politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The biggest challenge for UKIP at #GE2015 will be the waste

Scott_P said:

JamesKelly said:

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles.

No.

I know the Nats have some really, really, really stupid ideas, but "vote for separation or die" has to be the dumbest thing you have ever posted

Scott, I think it's just a cunning ploy to attract the female vote.

"Vote Yes. Lose 10 pounds!"

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

Bye bye Rafa!

*sigh*

UK's income gap widest since 60s

• Labour admits child poverty failure

• Incomes of poorest fall

Britain under Gordon Brown is a more unequal country than at any time since modern records began in the early 1960s, after the incomes of the poor fell and those of the rich rose in the three years after the 2005 general election.

Deprivation and inequality in the UK rose for a third successive year in 2007-08, according to data from the Department for Work and Pensions that prompted strong criticism from campaign groups for the government's backsliding on its anti-poverty goals.

In a further blow, the government failed to make a dent in the number of children or pensioners living in poverty after big increases the previous year. Almost 17,000 more children in England are on free school meals this year compared with last, according to government data also published yesterday.

About 15% of pupils in state schools are now entitled to free school meals because their parents receive welfare payments or earn below £15,575 a year, the figures show. Last year, 14.5% of pupils were eligible.

Even before the onset of the UK's deepest recession in a generation, official figures showed that only the better-off families were spared from a squeeze on living standards that saw median income virtually unchanged and fresh cuts in real pay for those on the lowest salaries.

Since Tony Blair's third election victory, the poorest 10% of households have seen weekly incomes fall by £9 a week to £147 once inflation is accounted for, while those in the richest 10% of homes have enjoyed a £45 a week increase to £1,033.

The data shows that the second poorest 10% of households has also had to make do with less since 2005. Overall, the poorest 20% saw real income fall by 2.6% in the three years to 2007-08, while those in the top fifth of the income distribution enjoyed a rise of 3.3%. As a result, income inequality at the end of Labour's 11th year in power was higher than at any time during Margaret Thatcher's premiership.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/08/poverty-equality-britain-incomes-poor

No doubt Cammie and Clegg have reversed all that.

Charles said:

JamesKelly said:

"When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union."

It wasn't intended to be 'funny" - it was an entirely serious point. The fact that Fluffy even flagged my comments as "trolling" just demonstrate the extent to which you PB Tories inhabit a different planet. I'm afraid the record of the union will be on trial in this referendum, whether you like it or not. I can hardly think of a better reason to abandon London rule than the appalling effect it has had on Scottish life expectancy.

Please demonstrate the line of causation.

The majority of people living in Scotland over the age of 16 drink alcohol, 93 percent of men and 87 percent of women. They drink nearly 25 percent more than the English and Welsh. A strong link between alcohol abuse and poverty persists in Scotland. Men who lived in deprived areas are seven times more likely to die of alcohol-related causes.

All exacerbated by binge drinking, separatism and underaged alcohol abuse.

See: http://alcoholrehab.com/alcohol-rehab/alcohol-abuse-in-scotland/

The First World War for beginners:


If World War 1 was a bar fight


Germany, Austria and Italy are stood together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria’s pint.

Austria demands Serbia buy it a complete new suit, because there are splashes on its trouser leg.

Germany expresses its support for Austria’s point of view.

Britain recommends that everyone calm down a bit.

Serbia points out that it can’t afford a whole suit, but offers to pay for cleaning Austria’s trousers.

Russia and Serbia look at Austria.

Austria asks Serbia who it’s looking at.

Russia suggests that Austria should leave its little brother alone.

Austria inquires as to whose army will assist Russia in compelling it to do so.

Germany appeals to Britain that France has been looking at it, and that this is sufficiently out of order that Britain should not intervene.

Britain replies that France can look at who it wants to, that Britain is looking at Germany too, and what is Germany going to do about it?

Germany tells Russia to stop looking at Austria, or Germany will render Russia incapable of such action.

Britain and France ask Germany whether it’s looking at Belgium.

Turkey and Germany go off into a corner and whisper. When they come back, Turkey makes a show of not looking at anyone.

Germany rolls up its sleeves, looks at France, and punches Belgium.

France and Britain punch Germany. Austria punches Russia. Germany punches Britain and France with one hand and Russia with the other.

Russia throws a punch at Germany, but misses and nearly falls over. Japan calls over from the other side of the room that it’s on Britain’s side, but stays there. Italy surprises everyone by punching Austria.

Australia punches Turkey, and gets punched back. There are no hard feelings, because Britain made Australia do it.

France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change.

Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway. Italy raises both fists in the air and runs round the room chanting.

America waits till Germany is about to fall over from sustained punching from Britain and France, then walks over and smashes it with a barstool, then pretends it won the fight all by itself.

By now all the chairs are broken, and the big mirror over the bar is shattered. Britain, France and America agree that Germany threw the first punch, so the whole thing is Germany’s fault . While Germany is still unconscious, they go through its pockets, steal its wallet, and buy drinks for all their friends.

And when Germany wakes up, it goes out to its car, gets the gun out of the glovebox and heads back inside...

Oops - PB embargo for dinner! I'll be back soon!

))

Mr. Brooke, I've read that before (it's a few years old), but it's still a fantastic analogy.

AveryLP said:

Charles said:

JamesKelly said:

"When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union."

It wasn't intended to be 'funny" - it was an entirely serious point. The fact that Fluffy even flagged my comments as "trolling" just demonstrate the extent to which you PB Tories inhabit a different planet. I'm afraid the record of the union will be on trial in this referendum, whether you like it or not. I can hardly think of a better reason to abandon London rule than the appalling effect it has had on Scottish life expectancy.

Please demonstrate the line of causation.

The majority of people living in Scotland over the age of 16 drink alcohol, 93 percent of men and 87 percent of women. They drink nearly 25 percent more than the English and Welsh. A strong link between alcohol abuse and poverty persists in Scotland. Men who lived in deprived areas are seven times more likely to die of alcohol-related causes.

All exacerbated by binge drinking, separatism and underaged alcohol abuse.

See: http://alcoholrehab.com/alcohol-rehab/alcohol-abuse-in-scotland/

Health policy in Scotland has been the responsibility of the Scottish parliament for over a decade. The per capita spend on health in the NHS is higher.

Life expectancy has little to do with health spending though when you look around the world. It has much more to do with diet, lack of vegetables in the diet in particular, lack of exercise, smoking and alcohol consumption. Man cannot live on Buckie and Irn-bru alone!

It will be a great campaigning slogan. "vote SNP to ban your chips and beer, live in free Scotland on salad and carrot juice!"

JamesKelly said:

Nice try. But as SO has pointed out, the gap in life expectancy started in the 1950s, so we can look to the likes of Macmillan, Thatcher and Major as the culprits. It takes time to repair that damage - devolution has only been in operation for fourteen years, and for the first eight of those the Scottish government was run by London Labour poodles.

I don't have the figures to hand for changes to Scottish life expectancy over the last 8 years. I am sure you will if they support your argument.

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

That may be correct, although it would need some research.

As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.

In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.

Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.

You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Actually, no, you made the original assertion. But I was bored, so googled a bit:

Dr. Gerry McCartney, who agrees with you, states: "It is increasingly recognized that it is insufficient to try to explain health trends by simply looking at the proximal causes such as smoking or alcohol," said Dr Gerry McCartney who is also a member of the Scottish Socialist Party. "Income inequality, welfare policy and unemployment do not occur by accident, but as a product of the politics pursued by the government of the day.

http://www.enn.com/health/article/44463/print

However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):

Since devolution started in 1999, the average life expectancy among males in the poorest areas of Scotland has increased 1.4 years compared to 2.1 years for the rest of the country. For women the figures are 1.2 years and 1.6 years respectively. Scottish males now live on average to just over 75, while females die at about 80.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8139581/Scots-to-have-Europes-lowest-life-expectancy.html

Alternatively we could just go to the Audit Scotland report on the issue

Overall health has improved over the last 50 years but health inequalities remain a significant and long-standing problem in Scotland. Deprivation is a major factor in health inequalities, with people in more affluent areas living longer and having significantly better health. Health inequalities are highly localised and vary widely within individual NHS board and council areas. Children in deprived areas have significantly worse health than those in more affluent areas.

http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/docs/health/2012/nr_121213_health_inequalities.pdf

Morris_Dancer said:

I wonder what the odds were. I'd guess about 40 on Darcis.

Nadal was 1.02 Start price on Betfair, cash traded at 1.01 too.
Didn't bet myself.

Mr. Pulpstar, that's about what I would've expected.

Staggering to think Nadal won a Grand Slam and then left the next one in the first round.

" By the pricking of my thumbs something wicked this way comes "

Italy court finds Berlusconi guilty on sex charges

(Reuters) - A Milan court sentenced Italian former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi on Monday to seven years in prison after convicting him of paying for sex with a minor but he will not have to serve any jail time before he has exhausted appeals.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/24/uk-berlusconi-sex-trial-idUKBRE95N0A320130624

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

That may be correct, although it would need some research.

As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.

In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.

Spot on. The point is it is the political choices not the constitutional system.

James screwed up - it could have been a mistake - but he dug his heels in.

JamesKelly said:

I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom

Vote Yes, or kill yourself?

I was wrong, there was dumber to come...

JamesKelly said:

"However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):"

As I've already pointed out, devolved control over health can only repair part of the damage (and by 2009/10 the improvements brought in the by the first genuinely autonomous Scottish government in 2007 had barely had a chance to make themselves felt). For example, I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom

So: a Scotland that elects a Labour government isn't autonomous.

Vote Independence for a One Party State!

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

That may be correct, although it would need some research.

As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.

In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.

There must be a similar pattern of life expectancy differences between the wealthy and poor parts of Scotland as the whole of the UK mustn't there?

It's all here:

http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/stats/annual-review-2011/j21285206.htm

The comparative UK figures are interesting. England, Wales and NI are pretty close to each other. There is a big gap between Scotland and the rest.

I have to say that this thread is quite mind-blowing.

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

Scott_P said:

JamesKelly said:

I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom

Vote Yes, or kill yourself?

I was wrong, there was dumber to come...

Indeed. Minus one million credibility points for the Nats. A lot of very strange and un-Kelly-like shrieking and floundering going on (there's a compliment in there if you look very, very hard).

Mick_Pork said:

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

So a Scot, a Scot and a Scot's chum. Why is independence going to be so different ?

CarlottaVance said:

So the gap has widened since Devolution......

Wait for it; a devolved Labour Government was killing people. Only a separate Nat Government can save them...

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

That may be correct, although it would need some research.

As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.

In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.

Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.

You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.

I wonder if it was a case of the Scottish system before 1948 actually being better than in the rest of the UK and that the NHS allowed the other countries to improve beyond Scotland because they did not have to contend with the other factors Scotland does (at least to the same degree) - it's colder and darker for much of the year, for example.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"

Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?

Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

SouthamObserver said:

JamesKelly said:

"Please demonstrate the line of causation."

You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.

Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.

Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.

That may be correct, although it would need some research.

As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.

In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.

Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.

You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.

I wonder if it was a case of the Scottish system before 1948 actually being better than in the rest of the UK and that the NHS allowed the other countries to improve beyond Scotland because they did not have to contend with the other factors Scotland does (at least to the same degree) - it's colder and darker for much of the year, for example.

Of course back then the Scottish NHS was run by Dr Finlay and Janet, everyone ate healthy porridge and no-one went near Westminster.........

tim said:

What would equalise death rates would be devolved power to UKIP voting areas in the SE so they could reintroduce smoking everywhere.

missed a trick tim, you should be pointing our all those healthy immigrants are pushing up life expectancy.

Plato said:

For anyone who missed this - it always makes me laugh

Washington - (AP) BUSH DEPLOYS VOWELS TO BOSNIA

Cities of Sjlbvdnzv, Grzny to Be First Recipients.

Before an emergency joint session of Congress yesterday, President Bush announced US plans to deploy over 75,000 vowels to the war-torn region of Bosnia. The deployment, the largest of its kind in American history, will provide the region with the critically needed letters A,E,I,O and U, and is hoped to render countless Bosnian names more pronounceable.

"For six years, we have stood by while names like Ygrjvslhv and Tzlynhr and Glrm have been horribly butchered by millions around the world," Bush said. "Today, the United States must finally stand up and say `Enough.' It is time the people of Bosnia finally had some vowels in their incomprehensible words. The US is proud to lead the crusade in this noble endeavour."

The deployment, dubbed Operation Vowel Movement by the State Department, is set for early next week, with the Adriatic port cities of Sjlbvdnzv and Grzny slated to be the first recipients. Two C-130 transport planes, each carrying over 500 24-count boxes of "E's," will fly from Andrews Air Force Base across the Atlantic and airdrop the letters over the cities.

Citizens of Grzny and Sjlbvdnzv eagerly await the arrival of the vowels.

"I do not think we can last another day," Trszg Grzdnjkln, 44, said. "I have six children and none of them has a name that is understandable to me or to anyone else. Mr. Bush, please send my poor, wretched family just one 'E' Please."

Said Sjlbvdnzv resident Grg Hmphrs, 67: "With just a few key letters, I could be George Humphries. This is my dream."

The airdrop represents the largest deployment of any letter to a foreign country since 1984. During the summer of that year, the US shipped 92,000 consonants to Ethiopia, providing cities like Ouaouoaua, Eaoiiuae, and Aao with vital, life-giving supplies of L's, S's and T's.

???????????????

But all the major flashpoints in Bosnia had vowels!

viz.:

Sarajevo
Srebrenica
Bihac
Mostar
Gorni Vakuf
Tuzla
Banja Luka
Pale
Zenica

Need I go on?

Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.


Lawrence 'Smear Plot': Father Calls For Inquiry

Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.

The father of Stephen Lawrence dismissed an announcement by the Home Secretary that she will extend inquiries into allegations undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.

Neville Lawrence said that nothing short of a judge-led inquiry into the claims would be sufficient and that the fresh allegations had taken away the faith he had begun to build in the police.

From his home in Jamaica, a statement said he was "dismayed" over the new claims.

It said: "I've always felt that my family was under greater investigation than those guilty of killing my beloved Stephen.

"It is unthinkable that in the extremely dark days and months after my son's murder that my family were subject to such scrutiny.

"I am convinced that nothing short of a judge-led public inquiry will suffice and I have no confidence that the measures announced today will get to the bottom of this matter."

It comes after the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that Scotland Yard has asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to supervise its handling of allegations that police tried to "smear" the Lawrence family.

The claims emerged in an interview with a former undercover police officer, Peter Francis.

Theresa May MP said further allegations were likely to emerge before a report on alleged deliberate incompetence and corruption during the investigation into Stephen's murder.

http://news.sky.com/story/1107321/lawrence-smear-plot-father-calls-for-inquiry

CarlottaVance said:

Great SNP slogan:

"Devolution is great - it leads to lower life expectancy!

Imagine what Independence will do!"

"Vote Yes, or kill yourself" is pithier.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"

Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?

Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?

I thought you were talking about Chancellors

I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.

Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.

Charles said:

Mick_Pork said:

Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual.
They never learn.

No one is railing against devolution.

Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).

I think that a further factor is that healthier Scots are more likely to migrate.

But dying young is not all bad. At least Scotland will be able to afford its pensions!

That's unfortunate. Channel 4 News is doing a bit of digging into Crosby.

Don't they know that banging on about Europe and immigration is the master strategy that killed the kipper vote?

Mick_Pork said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"

Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?

Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?

I thought you were talking about Chancellors, Micky Mouse

I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.

Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.

Come on, Micky Mouse! You were trying to pass off two out of those three Chancellors as "westminster" when they were actually your fellow Scots

TwistedFireStopper said:

The NHS scandals and the Police embroiled in yet another case of looking out for themselves, rather than the public at large, make me glad I chose the Fire and Rescue Service as a career!

Mick_Pork said:

Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.


Lawrence 'Smear Plot': Father Calls For Inquiry

Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.

The father of Stephen Lawrence dismissed an announcement by the Home Secretary that she will extend inquiries into allegations undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.

Neville Lawrence said that nothing short of a judge-led inquiry into the claims would be sufficient and that the fresh allegations had taken away the faith he had begun to build in the police.

From his home in Jamaica, a statement said he was "dismayed" over the new claims.

It said: "I've always felt that my family was under greater investigation than those guilty of killing my beloved Stephen.

"It is unthinkable that in the extremely dark days and months after my son's murder that my family were subject to such scrutiny.

"I am convinced that nothing short of a judge-led public inquiry will suffice and I have no confidence that the measures announced today will get to the bottom of this matter."

It comes after the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that Scotland Yard has asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to supervise its handling of allegations that police tried to "smear" the Lawrence family.

The claims emerged in an interview with a former undercover police officer, Peter Francis.

Theresa May MP said further allegations were likely to emerge before a report on alleged deliberate incompetence and corruption during the investigation into Stephen's murder.

http://news.sky.com/story/1107321/lawrence-smear-plot-father-calls-for-inquiry

It's not as if Hogan-Howe wasn't in deep enough sh*t already. There's far more coming even after this. Be certain of that.

I remember one laughably inept tory spinner on PB touted Hogan-Howe as a great choice. Don't hear her saying that too much these days. ;^ )

foxinsoxuk said:

Charles said:

Mick_Pork said:

Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual.
They never learn.

No one is railing against devolution.

Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).

I think that a further factor is that healthier Scots are more likely to migrate.

But dying young is not all bad. At least Scotland will be able to afford its pensions!

Alex " Five bellies " Salmond will retire with six pensions ;

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-critics-claim-snp-leader-1973778

Let's hope that Mother Nature is kind to the Scottish tax-payer's wallet.

Scottish Male Suicide:

"We have also shown that suicide rates are dependent on changes in the availability and lethality of different methods. During the study period these changes included the detoxification of domestic gas, the replacement of barbiturates with the less toxic benzodiazepines, the compulsory fitting of catalytic converters in new petrol vehicles from 1993, the introduction of the legislation in 1998 on restricting the pack size of paracetamol and salicylates, and the withdrawal of co-proxamol in 2005. It is unlikely that these national changes alone can account for the diverging suicide trends, as they were implemented at the same time across Great Britain. One of the key changes in methods used during the study period, however, was the marked increase in suicide by hanging, particularly among young men in Scotland. This is of particular concern as hanging has high case fatality and is difficult to prevent, except within institutional settings. It has been proposed that population-based initiatives would be the most useful way to tackle the increase of suicide deaths by hanging, to counter the perception of hanging as a ‘clean, painless and rapid method that is easily implemented’.

http://www.chooselife.net/uploads/documents/51-Mok et al Br J Psychiatry published online feb 2012.pdf

Sounds like a devolved health issue.....

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Mick_Pork said:

SouthamObserver said:

In the end this is all about economics

So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?

Glad that's been cleared up.

Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"

Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?

Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?

I thought you were talking about Chancellors, Micky Mouse

I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.

Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.

You were trying to pass off two out of those three Chancellors as "westminster"

If you don't even know that westminster refers to the body politic where those areas of undevolved power are decided, then I fear you should go back to your trainspotting, or "foaming" as it is also called.

Try not to get too excited over this one Sunny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqvwnxgxazY

Scott_P said:

@MSmithsonPB: A punter at a Hills shop in Glasgow has bet £200,000 that the outcome of the 2014 #IndyRef will be a vote AGAINST Independence

Let's hope he lives long enough to collect, eh?

A fool and his money are easily parted