politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s LAB goes into 2019 with six fewer MPs than it had at
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s LAB goes into 2019 with six fewer MPs than it had at GE2017
Labour now has six MPs who have quit or been suspended since the 2017 general election
Comments
-
If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.0
-
Oh and e pluribus unum time.0
-
FPT
That would have run the risk of the UK becoming a 'lawless' country.tlg86 said:
The Government could have taken the UKIP approach and simply repealed the 1972 European Communities Act and not bothered with A50 at all.
With great swathes of law not applicable anymore and nothing in its stead.0 -
I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?0
-
I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.RobD said:I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
0 -
Hopkins will of course vote with Corbyn whatever happens
Onasanya will presumably be busy going forward.
O'Mara is an unknown quantity - does he turn up, or does he draw his grievance, his breath and his salary?
The other three, however, owe Corbyn in particular no favours. They might decide to be awkward.0 -
James.
Edit: Dammnit, ydoethur ruined my history lesson joke.0 -
What did Garak say about coincidences?TheScreamingEagles said:
I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.RobD said:I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
0 -
Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.RobD said:
What did Garak say about coincidences?TheScreamingEagles said:
I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.RobD said:I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
The one about the boy who cried wolf.0 -
Quick evening all
Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.
I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.
Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.
0 -
Oh, that is a good one.TheScreamingEagles said:
Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.RobD said:
What did Garak say about coincidences?TheScreamingEagles said:
I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.RobD said:I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
The one about the boy who cried wolf.
For those that haven’t seen it.0 -
Seems a bit harsh on Mrs May.TheScreamingEagles said:If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.
0 -
Oddly, I was thinking about the boy who cried wolf when I pointed out the reason nobody believes Corbyn now is because he's lied so often in the past.TheScreamingEagles said:
Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.RobD said:
What did Garak say about coincidences?TheScreamingEagles said:
I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.RobD said:I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
The one about the boy who cried wolf.
But since he never tells the same lie twice, the Garak solution doesn't really apply here.0 -
That's as maybe, but if would have implemented the result a lot quicker!TheScreamingEagles said:FPT
That would have run the risk of the UK becoming a 'lawless' country.tlg86 said:
The Government could have taken the UKIP approach and simply repealed the 1972 European Communities Act and not bothered with A50 at all.
With great swathes of law not applicable anymore and nothing in its stead.0 -
Well, Onasanya seems to have imperfect recall, so she'd probably be OK.Nigelb said:
Seems a bit harsh on Mrs May.TheScreamingEagles said:If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.
0 -
There May come times when JC (as Ms Onasanya would no doubt call him) might need every vote to form a government. Having to haggle with those outside the whip, at least two of whom look to be in the “hell freeze over” category, might be very awkward indeed.0
-
-
-
Incidentally, I recall it being mentioned earlier this evening that Corbyn's Parliamentary Party is now smaller than Gordon Brown's was after the 2010 election.0
-
Haven’t those now been hyped beyond all proportion? Damp squib here we come.Scott_P said:0 -
That's quite funny as well.Black_Rook said:Incidentally, I recall it being mentioned earlier this evening that Corbyn's Parliamentary Party is now smaller than Gordon Brown's was after the 2010 election.
But remember, he only got 29% to Corbyn's 39.99%.0 -
-
When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.Scott_P said:
Nos da.0 -
Good Lord, another day closed?Scott_P said:0 -
Looks likely:RobD said:
Good Lord, another day closed?Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/Ryanair/status/10758394131277045760 -
At least some flights could be rescheduled.Donny43 said:
Looks likely:RobD said:
Good Lord, another day closed?Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/Ryanair/status/10758394131277045760 -
They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.RobD said:0 -
Hm, know anywhere I can get a cheap drone?TheScreamingEagles said:
They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.RobD said:0 -
If the fact that he’s been forced to shut down a charity, which appears to have been run criminally, and more or less entirely, as a slush fund for him and his family, doesn’t bother his supporters.... then it seems unlikely his tax returns will, either.RobD said:
Haven’t those now been hyped beyond all proportion? Damp squib here we come.Scott_P said:
0 -
You need to be careful about offering incentives.TheScreamingEagles said:
They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.RobD said:0 -
0
-
The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
0 -
Has anyone read the Cooper / Morgan / Letwin / Boles et al amendment to the Finance Bill?
Here's a tweet of it (sorry, linky no worky):
https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1075765589908418562
On my reading, it (if passed) stops the Treasury making any minor or consequential amendments to help make tax law work post-Brexit unless there is a WA, an A50 extension or a HoC-approved no-deal.
Any tax lawyers around to tell me whether they can spot any VAT or similar loopholes that would appear if this passed and there were no deal? Needless to say, my usual tax silk, Mr Maugham of Devereux Chambers, has has hands full right now.
Edit: linky does worky.0 -
If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
0 -
Both Hopkins and Field are strongly pro-Brexit. I doubt they will vote against anything that threatens Brexit.stodge said:Quick evening all
Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.
I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.
Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.0 -
Any titbits you can share?Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).0 -
Any idea how quickly we could get lasers fitted to these and deploy them ?Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-rafael-to-sell-6-anti-drone-systems-to-uk-10012503930 -
We should conduct government purely in response to opinion polling? Real smart move, professor, why do I get the impression if it was something you didn't want you would not agree with other polling?Scott_P said:0 -
Where's Torchwood when you need them?Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).0 -
You don't necessarily find an operator via tracking their UAV.Chameleon said:
If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).0 -
No, i think TSE might see the collateral removal of pineapple pizza lovers from society as win/win.Donny43 said:
You need to be careful about offering incentives.TheScreamingEagles said:
They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.RobD said:
0 -
Other than voting against the Brexit deal?Richard_Tyndall said:
Both Hopkins and Field are strongly pro-Brexit. I doubt they will vote against anything that threatens Brexit.stodge said:Quick evening all
Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.
I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.
Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.
0 -
Drones don't add up, someone will have had to have spent over £15k in drones (either on a few very high end commercial ones, or many high end consumer drones). If someone like green peace is doing it, they'd claim responsibility when media coverage is at it's peak.SeanT said:
This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.ydoethur said:
When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.Scott_P said:
Nos da.
The only explanation I can conceive is that we are not being told the entire truth, and HMG is worried that the drone is full of Novichok, or whatever.
Plus surely the military would have the tech to detect and track such things, plus the staggered moving back makes no sense either (19:00 reopening at 4:15, 20:00 at 4:30, 22:00 at 4:45ish).
On the flip side if there is a credible threat against one or many planes then drones are a convenient excuse to ground everything and search.0 -
Yeah, you'd likely have to do it via who's been purchasing drones/ who owns commercial drones etc, not going to be a quick process, or seeing if there is anything to recover from any abandoned drones.Y0kel said:
You don't necessarily find an operator via tracking their UAV.Chameleon said:
If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
0 -
Possible too that the drones have a 4G connection and are taking flightpath instructions from a compromised server.Chameleon said:If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.
0 -
None really. I chatted to someone earlier who understands the techie detail in a way that I don't and their view was that the countermeasure tools available are limited both in scope and availability (ie Plod doesn't have them to hand) and the authorities have just been caught napping. Using some of the possible technical countermeasures at night seems to be more attractive but in truth pretty much all tools have a possibility of collateral damage.RobD said:
Any titbits you can share?Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
The greater concern, looking at it from where I'm sitting, is motivation0 -
I guess the important question this thread raises is what happens next time if Lab gets a very small majority (or Lab + allies have a very small majority).
If the above happens it'll then be critical for Lab to keep all its MPs on board - but will Corbyn be able to do so - in particular if he tries to implement any "radical" policies which aren't in the manifesto.0 -
It is rather strange. I wonder how long it will be before people begin to ask serious questions of our capability to control our own airspace.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.0 -
Maybe it’s the Vulcans?0
-
It's funny how futurologists always used to predict we'd have flying cars. They never thought about air traffic control for them.Jonathan said:
It is rather strange. I wonder how long it will be before people begin to ask serious questions of our capability to control our own airspace.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.0 -
The authorities are probably taking the view that it's better to take the financial hit and give themselves more of a chance to find the person or people doing it.Y0kel said:
None really. I chatted to someone earlier who understands the techie detail in a way that I don't and their view was that the countermeasure tools available are limited both in scope and availability (ie Plod doesn't have them to hand) and the authorities have just been caught napping. Using some of the possible technical countermeasures at night seems to be more attractive but in truth pretty much all tools have a possibility of collateral damage.RobD said:
Any titbits you can share?Y0kel said:The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.
The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).
The greater concern, looking at it from where I'm sitting, is motivation0 -
Why do you always go for the most dramatic, most spectacular reason for everything?SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
Oh yes, you're a writer.
Much more likely: there's more than one of them, they can be hard to shoot, and what goes up (especially bullets) must come down - an issue if they're in a residential area. And a side issue is that it may be harder to catch the scrotes who are doing this, and whether they'll just pop another drone up in an hour.
though they may well end up resorting to shooting them if this continues.
As someone who hates flying, who flies as infrequently as I can, and sees flying as a privilege rather than a right (I mean, do you know the tech behind flying? The blades of a jet turbine operate for hours well above their meltiing point, ffs - that's near magic), I'm finding this quite entertaining.
Though I can understand it may ruin many peoples' Christmases. But no-one's dying.0 -
There is a view that instead of splitting now to form another Social Democratic Party the centrist Lab MP's have decided to keep their heads down and if Corbyn is elected resign the whip and then vote against him so he can do no damage.MikeL said:I guess the important question this thread raises is what happens next time if Lab gets a very small majority (or Lab + allies have a very small majority).
If the above happens it'll then be critical for Lab to keep all its MPs on board - but will Corbyn be able to do so - in particular if he tries to implement any "radical" policies which aren't in the manifesto.0 -
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/0 -
Very true, I suspect a large amount of the issues stem from how little we (and potentially the police/Gatwick) know. How many drones do the operators have (i.e. how long can they keep this up for/if one is shot down will another just take it's place)? What type of drone (impacts on how it could be taken down)? Are they being recovered and relaunched or just ditched? How are they controlled? Why?El_Capitano said:
Possible too that the drones have a 4G connection and are taking flightpath instructions from a compromised server.Chameleon said:If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.
As someone who is flying out of Gatwick on Christmas day I hope that all the answers are known soon.0 -
Yeah can't see Brian saying something similar about the sort of punishments the public would support for child murderers.kle4 said:We should conduct government purely in response to opinion polling? Real smart move, professor, why do I get the impression if it was something you didn't want you would not agree with other polling?
0 -
Apply Occam's Razor. The most straightforward explanation is that the coppers are telling the truth when they say they're afraid to shoot it down because of the risk of collateral damage.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
After all, imagine the amount of screaming if so much as a pigeon, let alone a human being, gets hit by a stray bullet. The independent inquiry. The sobbing. The accusations that not enough care was taken. Safety compromised for the sake of getting a few people away on holiday. Oh God, how could they be so heartless?! The litigation. The court cases. The seven-figure compensation payouts. The ruined careers (both of whichever poor fucker fired the bullet, and whichever senior officer gave them permission to start shooting.)
Makes standing around like a bunch of lemons (whilst claiming generous helpings of overtime) look much the best option for Sussex Police, doesn't it?0 -
Because its really hard to hit it with small arms even when hovvering. The blunt force with firearms is to just load thousands of rounds up there which then leads to what happens to all the rounds that miss. I believe you hung about Beirut. Shooting a lot in the air, not always so clever.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
Missiles = debris, large calibre AA weapons...not sure we have any.
In another country, sure just let rip, but this is Britain and clipboards and hi vis vests have big influence on actions.
0 -
It's aliens, innit?SeanT said:
That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the questionJonathan said:
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc
A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.
Again, what am I missing?0 -
Or just do it at nightSeanT said:
That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the questionJonathan said:
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc
A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.
Again, what am I missing? 0 -
I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???0 -
Probably many things. For one, you will be alerting the drone operators as well, and if they have some form of control link, they can just lower it in height - say in front of a nice, convenient tower block that will provide a convenient backdrop for the bullets to hit - or some other sh*t thing.SeanT said:
That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the questionJonathan said:
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc
A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.
Again, what am I missing?
Perhaps the drones are darting around unpredictably, or using cover before hopping up.
We're suffering from a lack of information, and the authorities may also be lacking critical information.0 -
Fun fact, Surrey and Sussex police spent £250,000 on four new state of the art drones less than three years ago.0
-
El Reg is not obscure.SeanT said:What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?
As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse
Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ... 0 -
Sort of reads like "I can't say I'm sorry to see him dead, Chief Inspector Barnaby, but it's got nothing to do with me"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-sussex-46564814?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5c1bec0c028b9d0681be9f28&'Early Christmas present for residents'&2018-12-20T19:24:20.496Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:53552fb1-9ce4-4a02-b0bb-9de0ecb42846&pinned_post_asset_id=5c1bec0c028b9d0681be9f28&pinned_post_type=share0 -
Completely unrelated but the German authorities are after four believed to be planning an attack on an airport in France or Germany. Not clear whether they have them in custody or are looking for them.0
-
To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...glw said:
This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.viewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???0 -
When being trained on anti-drone techniques Police routinely get told to consider that there could be some form of explosive attached to the drone, and that the entire release system is available online to 3D print. Last thing the police want to happen is to shoot a drone down into someone's garden and the entire house goes boom, or a busy road, or a roof, or a...SeanT said:
That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the questionJonathan said:
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc
A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.
Again, what am I missing?0 -
++JosiasJessop said:
El Reg is not obscure.SeanT said:What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?
As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse
Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ...0 -
Are there any drones affecting LAB at the moment?0
-
Trump supporters angry at his 'retreat' on border wall
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-466377730 -
On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.JosiasJessop said:
To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...glw said:
This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.viewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???
Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...
0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrWQEJhVSz4Foxy said:
On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.JosiasJessop said:
To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...glw said:
This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.viewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???
Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...0 -
Well, it'll certainly solve the problem.SeanT said:
OK then, nuke Sussex.JosiasJessop said:
Probably many things. For one, you will be alerting the drone operators as well, and if they have some form of control link, they can just lower it in height - say in front of a nice, convenient tower block that will provide a convenient backdrop for the bullets to hit - or some other sh*t thing.SeanT said:
That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the questionJonathan said:
This is good.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc
A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.
Again, what am I missing?
Perhaps the drones are darting around unpredictably, or using cover before hopping up.
We're suffering from a lack of information, and the authorities may also be lacking critical information.
On another point, I always assumed the danger to aircraft would be from lasers: there have been cases of simple laser pointers dazzling pilots (and it was a plot point from a Tom Clancy book decades ago). If this was to be terror-related, then that sort of thing might be best.
Except: there is a small problem that the laser beam points straight back in a 'Yes, authorities, I am here' way. In addition, because it is a known issue, there might be systems in place to mitigate it. P'haps.0 -
I understood that reference!glw said:
++JosiasJessop said:
El Reg is not obscure.SeanT said:What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?
As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse
Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ...0 -
SeanT said:
This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.
Presumably if they can get close enough to shoot it, they could follow it (police helicopter, or another drone) to find the perp.
Suggests to me there are multiple throwaway drones.0 -
BBC news confirms that they do not know what make or model it is.0
-
Weren't they described as rather large drones? Not cheap...Andrew said:SeanT said:This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.
Presumably if they can get close enough to shoot it, they could follow it (police helicopter, or another drone) to find the perp.
Suggests to me there are multiple throwaway drones.0 -
Small comfort to us unless we get lucky and no deal is not as bad as feared.SeanT said:
Another thing I learned from reading Irish papers and comments is that there are hints - just hints, at the moment - that they they are willing to blame Varadkar (if we Hard Brexit), for being so opposed to compromise.williamglenn said:0 -
Just watched Mark Kermode's Christmas Films programme on BBC... He claims Die Hard is a Christmas movie - WTF?!JosiasJessop said:
To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...glw said:
This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.viewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???0 -
So the same government that doesn't have the technology to stop a single drone will have the technology to police the Irish border in 3 months time...0
-
Y0kel said:
Because its really hard to hit it with small arms even when hovvering. The blunt force with firearms is to just load thousands of rounds up there which then leads to what happens to all the rounds that miss. I believe you hung about Beirut. Shooting a lot in the air, not always so clever.SeanT said:SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.
FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc
Which is kinda worrying.
Missiles = debris, large calibre AA weapons...not sure we have any.
In another country, sure just let rip, but this is Britain and clipboards and hi vis vests have big influence on actions.
Die Hard with a Clipboardviewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???
In which the plods do battle with faceless, havoc-causing, drone wielding terrorists - whilst adhering to any and all requirements laid down in the Health and Safety At Work etc. Act 1974.
In the pivotal scene, the controller of the drones is tracked down to a suburban semi in Crawley after an urgent and breathless manhunt involving fifteen weeks of door-to-door enquiries and an intensive Twitter campaign.
The mastermind transpires to be a trans woman whom, after being taken into custody, is found to have a previously undiagnosed personality disorder that was inadequately treated after the court-appointed psychiatrist failed to properly evaluate her after detention. A case is launched under the Human Rights Act which results in all charges of improper drone usage being dropped and an undisclosed settlement for damages (rumoured to be in the region of £250,000) being paid.
Airport goes bankrupt with loss of 10,000 jobs. Human rights advocate receives CBE in next New Year's Honours list. Drone mastermind writes best-selling misery memoir and is given a regular column in The Guardian.
The End.0 -
-
They could be very expensive drones, and throwaway ones at the same time, depends how deep the pockets are.RobD said:
Weren't they described as rather large drones? Not cheap...Andrew said:SeanT said:This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.
Presumably if they can get close enough to shoot it, they could follow it (police helicopter, or another drone) to find the perp.
Suggests to me there are multiple throwaway drones.0 -
Why can't the military do something against the drones?
Does this imply that Gavin Williamson is shyt?
0 -
A 10 mile-wide asteroid would be a tiny speck in the sky before it gets close... just sayin'....Scott_P said:0 -
-
Do they know anything?Chameleon said:BBC news confirms that they do not know what make or model it is.
0 -
His programmes have been great. They should give him more time though - he's having to run through flims at breakneck speed.SeanT said:
Mark Kermode thinks the Exorcist is possibly the greatest movie ever made. He is right. He should get a knighthood.Foxy said:
On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.JosiasJessop said:
To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...glw said:
This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.viewcode said:I've just had a thought.
It's coming up to Christmas.
A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.
Pause.
So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???
Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...0 -
That’s looking rather less likely now than before the drones popped up.kle4 said:
Small comfort to us unless we get lucky and no deal is not as bad as feared.SeanT said:
Another thing I learned from reading Irish papers and comments is that there are hints - just hints, at the moment - that they they are willing to blame Varadkar (if we Hard Brexit), for being so opposed to compromise.williamglenn said:0
