Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
If Tory MPs hadn't backed Blair then Blair would have been defeated in the vote, Blair would have resigned and we wouldn't have been involved in Iraq.
Dick Cheney and Donny Rumsfeld rang IDS to thank him for his support.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
Was that Brexit or was that because Corbyn offered a load of stuff that sounded like it would address issues many of the young population of London have?
It was Brexit, as the equally large swing to the Lib Dems in Vauxhall shows.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
But you do not help by your own tone. I do respect you for many of your contributions but on Brexit you are so predictable and do not attempt to cross the divide yourself.
While I voted remain we have to leave and I hope the relationship TM has with EU leaders will result in a fair deal. Only time will tell
Out of Remain supporterd I know in real life, about a third aren't too bothered, a third are unhappy but grudgingly accept they lost, and a third are in Meeks-like implacable anger at Leave voters. The idea that the latter are "moderates" is amusing.
In my office no one who voted no mentions it - they just get on with their lives.
My brother who was passionate about remaining pre vote has accepted the result and never mentions it.
Some people will never be prepared to move on - that really is their problem and no one elses.
I understand that Mr Meeks feels raw about the situation. It is a form of bereavement when part of your world is changed and you cannot control that. Let's try and keep being kind to each other though.
Hope you would feel the same way if these move on funding succeed in impeding Brexit. If the funding rules were broken then we could see a whole new ball game.
I understand remain have questions to answer over spending.
At other elections the Lib Dems and other parties have broken spending rules - As a society we punish the rule breakers and that is it - we do not overturn results.
Well, the overspending wouldn't be Cricket, would it?
I fear that phrase is on the endangered list. Which is a shame, however much amusement the convicts are giving at the moment.
Not cricket was, however, originally sarcastic. Referring to the widespread cheating, match-fixing, gambling, prostitution, drinking and fighting associated with the game as the first professional sport.
Really? I didn't know that. There is nothing new under the sun is there?
The first professional teams were formed by high-stakes gamblers. Matches were somewhat festivals of bacchanalia. Attracting all kinds of reprobates. The players themselves were looked down on as they were not "gentlemen amateurs".
I can remember going to a Gentlemen vs Players game at Lords
We talk about Brexit pretty much non stop in the office, apart from the times we discuss MiFID II.
The loss of the passport is going to damage the financial services industry so much.
The vast majority of UK financial services is domestic, two thirds of the remaining exports go to non-EU countries, a significant share of EU exports don't use the passport, and some of the passported stuff could happen without it. There will be a hit but it will be small in the scheme of things and workarounds will be found.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
But you do not help by your own tone. I do respect you for many of your contributions but on Brexit you are so predictable and do not attempt to cross the divide yourself.
While I voted remain we have to leave and I hope the relationship TM has with EU leaders will result in a fair deal. Only time will tell
Out of Remain supporterd I know in real life, about a third aren't too bothered, a third are unhappy but grudgingly accept they lost, and a third are in Meeks-like implacable anger at Leave voters. The idea that the latter are "moderates" is amusing.
In my office no one who voted no mentions it - they just get on with their lives.
My brother who was passionate about remaining pre vote has accepted the result and never mentions it.
Some people will never be prepared to move on - that really is their problem and no one elses.
I understand that Mr Meeks feels raw about the situation. It is a form of bereavement when part of your world is changed and you cannot control that. Let's try and keep being kind to each other though.
Hope you would feel the same way if these move on funding succeed in impeding Brexit. If the funding rules were broken then we could see a whole new ball game.
I hope so too. Do you think that likely though? I followed a link to Guido's article today on remain funding and was left with the feeling that both sides were as bad as each other. It seems to me that electoral law is not fit for purpose, and the blame lies squarely with the last generation of politicians who saw the game as more important than the truth.
Just look here - some very intelligent, knowledgeable, committed people who cannot even agree on the great issue of our age. Pineapple on pizza.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
But you do not help by your own tone. I do respect you for many of your contributions but on Brexit you are so predictable and do not attempt to cross the divide yourself.
While I voted remain we have to leave and I hope the relationship TM has with EU leaders will result in a fair deal. Only time will tell
Out of Remain supporterd I know in real life, about a third aren't too bothered, a third are unhappy but grudgingly accept they lost, and a third are in Meeks-like implacable anger at Leave voters. The idea that the latter are "moderates" is amusing.
In my office no one who voted no mentions it - they just get on with their lives.
My brother who was passionate about remaining pre vote has accepted the result and never mentions it.
Some people will never be prepared to move on - that really is their problem and no one elses.
I understand that Mr Meeks feels raw about the situation. It is a form of bereavement when part of your world is changed and you cannot control that. Let's try and keep being kind to each other though.
Hope you would feel the same way if these move on funding succeed in impeding Brexit. If the funding rules were broken then we could see a whole new ball game.
Only if it can be demonstrated to have actually altered the result. Given that, according to Electoral Commission figures, Remain spent £19 million compared to Leave's £13.4 million, it would seem that the amounts being talked about would not have made a significant difference - given how Remain spent more than £5 million more than Leave and still lost.
But given both campaigns have been subject to scrutiny over the management of their finances, I can easily see why people are just not getting engaged over this. Remain spent more and lost
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
Apart from IDS being gung ho for Iraq intervention before the dodgy dossier was a twinkle in A.Campbell's eye, & Con mps proportionally the strongest supporters of any party in the Iraq vote, yeah, not involved at all.
Don't be so obtuse. The government at the time - you know the people responsible for the dossier - was a Labour government. They were the ones involved in the manipulation of intelligence material.
IDS had no control over the reports. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.
It a Labour PM and his Labour Press team all the way.
And everyone else is now having to deal with the fallout from their actions.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
If Tory MPs hadn't backed Blair then Blair would have been defeated in the vote, Blair would have resigned and we wouldn't have been involved in Iraq.
Dick Cheney and Donny Rumsfeld rang IDS to thank him for his support.
IDS didn't create the dossier. Blair and his team are the ones who used intelligence material and then 'sexed it up' for their own ends. Yes, the Conservative Party accepted the report - but the people doing the dissembling were Labour.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
Apart from IDS being gung ho for Iraq intervention before the dodgy dossier was a twinkle in A.Campbell's eye, & Con mps proportionally the strongest supporters of any party in the Iraq vote, yeah, not involved at all.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
She could give a single, nuanced speech setting out the positive case for both options, with a similar tone to her speech in the 2016 campaign. It would work.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
I think that would be too painfully familiar a prognosis.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
So why was there no big swing to the Conservatives in places like Romford, Feltham, Uxbridge and Carshalton ?
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
She wouldn’t survive till the Six O’Clock News. The 48 letters would descend at once. She has every interest in no referendum.
That should be a de minimus.(the bans) Lehman has to carry the can
In all honesty,I'm less bothered about the cheating than I am about the Australian (and not just Australian, but they're by far the worst) approach to sledging - trying to win by calling someone names. That is the absolute antithesis of sport. It's worse than diving in football.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
I think that would be too painfully familiar a prognosis.
It would have the added appeal to her personally that she could show Cameron how it's done. She's very motivated by doing things differently to him and showing that she knew best all along.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
Was that Brexit or was that because Corbyn offered a load of stuff that sounded like it would address issues many of the young population of London have?
It was Brexit, as the equally large swing to the Lib Dems in Vauxhall shows.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
She wouldn’t survive till the Six O’Clock News. The 48 letters would descend at once. She has every interest in no referendum.
Even if they did, she'd win the confidence vote because by that point it would be clear that ousting a leader for offering the people a say would be untenable.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
I live in London (well zone 2) and my experience is diametrically opposite. No one gets upset. No one discusses it.
Perhaps you mix in circles socially adept enough to not need to rely on personal ads to find a date.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
I live in London (well zone 2) and my experience is diametrically opposite. No one gets upset. No one discusses it.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Out of Remain supporterd I know in real life, about a third aren't too bothered, a third are unhappy but grudgingly accept they lost, and a third are in Meeks-like implacable anger at Leave voters. The idea that the latter are "moderates" is amusing.
In my office no one who voted no mentions it - they just get on with their lives.
My brother who was passionate about remaining pre vote has accepted the result and never mentions it.
Some people will never be prepared to move on - that really is their problem and no one elses.
I understand that Mr Meeks feels raw about the situation. It is a form of bereavement when part of your world is changed and you cannot control that. Let's try and keep being kind to each other though.
Hope you would feel the same way if these move on funding succeed in impeding Brexit. If the funding rules were broken then we could see a whole new ball game.
I hope so too. Do you think that likely though? I followed a link to Guido's article today on remain funding and was left with the feeling that both sides were as bad as each other. It seems to me that electoral law is not fit for purpose, and the blame lies squarely with the last generation of politicians who saw the game as more important than the truth.
Just look here - some very intelligent, knowledgeable, committed people who cannot even agree on the great issue of our age. Pineapple on pizza.
I had the impression that we were pretty solidly "no" on that
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
So why was there no big swing to the Conservatives in places like Romford, Feltham, Uxbridge and Carshalton ?
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
Cardiff was as Remainy as London ( if not a bit more so?). Just not mentioned. The streets are not stalked by Leave Stormtroopers down from the Valleys crushing dissent, and looking out for those listening to radio Brussels on clandestine sets.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
She wouldn’t survive till the Six O’Clock News. The 48 letters would descend at once. She has every interest in no referendum.
Even if they did, she'd win the confidence vote because by that point it would be clear that ousting a leader for offering the people a say would be untenable.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
She wouldn’t survive till the Six O’Clock News. The 48 letters would descend at once. She has every interest in no referendum.
Even if they did, she'd win the confidence vote because by that point it would be clear that ousting a leader for offering the people a say would be untenable.
Nope.
Nope to what? What do you think it would do to the Tories' prospects if the defenestrated a leader for offering the people a vote on a matter of such consequence? They are not that stupid.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
She could give a single, nuanced speech setting out the positive case for both options, with a similar tone to her speech in the 2016 campaign. It would work.
Her speech in 2016 backed a side. And now she is Prime Minister, making it even more a requirement. You can't have a major national decision and have the government of the day undecided on it.
We talk about Brexit pretty much non stop in the office, apart from the times we discuss MiFID II.
The loss of the passport is going to damage the financial services industry so much.
The vast majority of UK financial services is domestic, two thirds of the remaining exports go to non-EU countries, a significant share of EU exports don't use the passport, and some of the passported stuff could happen without it. There will be a hit but it will be small in the scheme of things and workarounds will be found.
I'm glad you can be so blithe about the largest contributor to the Exchequer.
Over 300,000 financial passports are held by UK firms.
I mean what's circa £25 to £30 billion pounds worth of exports.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Out of Remain supporterd I know in real life, about a third aren't too bothered, a third are unhappy but grudgingly accept they lost, and a third are in Meeks-like implacable anger at Leave voters. The idea that the latter are "moderates" is amusing.
In my office no one who voted no mentions it - they just get on with their lives.
My brother who was passionate about remaining pre vote has accepted the result and never mentions it.
Some people will never be prepared to move on - that really is their problem and no one elses.
I understand that Mr Meeks feels raw about the situation. It is a form of bereavement when part of your world is changed and you cannot control that. Let's try and keep being kind to each other though.
Hope you would feel the same way if these move on funding succeed in impeding Brexit. If the funding rules were broken then we could see a whole new ball game.
I hope so too. Do you think that likely though? I followed a link to Guido's article today on remain funding and was left with the feeling that both sides were as bad as each other. It seems to me that electoral law is not fit for purpose, and the blame lies squarely with the last generation of politicians who saw the game as more important than the truth.
Just look here - some very intelligent, knowledgeable, committed people who cannot even agree on the great issue of our age. Pineapple on pizza.
I had the impression that we were pretty solidly "no" on that
Its all we talk about in my office. Some people cannot accept that position
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
I live in London (well zone 2) and my experience is diametrically opposite. No one gets upset. No one discusses it.
Zone 2? (Shrugs shoulders..)
I'm disappointed that Charles even knows what public transport is.
BA?
(I had the experience of a friend agreeing with me when I apologised for being late for a meeting because of public transport who agreed... he’d had to fire his pilot and his chopper was in for repairs so he needed to catch a BA flight from Belfast... but it was delayed 3 hours...)
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
Apart from IDS being gung ho for Iraq intervention before the dodgy dossier was a twinkle in A.Campbell's eye, & Con mps proportionally the strongest supporters of any party in the Iraq vote, yeah, not involved at all.
Don't be so obtuse. The government at the time - you know the people responsible for the dossier - was a Labour government. They were the ones involved in the manipulation of intelligence material.
IDS had no control over the reports. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.
It a Labour PM and his Labour Press team all the way.
And everyone else is now having to deal with the fallout from their actions.
It's miraculous, Tory mps voted in larger numbers than any other party to go into Iraq, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv. Tories push for even laxer financial regulation than Labour up to 2008, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv. Majority of Tory mps & msps voted against gay marriage, subsequent success of progressive legislation everything to do with us guv. Let's not even bother with Tories' backtracking and broken promises over devolution.
Let's just call you the avoiding blame and stealing credit party.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
She wouldn’t survive till the Six O’Clock News. The 48 letters would descend at once. She has every interest in no referendum.
Even if they did, she'd win the confidence vote because by that point it would be clear that ousting a leader for offering the people a say would be untenable.
Nope.
Nope to what? What do you think it would do to the Tories' prospects if the defenestrated a leader for offering the people a vote on a matter of such consequence? They are not that stupid.
The Tories would rip themselves apart. After they’d ripped her apart. That’s why it’s not going to happen. Even if you pray hard, it still won’t. Sorry.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
So why was there no big swing to the Conservatives in places like Romford, Feltham, Uxbridge and Carshalton ?
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
The Lib Dems are irrelevant. Brexit has irretrievably severed the connection between prudent London voters and the Conservatives. For now Labour is the default. As someone who is appalled by Jeremy Corbyn, this deeply saddens me.
As for who’s right, I’m just one voice. London Leave PBers are, I suspect, well-known for their proclivities on that front. They are unlikely to be hearing the same conversations with anything like the same regularity. Their unfailingly charming manner no doubt encourages Remain voters to take them into their confidence. As for other London Remain PBers, they can speak for themselves.
Anyway, you asked for my experience and I gave it to you. You’ll have to form your own view I’m afraid.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
I live in London (well zone 2) and my experience is diametrically opposite. No one gets upset. No one discusses it.
Zone 2? (Shrugs shoulders..)
Bankers fit in well with cricketers
I was offered a job in London late last year.
A house in Dore costs £600k, an equivalent house in St John's Wood was over £12 million.
We talk about Brexit pretty much non stop in the office, apart from the times we discuss MiFID II.
The loss of the passport is going to damage the financial services industry so much.
The vast majority of UK financial services is domestic, two thirds of the remaining exports go to non-EU countries, a significant share of EU exports don't use the passport, and some of the passported stuff could happen without it. There will be a hit but it will be small in the scheme of things and workarounds will be found.
I'm glad you can be so blithe about the largest contributor to the Exchequer.
Over 300,000 financial passports are held by UK firms.
I mean what's circa £25 to £30 billion pounds worth of exports.
But at least we'll have blue passports.
There is not £25 to £30 bn of financial service exports to the EU, let alone that amount under the financial service passports.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
That explains all - you vote for campaigns!!!
More accurately I vote against them. I voted against the xenophobic lies told by Leave because the country could not go in a good direction with the mandate such a victory would imply. So it is proving.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
She could give a single, nuanced speech setting out the positive case for both options, with a similar tone to her speech in the 2016 campaign. It would work.
Her speech in 2016 backed a side. And now she is Prime Minister, making it even more a requirement. You can't have a major national decision and have the government of the day undecided on it.
Being PM makes it less of a requirement. She could genuinely position herself as being content to lead whichever way the vote goes - either a 'smooth and orderly' exit, or returning to the EU with a new spirit (she could give a veiled critique of Cameron's handling of the EU as well and offer an alternative vision).
Doing it that way would also avoid the referendum becoming a chance to give her a kicking.
Leanne Wood leader of Plaid Cymru is a disgrace - she wont back Russian actions as she doesn't believe a word the Tories say without evidence as they have form
It's an argument that doesn't make any sense to me.
The US case for Iraqi WMD as presented by Colin Powell at the UN was based on one major defector, satellite imagery, and signals intelligence intercepts. The UK intelligence community presumably had very similar information. Fundamentally it was an assessment of things that were remote, covert, and fragmentary. It was mostly wrong, although there were a few remants of previous Iraqi WMD programmes found after the war.
The UK intelligence assessment of the nerve agent attack is based on first-hand analysis of the agent and its effects, and likely includes some very clever chemical forensics capability that we have built up since the Litvinenko murder. The identification was so prompt that I think we have surprised the Russians by our capabilities.
I get why people are suspicious post Iraq, but it's really not a like for like comparable issue.
Her position is even more confused as the Tories were not involved in the Iraq process at all...
Apart from IDS being gung ho for Iraq intervention before the dodgy dossier was a twinkle in A.Campbell's eye, & Con mps proportionally the strongest supporters of any party in the Iraq vote, yeah, not involved at all.
Don't be so obtuse. The government at the time - you know the people responsible for the dossier - was a Labour government. They were the ones involved in the manipulation of intelligence material.
IDS had no control over the reports. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.
It a Labour PM and his Labour Press team all the way.
And everyone else is now having to deal with the fallout from their actions.
It's miraculous, Tory mps voted in larger numbers than any other party to go into Iraq, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv. Tories push for even laxer financial regulation than Labour up to 2008, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv. Majority of Tory mps & msps voted against gay marriage, subsequent success of progressive legislation everything to do with us guv. Let's not even go to the Tories' backtracking and broken promises over devolution.
Let's just call you the avoiding blame and stealing credit party.
You really are so tribal that you will not accept that a Labour Government created the dodgy dossier. It really wasn't anyone else.
Focus on the issue in hand and just admit that the Dodgy Dossier was a Labour publication. Go on. I dare you.
lol, what, exactly, are the electoral commission supposed to be investigating?
Makes her a star David, most of them look like they have been hit by a bus and sound like it to ( males as well ), as well as spouting drivel. At least she has some redeeming feature.
Silly question....if Rocket man has gone to Beijing on a train.
Isn't it rather a long way from Pyongyang to Beijing and rather boring way of getting there?
Yes but you can’t get shot down. By accident of course. Don’t think Stalin was keen on flying either. Odd that.
No chance of an accidental derailment? Coming from North Korea and arriving in Beijing, must be a bit like that train arriving back from Westworld to the Mesa Hub.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
She could give a single, nuanced speech setting out the positive case for both options, with a similar tone to her speech in the 2016 campaign. It would work.
Her speech in 2016 backed a side. And now she is Prime Minister, making it even more a requirement. You can't have a major national decision and have the government of the day undecided on it.
Being PM makes it less of a requirement. She could genuinely position herself as being content to lead whichever way the vote goes - either a 'smooth and orderly' exit, or returning to the EU with a new spirit (she could give a veiled critique of Cameron's handling of the EU as well and offer an alternative vision).
Doing it that way would also avoid the referendum becoming a chance to give her a kicking.
Boris would um and ah and then back Remain.
If this is what you are pinning your hopes on, you really will be disappointed.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
No, he went to war on a misjudgement.
It was a massive lie about not working with the Israelis.
Silly question....if Rocket man has gone to Beijing on a train.
Isn't it rather a long way from Pyongyang to Beijing and rather boring way of getting there?
Yes but you can’t get shot down. By accident of course. Don’t think Stalin was keen on flying either. Odd that.
No chance of an accidental derailment? Coming from North Korea and arriving in Beijing, must be a bit like that train arriving Westworld Mesa Hub.
More chance of surviving that though.
What North Korea to China or in Westworld? Having seen the trailer for Season 2 of Westworld, not much chance of surviving in the park this time around.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
I think that should certainly be more than adequate to confirm your status as a moderate here. There are no hypothetical Leave campaigns whatsoever that I could ever have voted for so you're certainly more moderate than I am.
I fully accept the result though, of course, and I'm not too interested in re-fighting old battles as, although I hate the idea of leaving the EU, I believe the referendum campaign (specifically how both sides of it conducted themselves) has done more damage to the UK than the actual result of the vote.
Silly question....if Rocket man has gone to Beijing on a train.
Isn't it rather a long way from Pyongyang to Beijing and rather boring way of getting there?
Yes but you can’t get shot down. By accident of course. Don’t think Stalin was keen on flying either. Odd that.
No chance of an accidental derailment? Coming from North Korea and arriving in Beijing, must be a bit like that train arriving Westworld Mesa Hub.
More chance of surviving that though.
What North Korea to China or in Westworld? Having seen the trailer for Season 2 of Westworld, not much chance of surviving in the park this time around.
We talk about Brexit pretty much non stop in the office, apart from the times we discuss MiFID II.
The loss of the passport is going to damage the financial services industry so much.
The vast majority of UK financial services is domestic, two thirds of the remaining exports go to non-EU countries, a significant share of EU exports don't use the passport, and some of the passported stuff could happen without it. There will be a hit but it will be small in the scheme of things and workarounds will be found.
I'm glad you can be so blithe about the largest contributor to the Exchequer.
Over 300,000 financial passports are held by UK firms.
I mean what's circa £25 to £30 billion pounds worth of exports.
But at least we'll have blue passports.
There is not £25 to £30 bn of financial service exports to the EU, let alone that amount under the financial service passports.
The figure was £20 billion in 2014, and it has grown since then but what do the British Banking Association/UK Finance know?
Why does passporting matter?
While each passport covers a separate kind of activity, to enable banks to service the needs of customers and businesses, many modern banking services involve activities covered by more than one passport (see Box 2: Providing Capital to EU businesses).
These passports are the basis of the single market in financial services and are used to enable a steady flow of trade in financial services across the EU. Many banks and financial services businesses in the UK have based their business models on the rights conferred by EU legislation to ‘passport’ their services across the EU and the EEA.
They are especially important for the UK, which is the largest exporter of financial services inside the single market, exporting over £20 billion of services to customers in the rest of the EU in 2014 and helping provide hundreds of billions of euros in finance.
This trade also supports a wide ecosystem of ancillary services, from legal and business services to data processing and storage.
Silly question....if Rocket man has gone to Beijing on a train.
Isn't it rather a long way from Pyongyang to Beijing and rather boring way of getting there?
Yes but you can’t get shot down. By accident of course. Don’t think Stalin was keen on flying either. Odd that.
No chance of an accidental derailment? Coming from North Korea and arriving in Beijing, must be a bit like that train arriving Westworld Mesa Hub.
More chance of surviving that though.
What North Korea to China or in Westworld? Having seen the trailer for Season 2 of Westworld, not much chance of surviving in the park this time around.
I wonder who NP's circle in the Surrey bubble comprises, champagne socialists presumably.
Office colleagues (big open plan with 90 staff, lots of interaction). Poker players. Labour members. Gamers. Shop assistants (very chatty and personal in this little town). Haven't met any champagne socialists - think they mostly live in London.
Everyone's very nice, but there's not a huge amount going on. Cinemas, clubs, ambitious resaurants, immigration, boozers, large bookshops are all distant rumours. Some pleasant coffee shops, lots of estate agents and banks, a Pizza Express if you fancy haute cuisine. If I was 18 I'd be desperate to get away - at 68, it's quite pleasant in a slightly unreal way.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
Talking of Iraq and Brexit,Blair is on Newsnight now......
Louise Ellmann MP was on beforehand and very good she was too.
The difficulty she and others who want Labour to live up to its principles face is that if Corbyn seriously wants to get rid of anti-semitism he is going to have to disavow some of the things he has said and done over the years (for instance, his championing of convicted anti-semite, Raed Salah). Is he willing and capable of doing that? I’m not at all sure he is.
I wonder who NP's circle in the Surrey bubble comprises, champagne socialists presumably.
Office colleagues (big open plan with 90 staff, lots of interaction). Poker players. Labour members. Gamers. Shop assistants (very chatty and personal in this little town). Haven't met any champagne socialists - think they mostly live in London.
Everyone's very nice, but there's not a huge amount going on. Cinemas, clubs, ambitious resaurants, immigration, boozers, large bookshops are all distant rumours. Some pleasant coffee shops, lots of estate agents and banks, a Pizza Express if you fancy haute cuisine. If I was 18 I'd be desperate to get away - at 68, it's quite pleasant in a slightly unreal way.
Used to be a cracking antiquarian book auction in Godders (up an alley next to Caffe Nero). Sadly closed a couple of years ago.
Grills and Greens always used to be the spot for breakfast/lunch...
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
No, he went to war on a misjudgement.
It was a massive lie about not working with the Israelis.
Yes, he denied working with the Israelis. He didn't make up a pretext for going to war.
Increasing it off a miniscule base. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have no interest in a second referendum. The only way we will still be in the EU in ten years' time is if it turns out VoteLeave worked woth the Russians or if we rejoin pending Chuka Umunna's new Progressives party barnstorming to power.
I dispute that the Prime Minister has no interest in a second referendum. It would be the perfect solution for her. She could sit above the fray while creating a civil war within Labour, and then lead a united party whatever the verdict of the people.
There is no way the government could call a referendum and not take a stance on it. Her backing Remain would cause a Tory civil war and if she backed Leave she would only be creating a potentially resigning matter for herself.
She could give a single, nuanced speech setting out the positive case for both options, with a similar tone to her speech in the 2016 campaign. It would work.
Her speech in 2016 backed a side. And now she is Prime Minister, making it even more a requirement. You can't have a major national decision and have the government of the day undecided on it.
Being PM makes it less of a requirement. She could genuinely position herself as being content to lead whichever way the vote goes - either a 'smooth and orderly' exit, or returning to the EU with a new spirit (she could give a veiled critique of Cameron's handling of the EU as well and offer an alternative vision).
Doing it that way would also avoid the referendum becoming a chance to give her a kicking.
Boris would um and ah and then back Remain.
If this is what you are pinning your hopes on, you really will be disappointed.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
So why was there no big swing to the Conservatives in places like Romford, Feltham, Uxbridge and Carshalton ?
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
Cardiff was as Remainy as London ( if not a bit more so?). Just not mentioned. The streets are not stalked by Leave Stormtroopers down from the Valleys crushing dissent, and looking out for those listening to radio Brussels on clandestine sets.
Edinburgh too. People still raise interesting questions such as how will decrees be mutually enforced unless EU law is changed too, the extent to which we might be driven back to the Hague Conventions and the limitations on us just making EU law our domestic law internationally but I cannot recall the last time I met someone who seriously contended that the decision should be reversed, even if they personally regret it. That ship has sailed.
Yet you seem to be the only person talking this way.
Other PB Remain voters aren't.
I don't see any BBC or Guardian articles referring to London being in the mood of a city under occupation.
Look at the swings to Labour in London last year. That’s the sea change in votes.
So why was there no big swing to the Conservatives in places like Romford, Feltham, Uxbridge and Carshalton ?
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
The Lib Dems are irrelevant. Brexit has irretrievably severed the connection between prudent London voters and the Conservatives. For now Labour is the default. As someone who is appalled by Jeremy Corbyn, this deeply saddens me.
As for who’s right, I’m just one voice. London Leave PBers are, I suspect, well-known for their proclivities on that front. They are unlikely to be hearing the same conversations with anything like the same regularity. Their unfailingly charming manner no doubt encourages Remain voters to take them into their confidence. As for other London Remain PBers, they can speak for themselves.
Anyway, you asked for my experience and I gave it to you. You’ll have to form your own view I’m afraid.
But the LibDems aren't irrelevant are they.
Aside from their stronghold in SW London there have been plenty of other heavily Remain boroughs where the LibDems controlled the council only a decade ago - Camden, Lambeth, Southwark, Haringey and your own Islington.
Now with the Conservatives nearly non-existent in these areas and with Corbyn's promises on student debt etc irrelevent this year surely there should be a big swing to the LibDems if Brexit is such a big issue.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
You weren't the only one. However, you can maybe empathise why certain people in Labour do not see a "moderate" leading the party as a panacea.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
No, he went to war on a misjudgement.
To be fair, he conspired with Israel to create a false pretext for a “peacekeeping” intervention by Britain and France.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, exactly. I was puzzled, because even if what Blair was saying was true, I couldn't see what the hurry was, since Iraq was crawling with UN weapons inspectors at the time. But I naively thought Blair must have information we didn't, which would explain it. In terms of public trust in politicians and 'experts', it was surely the most corrosive incident of the last half-century, especially when combined with the absolutely extraordinary conclusions of the Hutton Inquiry.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
No, he went to war on a misjudgement.
To be fair, he conspired with Israel to create a false pretext for a “peacekeeping” intervention by Britain and France.
Sloppy, and embarrassing.
The embarrassing thing was going to war alongside France.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
That explains all - you vote for campaigns!!!
To be fair, I recall him saying before the vote that his decision would be based on the vision of the future which both campaigns presented. He took the view - and I quite understand why - that the vision presented by Farage and others, as exemplified by the two posters, was not something he shared or liked.
I wonder who NP's circle in the Surrey bubble comprises, champagne socialists presumably.
Office colleagues (big open plan with 90 staff, lots of interaction). Poker players. Labour members. Gamers. Shop assistants (very chatty and personal in this little town). Haven't met any champagne socialists - think they mostly live in London.
Everyone's very nice, but there's not a huge amount going on. Cinemas, clubs, ambitious resaurants, immigration, boozers, large bookshops are all distant rumours. Some pleasant coffee shops, lots of estate agents and banks, a Pizza Express if you fancy haute cuisine. If I was 18 I'd be desperate to get away - at 68, it's quite pleasant in a slightly unreal way.
One of my many problems with going to war with Iraq was that was not a part of the war on terror. Saddam, for all the bad things he was, was not an Islamic fundamentalist. If the war on terror was really as important as it was said to be then it needed to be confided to terrorists.
My other main complaint was we still had work to do in Afghanistan. I approved of the decision to invade it on the basis we would build up the country into a workable democracy.
I didn't believe the weapons of mass destruction line but if I'm being honest as a very passionate teenager that last part at least may have been more based on being against the war rather than sound unbiased analysis.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
You weren't the only one. However, you can maybe empathise why certain people in Labour do not see a "moderate" leading the party as a panacea.
Being a moderate does not mean being a liar. Blair was a liar but you cannot paint everyone in the centre of the party with his brush. The UK needs a credible alternative government. It would, amongst other things, force the current government to up its game and focus on the many real issues we face instead of obsessing with the side show that is Brexit. Labour is letting the country down and it is already damaging us, even without them being elected.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
That explains all - you vote for campaigns!!!
To be fair, I recall him saying before the vote that his decision would be based on the vision of the future which both campaigns presented. He took the view - and I quite understand why - that the vision presented by Farage and others, as exemplified by the two posters, was not something he shared or liked.
The issue being that Farage was not the official campaign. If Farage didn't exist there would have been someone else playing the role of the extremist.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
AM
Out of interest are your views widely shared among your real-world acquaintances ?
I'm curious because in my little part of the world people rarely mention politics and even less so with any fervency.
Certainly they might not like politician X or policy Y but they accept them and get on with their own lives.
Brexit is alive like no other political topic. I’m not joking when I say I’m a moderate.
I was travelling on a train from Birmingham to London last week (second class because I’m a man of the people). Behind me an old man fell into conversation with his neighbour. The old boy, who turned out to be in his 90s, told his neighbour that he had felt the same sense of dread about the referendum vote that he had felt on the outbreak of World War Two. A Scottish friend of his had burst into tears on the news.
In work meetings it is a routine topic of conversation (one I avoid because it arouses too many passions in others). In London you see personal ads where writers specify no Leave voters.
This is as live and raw as it was when the vote came out. The mood in London is not far off a city under occupation.
I live in London (well zone 2) and my experience is diametrically opposite. No one gets upset. No one discusses it.
As someone who commutes to and works in London every day, I generally find it's more practical to keep my black uniform and knuckle dusters in the cupboard by my desk.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
You weren't the only one. However, you can maybe empathise why certain people in Labour do not see a "moderate" leading the party as a panacea.
Only if you think that “moderate” means the same as “untrustworthy lying bastard”.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
Come on. Going to war on a lie was exactly what Eden did in the Halcyon days of the fifties.
No, he went to war on a misjudgement.
To be fair, he conspired with Israel to create a false pretext for a “peacekeeping” intervention by Britain and France.
Sloppy, and embarrassing.
The embarrassing thing was going to war alongside France.
Defeat was guaranteed from that moment onwards.
Oh and giving the operation a French name.
It's not really clear what we would have done had we "won", either.
Continued to occupy the Suez Canal Zone with tens of thousands of troops?
That wasn't working for us barely 2 years earlier, which, ironically, led to the withdrawal which helped precipitate the nationalisation.
Missing the point: it was not the Tories who were responsible for the misuse of intelligence which led to the decision to go to war. Those responsible were the Labour government.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
It's now almost impossible for anyone aged under 50 to believe, but at the time of Blair's dodgy dossier, no-one except cranks thought that a British PM would mislead parliament and the country over such a grave matter, on matters of fact. We were naive of course; we should have realised how deeply New Labour had corrupted the body politic.
I didn't really believe it, not on what we were told, but when a British PM stands up in Parliament and tells the House that the raw intelligence passing his desk every day really left no room for doubt I wrongly gave the lying bastard the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, exactly. I was puzzled, because even if what Blair was saying was true, I couldn't see what the hurry was, since Iraq was crawling with UN weapons inspectors at the time. But I naively thought Blair must have information we didn't, which would explain it. In terms of public trust in politicians and 'experts', it was surely the most corrosive incident of the last half-century, especially when combined with the absolutely extraordinary conclusions of the Hutton Inquiry.
Hutton had a chance to repair some of the damage. And he blew it in the most disgraceful way. Shameful.
One of my many problems with going to war with Iraq was that was not a part of the war on terror. Saddam, for all the bad things he was, was not an Islamic fundamentalist. If the war on terror was really as important as it was said to be then it needed to be confided to terrorists.
My other main complaint was we still had work to do in Afghanistan. I approved of the decision to invade it on the basis we would build up the country into a workable democracy.
I didn't believe the weapons of mass destruction line but if I'm being honest as a very passionate teenager that last part at least may have been more based on being against the war rather than sound unbiased analysis.
For once I find myself agreeing with you, especially on your second paragraph. The Iraq war was not only a disaster in itself, it was also a disaster in terms of distracting attention and effort from Afghanistan, where there genuinely had been a necessity to respond to terrorism.
Hutton had a chance to repair some of the damage. And he blew it in the most disgraceful way. Shameful.
I think I've mentioned before that reading Lord Hutton's conclusion was the first time in my life that I discovered that the phrase 'jaw-dropping' was not just a figure of speech.
One of my many problems with going to war with Iraq was that was not a part of the war on terror. Saddam, for all the bad things he was, was not an Islamic fundamentalist. If the war on terror was really as important as it was said to be then it needed to be confided to terrorists.
My other main complaint was we still had work to do in Afghanistan. I approved of the decision to invade it on the basis we would build up the country into a workable democracy.
I didn't believe the weapons of mass destruction line but if I'm being honest as a very passionate teenager that last part at least may have been more based on being against the war rather than sound unbiased analysis.
For once I find myself agreeing with you, especially on your second paragraph. The Iraq war was not only a disaster in itself, it was also a disaster in terms of distracting attention and effort from Afghanistan, where there genuinely had been a necessity to respond to terrorism.
It was almost as if the deciding factor was that Iraq had a nice empty desert where the American military could play with all of their toys to their heart's content and show how well they worked under ideal conditions.
I'm sure Yokel will fill us in on the details - I always enjoy his posts - and I can't help being impressed by how many Western countries have fallen in so quickly behind the UK's position, and how flawlessly they've coordinated mass ejections of Russian 'diplomats'.
Big step.
I can only conclude that the intelligence that our security services (who are clearly very, very good) have shared with them is pretty damning, and there's evidence it forms part of a broader web of aggressive espionage and extraterritorial intent by Russia.
One could of course argue that ejection of 1, 2, or 3 diplomats here and there by European countries were random and token choices, just to send a message, but I suspect they were more likely to have been intelligence-led choices, and all known Russian agents.
So, we have a coordinated attempt to degrade Russia's intelligence capability in the West. I suspect most Western countries realise what happened in Salisbury could have happened to any of them and, if they don't send a very clear message to Putin now, there might be no telling where it might end.
Hutton had a chance to repair some of the damage. And he blew it in the most disgraceful way. Shameful.
I think I've mentioned before that reading Lord Hutton's conclusion was the first time in my life that I discovered that the phrase 'jaw-dropping' was not just a figure of speech.
LOL. If you had I'd forgotten. What was particularly frustrating about Hutton, unlike the subsequent inquiries, is that it was quite good about getting and collating the evidence. Only to ignore it in those conclusions.
Hutton had a chance to repair some of the damage. And he blew it in the most disgraceful way. Shameful.
I think I've mentioned before that reading Lord Hutton's conclusion was the first time in my life that I discovered that the phrase 'jaw-dropping' was not just a figure of speech.
LOL. If you had I'd forgotten. What was particularly frustrating about Hutton, unlike the subsequent inquiries, is that it was quite good about getting and collating the evidence. Only to ignore it in those conclusions.
No inquiry will ever plumb the depths that Leveson did.
Newspapers should pay legal costs of plaintiffs, even if found not guilty? Sheer, unmitigated stupidity.
Boris Johnson could have been caught on camera taking roubles from Vladimir Putin in return for abolishing democracy after Brexit and Leavers would still want to press ahead. This story won’t stop Brexit.
It might, however, make Leavers’ already difficult job of persuading the sceptical that bit harder. But Leavers seem quite clueless about how they are going to get Brexit to stick.
Alastair - nobody will change your views on Brexit no matter what happens
Note, I am a relative moderate. I don’t want to stop Brexit, I don’t agree with the idea of a second referendum. The pool of the persuadable is small and shrinking. But somehow Leave are going to need to build at least a sullen acquiescence. They haven’t started yet and have gone backwards in the last 18 months.
Another genuine question for you: would you feel less disgusted with the result if Leave had won without the two posters you referred to on the previous thread? (I understand that it would not have been your preferred result.)
Yes.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
That explains all - you vote for campaigns!!!
To be fair, I recall him saying before the vote that his decision would be based on the vision of the future which both campaigns presented. He took the view - and I quite understand why - that the vision presented by Farage and others, as exemplified by the two posters, was not something he shared or liked.
The issue being that Farage was not the official campaign. If Farage didn't exist there would have been someone else playing the role of the extremist.
The Turkey poster which Mr Meeks intensely disliked was by the official Leave campaign.
Comments
Dick Cheney and Donny Rumsfeld rang IDS to thank him for his support.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/591631.html
Just look here - some very intelligent, knowledgeable, committed people who cannot even agree on the great issue of our age. Pineapple on pizza.
IDS had no control over the reports. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.
It a Labour PM and his Labour Press team all the way.
And everyone else is now having to deal with the fallout from their actions.
I’m not an aficionado of the EU. There are hypothetical Leave campaigns I could have voted for.
Leanne Wood is the sort of stupid person who just assumes that bad stuff can only be done by Tories.
Perhaps issues like housing and student debt had an effect as well in places where they affect many ?
And if Brexit is the big issue are you predicting huge gains for the LibDems in London this year ?
But you ignored my point - other London PBers are picking up on this mood nor are the media. That's not to say you're wrong and they are right but how is an outsider, like me, to judge ?
That Labour member who became the only person made a peer by Corbyn did it.
Over 300,000 financial passports are held by UK firms.
I mean what's circa £25 to £30 billion pounds worth of exports.
But at least we'll have blue passports.
Isn't it rather a long way from Pyongyang to Beijing and rather boring way of getting there?
(I had the experience of a friend agreeing with me when I apologised for being late for a meeting because of public transport who agreed... he’d had to fire his pilot and his chopper was in for repairs so he needed to catch a BA flight from Belfast... but it was delayed 3 hours...)
It's miraculous, Tory mps voted in larger numbers than any other party to go into Iraq, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv.
Tories push for even laxer financial regulation than Labour up to 2008, subsequent clusterfuck nothing to do with us guv.
Majority of Tory mps & msps voted against gay marriage, subsequent success of progressive legislation everything to do with us guv.
Let's not even bother with Tories' backtracking and broken promises over devolution.
Let's just call you the avoiding blame and stealing credit party.
As for who’s right, I’m just one voice. London Leave PBers are, I suspect, well-known for their proclivities on that front. They are unlikely to be hearing the same conversations with anything like the same regularity. Their unfailingly charming manner no doubt encourages Remain voters to take them into their confidence. As for other London Remain PBers, they can speak for themselves.
Anyway, you asked for my experience and I gave it to you. You’ll have to form your own view I’m afraid.
A house in Dore costs £600k, an equivalent house in St John's Wood was over £12 million.
I guess I'm staying a Northern Monkey.
Doing it that way would also avoid the referendum becoming a chance to give her a kicking.
Boris would um and ah and then back Remain.
Focus on the issue in hand and just admit that the Dodgy Dossier was a Labour publication. Go on. I dare you.
You probably need a bit of work on your tribal identification.
I fully accept the result though, of course, and I'm not too interested in re-fighting old battles as, although I hate the idea of leaving the EU, I believe the referendum campaign (specifically how both sides of it conducted themselves) has done more damage to the UK than the actual result of the vote.
Why does passporting matter?
While each passport covers a separate kind of activity, to enable banks to service the needs of customers and businesses, many modern banking services involve activities covered by more than one passport (see Box 2: Providing Capital to EU businesses).
These passports are the basis of the single market in financial services and are used to enable a steady flow of trade in financial services across the EU. Many banks and financial services businesses in the UK have based their business models on the rights conferred by EU legislation to ‘passport’ their services across the EU and the EEA.
They are especially important for the UK, which is the largest exporter of financial services inside the single market, exporting over £20 billion of services to customers in the rest of the EU in 2014 and helping provide hundreds of billions of euros in finance.
This trade also supports a wide ecosystem of ancillary services, from legal and business services to data processing and storage.
https://www.bba.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/webversion-BQB-3-1.pdf
Not excited for it, not at all....
Everyone's very nice, but there's not a huge amount going on. Cinemas, clubs, ambitious resaurants, immigration, boozers, large bookshops are all distant rumours. Some pleasant coffee shops, lots of estate agents and banks, a Pizza Express if you fancy haute cuisine. If I was 18 I'd be desperate to get away - at 68, it's quite pleasant in a slightly unreal way.
Its bad enough trying to keep a child entertained on a 3-4hr car journey, imagine little rocket man stuck on a train for 2-3 days.
Louise Ellmann MP was on beforehand and very good she was too.
The difficulty she and others who want Labour to live up to its principles face is that if Corbyn seriously wants to get rid of anti-semitism he is going to have to disavow some of the things he has said and done over the years (for instance, his championing of convicted anti-semite, Raed Salah). Is he willing and capable of doing that? I’m not at all sure he is.
Grills and Greens always used to be the spot for breakfast/lunch...
Aside from their stronghold in SW London there have been plenty of other heavily Remain boroughs where the LibDems controlled the council only a decade ago - Camden, Lambeth, Southwark, Haringey and your own Islington.
Now with the Conservatives nearly non-existent in these areas and with Corbyn's promises on student debt etc irrelevent this year surely there should be a big swing to the LibDems if Brexit is such a big issue.
However, you can maybe empathise why certain people in Labour do not see a "moderate" leading the party as a panacea.
Sloppy, and embarrassing.
Defeat was guaranteed from that moment onwards.
Oh and giving the operation a French name.
You're turning tory with age!
My other main complaint was we still had work to do in Afghanistan. I approved of the decision to invade it on the basis we would build up the country into a workable democracy.
I didn't believe the weapons of mass destruction line but if I'm being honest as a very passionate teenager that last part at least may have been more based on being against the war rather than sound unbiased analysis.
Continued to occupy the Suez Canal Zone with tens of thousands of troops?
That wasn't working for us barely 2 years earlier, which, ironically, led to the withdrawal which helped precipitate the nationalisation.
Big step.
I can only conclude that the intelligence that our security services (who are clearly very, very good) have shared with them is pretty damning, and there's evidence it forms part of a broader web of aggressive espionage and extraterritorial intent by Russia.
One could of course argue that ejection of 1, 2, or 3 diplomats here and there by European countries were random and token choices, just to send a message, but I suspect they were more likely to have been intelligence-led choices, and all known Russian agents.
So, we have a coordinated attempt to degrade Russia's intelligence capability in the West. I suspect most Western countries realise what happened in Salisbury could have happened to any of them and, if they don't send a very clear message to Putin now, there might be no telling where it might end.
Newspapers should pay legal costs of plaintiffs, even if found not guilty? Sheer, unmitigated stupidity.