 3% behind Clinton in a two-way fight. Unfortunately they only let Stein enter the picture in a four-way contest. But Stein's vote-share may exceed Johnson's. Trump's "Nixonian" helper Roger Stone has on a number of occasions said how much he likes Sanders. Of course he's stopped now that Sanders has endorsed Clinton, but he'll probably take the line that the only honourable thing for Sanders supporters to do if they don't want to "sell out" (those who don't vote Trump!) is to vote Stein. Johnson may be doing well in the polls, but the libertarians are unlikely to be able to portray Trump very successfully - famous businessman that he is - as a man of the state rather than a man of the market.
A portion of the electorate may decide to vote Trump at the last moment, but I'm sceptical about the existence of large hordes of "shy Trumpers". I reckon if Trump does win, he will have climbed steadily in the polls prior to election day, to at least 47-48% and perhaps to a much higher figure. He's such a big mouth - and he's learnt how to contort his mouth aggressively for the cameras too. That goes down well with so much of the electorate - those who call Clinton disgusting names obviously enjoy it - that his support probably won't get punctured and fall to earth. It will stay level or rise.
Stuff all the bad news and stories of deceit, murder and the like. I bring you tidings of great joy! The Gresham College Catalogue for 2016/17 turned up in the post this morning.
For those that don't know Gresham College was founded in 1597 to provide free education to the denizens of London in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, history, philosophy and so forth. The College now discharges its function by providing free lectures by very clever people on said subjects to anyone who wants to turn up (though for some lectures it is sensible to book a seat in advance).
Just quickly browsing through the catalogue this year looks like hosting a bumper crop. Who could resist "Curves in Honour of Leibniz'a Tercentenary"? How about The Port of London, history and future", or "the Challenge of Big Data - a mathematical perspective", "Did Sir Walter Scott invent Scotland?", or "The expanding Universe". and much, much more.
If you don't know Gresham College and are in striking distance of London I commend it to you.
Mr Llama: I too have received the catalogue. Much in it to tempt. Perhaps we may bump into each other at one of the events?
That would be nice, Mrs. Free. If it does happen then I claim the right to buy you supper and champagne afterwards. (I'll have a carer with me so you will be safe).
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
Mr. Pulpstar, which Paris attacks? Hebdo or Bataclan?
Ah Bataclan where the warriors of god cut off men's privates and put them in their mouths and sexually mutilated women.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
Why are you still repeating this utter nonsense? Does it give you some sort of warped pleasure? Bataclan was horrendous enough without inventing things.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
How many months? The boats themselves spend months at sea, return revictual go back to sea with the same missiles loaded, no American intervention there. So how many months when the boats can stay at sea for many months?
The problem with our Independent Nuclear Deterrent is that whilst it is certainly nuclear, it is neither independent, nor much of a deterrent.
Go in then why isn't it independent?
I believe it is universally acknowledged that the project would cease in a matter of months without American support. I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon. That's before you even get to skullduggery surrounding circuits, kill-switches etc.
Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country? Which country would you sell that to? The answer is you wouldn't, and the yanks certainly wouldn't. Hence there isn't another nuclear nation on earth that has bought this off-the-peg idiocy.
Utter bollocks from start to finish. But you believe so it must be true.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
Yes we had a lot of that on this site ahead of the EU referendum.
Sorry for assuming that everyone here was reasonably clued up on this issue. Please see the all party report I posted above.
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!
Islam and Judaism have far more cultural similarities than Judaism has to Western secularism. For example, gay marriage is an anathema and Judaism regards homosexuality as an abomination worthy of death.
There appears to be only one religion openly killing gays on the basis of their sexuality - clue its not judaism.
Pew published some utterly depressing poll results on muslims view to that "crime".
On average, how well do serious US election polls compare with British ones?
Five Thirty-Eight's poll averages, combined with other factors they take into account, are currently rating a Trump win at 35-37%. The Betfair market says 29%.
The Real Clear Politics average puts Trump 3% behind Clinton in a two-way fight. Unfortunately they only let Stein enter the picture in a four-way contest. But Stein's vote-share may exceed Johnson's. Trump's "Nixonian" helper Roger Stone has on a number of occasions said how much he likes Sanders. Of course he's stopped now that Sanders has endorsed Clinton, but he'll probably take the line that the only honourable thing for Sanders supporters to do if they don't want to "sell out" (those who don't vote Trump!) is to vote Stein. Johnson may be doing well in the polls, but the libertarians are unlikely to be able to portray Trump very successfully - famous businessman that he is - as a man of the state rather than a man of the market.
A portion of the electorate may decide to vote Trump at the last moment, but I'm sceptical about the existence of large hordes of "shy Trumpers". I reckon if Trump does win, he will have climbed steadily in the polls prior to election day, to at least 47-48% and perhaps to a much higher figure. He's such a big mouth - and he's learnt how to contort his mouth aggressively for the cameras too. That goes down well with so much of the electorate - those who call Clinton disgusting names obviously enjoy it - that his support probably won't get punctured and fall to earth. It will stay level or rise.
"He's such a big mouth - and he's learnt how to contort his mouth aggressively for the cameras too. That goes down well with so much of the electorate" Really?
Stuff all the bad news and stories of deceit, murder and the like. I bring you tidings of great joy! The Gresham College Catalogue for 2016/17 turned up in the post this morning.
For those that don't know Gresham College was founded in 1597 to provide free education to the denizens of London in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, history, philosophy and so forth. The College now discharges its function by providing free lectures by very clever people on said subjects to anyone who wants to turn up (though for some lectures it is sensible to book a seat in advance).
Just quickly browsing through the catalogue this year looks like hosting a bumper crop. Who could resist "Curves in Honour of Leibniz'a Tercentenary"? How about The Port of London, history and future", or "the Challenge of Big Data - a mathematical perspective", "Did Sir Walter Scott invent Scotland?", or "The expanding Universe". and much, much more.
If you don't know Gresham College and are in striking distance of London I commend it to you.
Mr Llama: I too have received the catalogue. Much in it to tempt. Perhaps we may bump into each other at one of the events?
That would be nice, Mrs. Free. If it does happen then I claim the right to buy you supper and champagne afterwards. (I'll have a carer with me so you will be safe).
That would be lovely.
I will send you a vanilla mail and let you know the ones I have my eye on and perhaps we can make arrangements.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
How many months? The boats themselves spend months at sea, return revictual go back to sea with the same missiles loaded, no American intervention there. So how many months when the boats can stay at sea for many months?
Great straw clutching, but I said a matter of months, the report said a matter of months, it's practically a direct quote which you dismissed out of hand.
Mr. Pulpstar, which Paris attacks? Hebdo or Bataclan?
Ah Bataclan where the warriors of god cut off men's privates and put them in their mouths and sexually mutilated women.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
Why are you still repeating this utter nonsense? Does it give you some sort of warped pleasure? Bataclan was horrendous enough without inventing things.
The evidence for it is first hand hearsay which would be admissible in an English court. It is also behaviour one would expect from Isis, and sounds very similar to what indubitably happened at the Westgate mall in Kenya. That is not to say it is true, but dismissing it as "utter nonsense" seems to me over the top.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
How many months? The boats themselves spend months at sea, return revictual go back to sea with the same missiles loaded, no American intervention there. So how many months when the boats can stay at sea for many months?
Great straw clutching, but I said a matter of months, the report said a matter of months, it's practically a direct quote which you dismissed out of hand.
As the boats can carry a missile load for well over a year it's a strange definition of months. But as usual you know best.
"So a hardline French president that "dealt" with radical Islam would be urgently and eagerly welcomed by the French Jewish community."
I agree that Jews are a target of Muslim hatred, largely (but not exclusively) due to the existence and behaviour of the Zionist entity, but that does not invalidate the point that I am making about the fact that Jews are outsiders and have much in common with Muslims, however much they hate the Jews, and so would be particularly affected by anti-Muslim pro-secular legislation.
the starting point for the attitude to jews from some muslims is the islamic faith.
Try looking up the verse of the sword for starters.
I have a vague memory of it also forming part of Hamas's charter?
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
It worked for me fine. I was emailed when I was at the front of the queue and then filled in my details, including CC number. I am now being processed.
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
Mr. Pulpstar, which Paris attacks? Hebdo or Bataclan?
Ah Bataclan where the warriors of god cut off men's privates and put them in their mouths and sexually mutilated women.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
Why are you still repeating this utter nonsense? Does it give you some sort of warped pleasure? Bataclan was horrendous enough without inventing things.
The evidence for it is first hand hearsay which would be admissible in an English court. It is also behaviour one would expect from Isis, and sounds very similar to what indubitably happened at the Westgate mall in Kenya. That is not to say it is true, but dismissing it as "utter nonsense" seems to me over the top.
Any judge would ask where are the forensics. It may not be utter nonsense - there were early reports of torture, although without such obscene details - but if the authorities wanted to suppress coverage they would have done so as easily as they did with the Paris massacre of 1961.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
How many months? The boats themselves spend months at sea, return revictual go back to sea with the same missiles loaded, no American intervention there. So how many months when the boats can stay at sea for many months?
Great straw clutching, but I said a matter of months, the report said a matter of months, it's practically a direct quote which you dismissed out of hand.
As the boats can carry a missile load for well over a year it's a strange definition of months. But as usual you know best.
Take it up with the Commons all party report authors - you must have been out when they called to ask for your contribution.
The evidence for it is first hand hearsay which would be admissible in an English court. It is also behaviour one would expect from Isis, and sounds very similar to what indubitably happened at the Westgate mall in Kenya. That is not to say it is true, but dismissing it as "utter nonsense" seems to me over the top.
No, the 'evidence' seems to be a question asked at the official enquiry. That question was based on very little, indeed virtually nothing. The answers to the question - from those actually in charge of the investigation - made it quite clear that the suggestion was garbage.
Now, I suppose they might have been lying, for some strange reason. If so, it seems extraordinary that no witnesses have come forward to say so.
Sometimes, the simple explanation is the correct one: the alleged atrocities didn't happen, and there was no cover-up, despite some people desperately wanting to believe otherwise.
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
It links to some people called queue-it.net who are responsible for this scheme and who deserve to die painfully because the link automatically serves audio at ear-splitting volume as soon as it opens.
My green man is now halfway there after about 3 minutes.
How can CBS know more about the Nice attack than the government in Paris?
I heard that he has 3 relatives who are also islamist extremists.
I also posted a link the other day about the events is Paris and the true barbarity being covered up.
There have been several other events where the truth is being suppressed, Germany being a specific example.
Political class obviously don't want difficult questions
The public are on to these things quicker than the politicians like to admit anyway.
Two months ago, British tourism in Turkey was down 30% in 2016 against its 2015 numbers. And that was before the violence in Ataturk airport and the recent coup.
We've evolved to sniff out danger, protect our families and weigh up the options, regardless of what our govt tells us. Politically correct labels of racism, bigotry, small mindedness or whatever.... fade into insignificance when measured up against the cold hard facts.
People are not holidaying in Turkey as much because they sense danger and are scared. Why is this?
The answer is pretty obvious.
Friends of ours normally go to France every summer - They decided to give it a miss this year.
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
Took 58 mins and 14 attempts for one vote
About five minutes for me. Clearly there was a big surge at the start. I'll report back if other family members have a problem.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then". ------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
How many months? The boats themselves spend months at sea, return revictual go back to sea with the same missiles loaded, no American intervention there. So how many months when the boats can stay at sea for many months?
Great straw clutching, but I said a matter of months, the report said a matter of months, it's practically a direct quote which you dismissed out of hand.
The idea that you have any real insight into how the Trident squadron operates is frankly laughable. The number of people that actually know is tiny and none of them are posting on a website under a nomme de plume.
Give it up mate all you are doing is making yourself look a prat.
How can CBS know more about the Nice attack than the government in Paris?
I heard that he has 3 relatives who are also islamist extremists.
I also posted a link the other day about the events is Paris and the true barbarity being covered up.
There have been several other events where the truth is being suppressed, Germany being a specific example.
Political class obviously don't want difficult questions
The public are on to these things quicker than the politicians like to admit anyway.
Two months ago, British tourism in Turkey was down 30% in 2016 against its 2015 numbers. And that was before the violence in Ataturk airport and the recent coup.
We've evolved to sniff out danger, protect our families and weigh up the options, regardless of what our govt tells us. Politically correct labels of racism, bigotry, small mindedness or whatever.... fade into insignificance when measured up against the cold hard facts.
People are not holidaying in Turkey as much because they sense danger and are scared. Why is this?
The answer is pretty obvious.
Friends of ours normally go to France every summer - They decided to give it a miss this year.
I can highly recommend Suffolk. Very nice indeed this weekend. No currency exchange problems either.
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue. You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
It worked for me fine. I was emailed when I was at the front of the queue and then filled in my details, including CC number. I am now being processed.
Clearly prioritising Blairites!!!
Took us 58, 62,63.63 mins but we are all registered again
The evidence for it is first hand hearsay which would be admissible in an English court. It is also behaviour one would expect from Isis, and sounds very similar to what indubitably happened at the Westgate mall in Kenya. That is not to say it is true, but dismissing it as "utter nonsense" seems to me over the top.
No, the 'evidence' seems to be a question asked at the official enquiry. That question was based on very little, indeed virtually nothing. The answers to the question - from those actually in charge of the investigation - made it quite clear that the suggestion was garbage.
Now, I suppose they might have been lying, for some strange reason. If so, it seems extraordinary that no witnesses have come forward to say so.
Sometimes, the simple explanation is the correct one: the alleged atrocities didn't happen, and there was no cover-up, despite some people desperately wanting to believe otherwise.
I guess some people want it to be true and sod what the families of the victims might feel.
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.
Pied Noir is a key to the whole thing. To understand what this is all about you have to know the History of Algeria.
Basically, imagine if South Africa had been declared an integral part of the UK in 1930 (and had Rhodesian style short of apartheid instituionalised discrimination including in who is allowed to vote) and that the black people were muslims.
Imagine then that what happened in Rhodesia in the 1970s (with the bush war and horrible massacres by both sides) had happened on a much bigger scale in South Africa in the 1950s and then in 1962 the UK had given in and given them independence.
And that immediately after independence the whites (equivalent of pied noirs) - over a milion of them and an equal amount of black and mixed race people (with links to the old regime) had fled to the UK virtually overnight to escape a vengeful Zanu-pf.
And that most of the black and mixed race people were housed in banlieues upon arrival in the UK which in some ways were little better than townships like Soweto. And that they had had more children than indigenous population and there were about 4 million, mostly poor, few jobs and still regarded as Kaffirs by many of the indidgenous population.
That is France today.
I'd say that the FLN's victory was one of the worst things to have ever happened. The ruling group in pre 5th Republic Algeria were not your classic colonial overlords. Algeria was not a French colony. It was a Department of the French Republic. The FLN were/are your classic Maoist/kleptocratic reavers. You don't see much in the way of islamist insurgency in Algeria since the crushed/co-opted the GIS in the 90s. Some of the most black-hearted men in the world rule the roost there.
Hence why I compared the FLN with the maoist zanu-pf and pre independence Algeria with the more paternalistic Rhodesian government than the hardline apartheidists.
Unfortunately the 4 million or descendants of the million black and mix raced people who fled to France after the FLN victory are second class disaffected citizens so ripe for exploitation by islamonutters.
There is quite a stict delinealtion between "beur" and "pied noir" down there. A better Brit comparisonis NI.
The evidence for it is first hand hearsay which would be admissible in an English court. It is also behaviour one would expect from Isis, and sounds very similar to what indubitably happened at the Westgate mall in Kenya. That is not to say it is true, but dismissing it as "utter nonsense" seems to me over the top.
No, the 'evidence' seems to be a question asked at the official enquiry. That question was based on very little, indeed virtually nothing. The answers to the question - from those actually in charge of the investigation - made it quite clear that the suggestion was garbage.
Now, I suppose they might have been lying, for some strange reason. If so, it seems extraordinary that no witnesses have come forward to say so.
Sometimes, the simple explanation is the correct one: the alleged atrocities didn't happen, and there was no cover-up, despite some people desperately wanting to believe otherwise.
The evidence is that a witness at the enquiry quoted a colleague's account of what he saw at first hand (and which caused him to vomit).
I have no desperate desire to believe either way, but one can see why there would be a cover up, if there was one. No safe conclusion can be drawn either way on the facts currently available.
'But no one is applying any rational economic risk analysis to this. That became painfully clear when the former Minister for Policy, Oliver Letwin MP, then in charge of overseeing the National Security Strategy, gave evidence to the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy on 23rd May. When I questioned him about procurement costs, he was only out by a factor of 10'
Mr. Pulpstar, which Paris attacks? Hebdo or Bataclan?
Ah Bataclan where the warriors of god cut off men's privates and put them in their mouths and sexually mutilated women.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
Why are you still repeating this utter nonsense? Does it give you some sort of warped pleasure? Bataclan was horrendous enough without inventing things.
There does seem to be some evidence that some atrocities were committed in the Bataclan. Call me old fashioned.
Mr. Pulpstar, which Paris attacks? Hebdo or Bataclan?
Ah Bataclan where the warriors of god cut off men's privates and put them in their mouths and sexually mutilated women.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
Why are you still repeating this utter nonsense? Does it give you some sort of warped pleasure? Bataclan was horrendous enough without inventing things.
There does seem to be some evidence that some atrocities were committed in the Bataclan. Call me old fashioned.
How can CBS know more about the Nice attack than the government in Paris?
I heard that he has 3 relatives who are also islamist extremists.
I also posted a link the other day about the events is Paris and the true barbarity being covered up.
There have been several other events where the truth is being suppressed, Germany being a specific example.
Political class obviously don't want difficult questions
The public are on to these things quicker than the politicians like to admit anyway.
Two months ago, British tourism in Turkey was down 30% in 2016 against its 2015 numbers. And that was before the violence in Ataturk airport and the recent coup.
We've evolved to sniff out danger, protect our families and weigh up the options, regardless of what our govt tells us. Politically correct labels of racism, bigotry, small mindedness or whatever.... fade into insignificance when measured up against the cold hard facts.
People are not holidaying in Turkey as much because they sense danger and are scared. Why is this?
The answer is pretty obvious.
Friends of ours normally go to France every summer - They decided to give it a miss this year.
I can highly recommend Suffolk. Very nice indeed this weekend. No currency exchange problems either.
Suffolk is fantastic, a true treasure hidden in plain sight Herself and I had a smashing holiday there a couple of years ago and found many great pubs and restaurants (much better then one would find in france for comparable costs), buckets full of fascinating history, and smashing scenery and seascapes. Once Thomas passes through the last cat flap we are going back as a matter of urgency.
Comments
Citation please.
"I also understand that we need their assistance in targeting the weapon."
Citation please.
"Would you sell the ability to wipe out cities entirely independently of your control to another country?"
You might, if that country would develop them anyway, you trust them, and this means extra moolah for your industry.
And now he refuses to do it
I see Bercow was having some fun with his latest intervention. Probably the only thing that gets him through these debates.
Unfortunately the 4 million or descendants of the million black and mix raced people who fled to France after the FLN victory are second class disaffected citizens so ripe for exploitation by islamonutters.
Compromise candidate for the rebels ?
https://t.co/hWT3KxjNlC https://t.co/Nf7gxiIXVJ
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36829574
Interesting, given Erdogan's plane was not merely not shot down, but allowed to land.
2) he knows it,
3) he doesn't give a monkey's.
Remain told us that we were more secure in Europe but that plainly was not the case. Irrespective this mis management of essential information is an absolute scandal.
For those that don't know Gresham College was founded in 1597 to provide free education to the denizens of London in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, rhetoric, history, philosophy and so forth. The College now discharges its function by providing free lectures by very clever people on said subjects to anyone who wants to turn up (though for some lectures it is sensible to book a seat in advance).
Just quickly browsing through the catalogue this year looks like hosting a bumper crop. Who could resist "Curves in Honour of Leibniz'a Tercentenary"? How about The Port of London, history and future", or "the Challenge of Big Data - a mathematical perspective", "Did Sir Walter Scott invent Scotland?", or "The expanding Universe". and much, much more.
If you don't know Gresham College and are in striking distance of London I commend it to you.
http://www.gresham.ac.uk/
Tomorrows NEC has to change the criteria.
Its a complete fix
The Theresa May clearout sale in full https://t.co/FLOd7GKIl1
But, what happens if it goes ahead as planned and Eagle or Smith win? Isn't that game over for Corbyn as the PLP will cling desperately to the new leader?
502 Bad Gateway
nginx/1.1.19
Also worth noting Denmark and Spain don't have permanent seats on the UN Security Council.
How on earth can a party leader speak out directly against party policy that was agreed by Conference?
Corbyn will clearly only advocate policies he agrees with and is not capable of any kind of compromise.
Anyhoo no point building a detterent if you are not happy to use it.
Virtually the entire 130,000 Jewish population also fled to france.
Roughly 1 million indigenous Algerians emigrated to France between independence in 1962 and 1975.
By the 1990s, approximately 50% of algerian immigrants were unemployed with the rest mostly doing travaux penibles jobs (crappy jobs the French don't want to do)
When France conquered Algeria in 1830 they confiscated the land and handed it to the settlers dispossessing the indigenous Algerians (another parallel with Rhodesia)
for anyone interested, "The Agony of Algeria" on Google Books is worth looking at
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zKLHw5AzJm4C&lpg=PA215&ots=m4IY1Erru4&dq=how many algerians have emigrated to france since 1962&pg=PA219#v=onepage&q=how many algerians have emigrated to france since 1962&f=false
I fear France is a powderkeg and could go the same way Northern Ireland did in the 1960s on a gigantic scale. I hope the UK are working out what to do about the possibility of a French Refugee Crisis on our doorstep before too long.
I love the "universally acknowledged" at the start. It's a wonderfully cheap rhetorical trick to make you think "oh... everyone thinks this, well it must be true then".
------------------
How does the all party Trident committee saying that without US cooperation the lifespan of the project would be 'measured in months' suit you then? http://www.basicint.org/tridentcommission
But yes, perhaps 'universally acknowledged' was a stretch - obviously the more naive amongst us wouldn't have known.
I remember that in the run up to Gulf War1 the French defence minister was a senior member of the Franco-Iranian Friendship Society. Yet he still wanted France to be included in the planning of the take back of Kuwait (they weren't).
Five Thirty-Eight's poll averages, combined with other factors they take into account, are currently rating a Trump win at 35-37%. The Betfair market says 29%.
The Real Clear Politics average puts Trump 3% behind Clinton in a two-way fight. Unfortunately they only let Stein enter the picture in a four-way contest. But Stein's vote-share may exceed Johnson's. Trump's "Nixonian" helper Roger Stone has on a number of occasions said how much he likes Sanders. Of course he's stopped now that Sanders has endorsed Clinton, but he'll probably take the line that the only honourable thing for Sanders supporters to do if they don't want to "sell out" (those who don't vote Trump!) is to vote Stein. Johnson may be doing well in the polls, but the libertarians are unlikely to be able to portray Trump very successfully - famous businessman that he is - as a man of the state rather than a man of the market.
A portion of the electorate may decide to vote Trump at the last moment, but I'm sceptical about the existence of large hordes of "shy Trumpers". I reckon if Trump does win, he will have climbed steadily in the polls prior to election day, to at least 47-48% and perhaps to a much higher figure. He's such a big mouth - and he's learnt how to contort his mouth aggressively for the cameras too. That goes down well with so much of the electorate - those who call Clinton disgusting names obviously enjoy it - that his support probably won't get punctured and fall to earth. It will stay level or rise.
Then the French authorities decided it best the public do not know the nature of their enemies.
You can close this page without losing your place in the queue.
You are now in the queue - check your progress below
When you reach the front of the queue, you will have 10 minutes to complete and submit your application to become a Labour Party registered supporter. As long as you’re in the queue by 5pm on Wednesday 20 July, and you complete your application within your 10 minute window, your application to be a registered supporter will be processed.
If you don't want to wait on this page, give us your email address and we'll send you an email when it's your turn.
Good grief!!
A queue to fill out a form on the internet??
I don't think I've ever seen this before. The 10 minute window is particularly stupid. How does this work for goodness sake? If someone walks away from the computer while waiting (there is no timer telling them how long there is before the window comes, although there is a picture of a slowly walking man filling up a green bar - that progresses at variable speed) then I guess they'd be stuffed. So you really just have to sit and watch and wait. This is ridiculous.
(Obviously you can do the email thing, but you need to have an eye on your email inbox otherwise again, you'll miss you slot.)
Pew published some utterly depressing poll results on muslims view to that "crime".
Oh,and the penalty for leaving Islam.
.
Really?
I will send you a vanilla mail and let you know the ones I have my eye on and perhaps we can make arrangements.
http://www.blunt4reigate.com/news/full-statement-renewal-trident
As the boats can carry a missile load for well over a year it's a strange definition of months. But as usual you know best.
Try looking up the verse of the sword for starters.
I have a vague memory of it also forming part of Hamas's charter?
Now, I suppose they might have been lying, for some strange reason. If so, it seems extraordinary that no witnesses have come forward to say so.
Sometimes, the simple explanation is the correct one: the alleged atrocities didn't happen, and there was no cover-up, despite some people desperately wanting to believe otherwise.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmdfence/986/986we13.htm
My green man is now halfway there after about 3 minutes.
Give it up mate all you are doing is making yourself look a prat.
In unrelated news, I hear there was also a debate on Trident renewal.
Took us 58, 62,63.63 mins but we are all registered again
I have no desperate desire to believe either way, but one can see why there would be a cover up, if there was one. No safe conclusion can be drawn either way on the facts currently available.
'But no one is applying any rational economic risk analysis to this. That became painfully clear when the former Minister for Policy, Oliver Letwin MP, then in charge of overseeing the National Security Strategy, gave evidence to the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy on 23rd May. When I questioned him about procurement costs, he was only out by a factor of 10'