From a very long list Grum. A very very long list! 🙁

I hope that there is a significant difference between this situation which exists today when wrong doing at a pretty low level is uncovered, and the situation 20 – 30 years ago, when hillsboro and the miners strike occured. I continue to live in hope.

Lose the tribal party element, and short term governments.

I know its wikipedia, but I’ll admit to being stunned by this on the ages of consent in Europe.

However I’m inclined to think most of them happen along the lines of Burn after reading

ditto

LOL: Classic conspirascist response there winston. Absolutely no substance whatsoever, but a perfectly phrased dark undertone, lightened with a touch of a jolly jape at the end just to prove that depsite wearing the tinfoil with pride you are in fact just one of the lads. Good work, keep it up.

ditto nedrapier

It seesm to me that the inability to hide even the simplest of pecadillo’s by the most powerful of politicians tends to undermine the concept of conspiracy as a plausible explanation for anything much.

Think about it, if you can’t keep the whereabouts of your cigar box a secret when only two people are party to the secret of moist tobacco how the hell can you keep an incredibly complex deception such as 9/11 or 7/7 quiet?

Out of interest, and again stepping away from party ideology for a moment, it is intersting that perhaps arguably the most successful recovery from debt and economic collapse in the 20th century was brought about by a policy of government spending to rejuvenate the economy. I am not in any way suggesting that some form of Nazi ideology is the way forward, however, in their early days it has to be said that Adolf and the boys did bring about a dramatic turnaround in post WW1 German fortunes.

I was just talking about economics. I want to know exactly WHY you think the money that rich poeple make doesn’t end up in the pockets of the rest of us eventually.

Money flow is definitely circular, but its circular for all, so it matters not who is spending it, so I think the concept of the rich having special magic money is the one that most people responding to you are struggling to cope with. If you think about it if the present Governments argument that rich people contribute through spending is correct, then its also correct if the government tax heavilly and then spend surely? Thus directly contradicting the current slash and burn policies with their own argument.

I think the flaw in the “rich have magic money” is the concept that they spend it all, thus keeping us poor people in the style we would like to become acquainted with. They don’t, thats why they remain rich.

I just want to clear up what I suspect might be misconceptions that are being USED to argue political points

Problem is that the answer very much depends on your political persuasion and belief system. For my tennpenneth, the concept that it is valid to tax the arse off a lowly paid individual whislt not taxing an extremly highly paid one, on the basis that what the rich dude spends benefits the poor fella, whilst it doesn’t do likewise the other way round starts the process off from a bad place IMHO. I mean you don’t think Phillip Green actually dresses his Mrs at M & $ do you? So I’m guessing his wealth accrues from poor people who do, thus if you accept that point it is obvious to that its actually a case of what the poor people spend benefits the rich, thus the tax argument surely should be the opposite…..shouldn’t it? 😯

Bit amazed to find this still going, just read through pages 2 and 3 and was just thinking how amazing it was that it had got to over 100 posts sticking reasonably firmly to the OP where it said

Without getting all aggressive and territorial, and most definately without going on about what any previous government did or didn’t do

……………and then chewkw popped his head over the parapet…shame on you!

£5billion?

Pretty insignificant when compared to the rate Dave and the boys are adding to the national debt currently…. surely?

BB – All the parties are guilty of it, its easier to get cheap soundbite win in, over a substantive arguement about something which more complicated than most people want to take the time to understand.

Sorry, I’ve read this several times and reread the post to which it responds. I’m afraid I must be one of the thick electorate, as I actually have no idea what it means in context.

Lib Dems are getting the shity end of the stick (in part deservedly, and in part not), owing to the simplistic nature of debate in our media will likely be destroyed in the next election

Oh right, so no discernible position on anything and a complete failure to capitalise on the opportunity to properly examine electoral reform has got nowt to do with it? clearly its just down to the thick people who vote not being able to see through the charade presented to them ……. hang on a minute isn’t that precisely why they won’t vote for your lot?……. Anyone would think you lot were led by an Old Etonian too!

I was just wondering where all the usual right wing Thatcherite suspects have gone. Very notable by their absence recently. Will no one stand up for Dave and his puppet?

There is only one possible comment on this subject….

Case dismissed

Naive I know, but I had great hopes in the run up to the last election that between a combination of the expenses scandal and 3 unelectable parties, that the mould might just get broken and a new politics emerge from the ashes of the corrupt and flawed system that we have now. I needn’t have bothered, it should have been plain that the old boy network would belch into action and maintain the status quo. How else can you explain the fiasco of the elctoral reform referendum? Nick Clegg basically floored the minor parties for the foreseeable future with that one, and with it any hope of real change.

Is that the illustrious Dr Therese Coffey cleaning up at the World Economic Forum?? Don’t tell me that Dave’s actually found a use for her at last????

This somehow seemed appropriate

…..and another

Snap…..thats another one!

yunki has threaten to organise a spontaneous morris dancing event in Chiswick High. If that doesn’t spread anxiety/restlessness amongst the general population I don’t know what will

Fair enough…… when you put it like that.. 😉

Surely you can only incite civil unrest if and only if the populace are already restless. That being the case the answer to the OP is an unequivocal No! What you can do is focus that unrest and direct it, which is an entirely different thing.

Taiwan defo has dual purpose roads/landing strips and has had for many years. Also dual purpose civilian/military airports.

All wonderfully interesting, but as nothing when compared to Orford Ness.
Generally reckoned, by them that know, to be at least as significant as Bletchley Park to the winning of WW2 and was consistently so throughout the Cold War and also as far back as WW1, yet completely obscure, to most, to this day.

The book about its history by Paddy Heazell is well worth a read. Goes right up to developing a counter to the Exocets during the Falklands War.

The fundamental flaw in democracy was that you had to get **** to vote for you…..that was until they realised it was easier to get them not to vote at all……

18 months is a joke given he was over the limit and did a runner.

Not when compared to what the killer of the Rhyl 4 got it isn’t.

Fair enough bb. Apologies for the rude response

No need I wasn’t offended, but thank you anyway.

Regarding the sane/insane argument, it matters not where the argument is made. You cannot possibly argue that his actions were those of a sane individual, because to do so makes the act sane. He is clearly a couple of stops short of a well known East London destination, however the desire for revenge does not allow for the insane judgement to be given as that would be seen as letting him off lightly. Same was true with Sutcliffe.

Incidentally, the law in Norway does allow for indefinite detention in a mental institution in much the same way as the actual sentence given allows for indefinite detention so in fact there is no real difference in outcome other than denying the obvious, and actually admitting that he might not be the epitomy of evil in the way that gives a nice clean outcome. Goodies only wear white hats and baddies black in the movies. Reality is far more complex.

The definition of sane.

adjective, san•er, san•est.
1.
free from mental derangement; having a sound, healthy mind: a sane person.
2.
having or showing reason, sound judgment, or good sense: sane advice.
3.
sound; healthy.

Therefore by definition, if he is sane his actions are sound, good sense and/or reasonable.

Surely that’s not too difficult to grasp?

Incidentally, I would point out I am not suggesting that I think they are, I am however suggesting that it is self evident that he is insane

They know more than anyone here ever will about the facts

You’re missing the Catch 22 point aren’t you?

If they are saying he is sane, by their own definition his killing spree was a sane act. If its sane, how come they are putting him on trial for it, because by definition (theirs), its normal behaviour.

….and there you go back into the perenial 3 R’s argument about crime and punishment. i.e. is it about Revenge, Rehabilitation or Removal?

In this case I would suggest probably the first and third are the only genuine considerations in the outcome.

No “sane” person would ever kill anyone

ah well now, thats a big debate all on its own. Personally I don’t agree with that. I watched my old chap die a very slow and undignified death in a geriatric ward. If I could I would have spared him that, and I don’t think that is an insane outlook.

This is utter arse.

I well remember the yorkshire rippers trial where they spent the first month debating whether he was sane or not….this, the guy who hammered bits of wood into womens bodily orifices and beat them to death with a hammer. They decided he was indeed sane. After a very short time in chokey the Prison system went …. “ahem ..hes a nutter and we can’t cope with him” and off he went to Broadmoor where hes been ever since.

Of course they are both loons, their actions are self evidently not those of a normal sane person are they? Or are they trying to say shooting and bombing 77 people who are at best very remotely linked to any issue he might have is in fact the action of a normal well adjusted human being. In which case if they are, why put him on trial for it?

And what help did he get exactly to serve in Afghanistan, when i presume it was his Regiment that was deployed?

What you mean you actually think he got into Sandhurst solely on the basis of a Grade B for art and D for geography, which he alledgedly cheated to get? You try to get into Sandhurst with that and see how far you get, then try it at the same time as having a national scandal about how you cheated to achieve the “B” and try again.
Not the slightest chance without serious strings being pulled: Fact!

Secondly, do you honestly believe that he was deployed into an active role without additional support and protection, or indeed that he was actually placed in harms way at all? If you do you probably also believe that multi million pound movies are put at risk by the Stars doing their own stunts. Enjoy your illusions, but I would recommmend you lighten up on the narcotics, as it may well be effecting your judgement.

Not the sharpest tool in the box sometimes but evidently got a bit about him of help to get through Sandhurst and serve in Afghanistan.

there you go, sorted that for you 🙄

By that token, so is the shadow chancellor

……….NO!!

….. surely not Ed Balls cheating at A level and pulling rank to get into both Sandhurst and apache pilot training despite being nowhere near qualified for either???? When did that happen??? 😯

Hopefully normal people will see him as a normal bloke having fun, just like we all do

Surely the problem here is that to perpetuate the Royal fallacy, us normal people have to believe that in some way the Royals are special and in some way better than the rest of us mere mortals. Therefore the more that they collectively prove that they are in fact just normal people the more it undermines the institution.
This is why he’ll be in the crap with Granny.

I’ve got really mixed feelings about it.

At the UK Schools Games this year the cycling had the disabled athletes competing against each other, but as just another race in the same event. i.e. just another athlete who qualifies by dint of right, not a segregated group. That was I feel absolutely the right way to do this. I got quite goose bumpy about Oscar Pretorius in the main event. Absolutely top work after they eventually decided that having no legs probably wasn’t advantageous!

So I can’t help but feel that having a separate event is actually the epitomy of segregation and isolation. In fact they might as well drop the pretence and go the whole hog and just call it something like the “Spaslympics” if you think about it in that context.

Given current legislation on disabled access, and the fact that many of the facilities were not in use for the full two weeks, can anyone think of a valid reason for this segregation?

However, having said that, I also recognise it is a process, and it has moved disabled issues on in leaps and bounds since it first happened. So on balance, I think its better to celebrate the positives while hoping for the negatives to be addressed sooner rather than later, and to that extent I’m very happy that as a nation we are on the leading edge of what is going on and will definitely revel in the achievements we are about to see.

Had a similar problem a few years ago with a lad who lived opposite and did pretty much everything possible to piss the neighbours off. My next door neighbour was a very quiet and mild mannered teacher who it transpired was an ex-para captain.

The ragging it up and down the road was sorted by the teacher simply kicking an old kids buggy into the scrotes path one day. It did minimal damage to the car, but shook the little scrote up properly, especially when we insisted that he call the Police, who were then overwhelmed with witnesses wanting to tell how stupidly the scrote had been driving at the time and how lucky it was the child was not in said buggy. Might have more severe consequences to a biker though.

The said scrote followed this up by standing in the street with a “ghetto blaster” on full volume outside our houses. Teacher, walked out asked him to turn it down, to which scrote turned it up, teacher went out and asked again, to which the scrote turned it up, teacher then suggested scrote leave before something bad happened. He didn’t, and the ghetto blaster was punted over an adjoining garden fence by the teacher.

Strangely, things started to quiten down not long after that.

Got my tickets for tomorrow but not bothering now as its obviously just for idiots who despite being the best in the world at what they do have described it as extremely demanding, one of the most technical that we have had to race on and a real test, whilst the STW massif the true font of knowledge on all subjects have clearly identified it as only fit for powder puffery and manhood strokers.

What a let down….