I have met both Miliband brothers. David was cold, unfriendly and dry as a bone. Ed, by contrast, was genial, interested and interesting - one of the nicest politicians I’ve ever met.
I've met Ed Miliband and can confirm your view. He genuinely cared about people that worked for him and also would chat open-mindedly to those who disagreed with him.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Quite. The whole government case that it is Russia has unravelled spectacularly at the seams today. Gary Aitkenhead, the Porton Down chief executive clearly didn't have a Russian Novichok sample with which to compare. It wasn't made in Russia anyway back in the 1990's, it was in modern day Uzbekistan. How did Porton Down come to the conclusion it was from Russia within a week of the incident, when the OPCW has taken over 3 weeks? And note that Russia has not received any satisfactory answer to any of the following 14 questions:
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
I would have thought that was very obvious even to you. Governments throughout history when the going gets tough require an enemy on which they can pin the blame in order to deflect from their own failings.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
I would have thought that was very obvious even to you. Governments throughout history when the going gets tough require an enemy on which they can pin the blame in order to deflect from their own failings.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
Something to do with Finchley Road.
Follow the money. It will lead you to the truth. Something you're evidently incapable of doing.
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Explain, with whatever evidence you wish to put forward, why it's in the UK governments interest to poison Skripal.
I would have thought that was very obvious even to you. Governments throughout history when the going gets tough require an enemy on which they can pin the blame in order to deflect from their own failings.
Does this logic somehow not apply to the Russian government?
I don't see what's wrong with this statement. It depends how you interpret the slight ambiguity. You are reading it as "the nerve agent (specific sample that was used in the attack) was made in Russia". It is just as easily read as "the nerve agent is made in Russia" (but the source of the specific sample used in the attack is unknown).
I agree. TSE just doesn’t understand how the real world works at this level
While I love the use of constructive ambiguity in diplomatic language, I think the use of the word 'this' lends support to TSE's interpretation. If it read 'the nerve agent', I would agree with you. But strip it down and it reads 'this was a ... nerve agent produced in Russia'. Pretty unambiguous.
Turns out in the dim and distant past I used the company formation services at Finchley Road.
Normally I used Formations Direct.
Finchley Road all got shut down in a massive panic at the end of February last year. It's moved on to new addresses which you can easily trace if you get off your backside and do your own research on Companies House. Please keep up with the times everyone!
Does this logic somehow not apply to the Russian government?
Russia consistently wanted better relations with the West. The West said back in the early 1990's that they wouldn't take NATO up to the Russian border and take advantage of the then weakness of Russia. We surrounded Russia with military bases. Along with Qatar we tried to get an oil pipeline through Syria in order to reduce energy reliance on Russia......not that the true story of Syria has ever been told to the UK general public. Funny that isn't it?
British scientists at the Porton Down defence research laboratory have not established that the nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal was made in Russia, it has emerged.
I am sedated but conscious for mine, so I can see what is happening on the same big screen as the operator. Fascinating stuff, and nothing else I have ever seen on TV comes close to the big reveal when they go round a corner and meet a stage 3 tumour nobody was expecting to be there.
As a regular recipient of endoscopies, I heartily recommend the screen-watching option. In a funny way it's nice to get to know yourself a bit more. No tumours for me yet, fortunately, though I get my own fair share of nasties instead - very glad yours was all dealt with. But to anybody who is in two minds about having one - go for it. I never found them particularly painful (not exactly "comfortable" but it's always been well-bearable) and they have the potential to be of utmost importance, as @Ishmael_Z found. I actually found rigid sigmoidoscopy - which doesn't go to any great depth at all - a far less palatable experience than a full-blown colonoscopy. And if you're too squeamish for the screen you can always just not look. If your physician recommends it, don't put it off, just go!
British scientists at the Porton Down defence research laboratory have not established that the nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal was made in Russia, it has emerged.
"Of a type developed in Russia" is all I can say.
Over to FU?
And they have also stated that it is not their job to establish that it was made in Russia.
If...IF this turned out to be wrong info from the government albeit because our intelligence services -oxymoron alert- got it wrong again I would guess May would have to resign pronto!
Corbyn was right on the IRA and invading Iraq, now he'll be proven right about the poisoning.
He's going to win a landslide in 2022.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
Good to see that TSE is learning fast, even if many others on this website remain completely and hopelessly in the dark about what governments regularly get up to.
I want to attack this idea that social democracy doesn't have any answers for the post-2008 world. It needs to be modified, sure. We need to spend a little less and tax a bit more. We need to regulate financial institutions more tightly. We need to pay more attention to the disruptions on local communities. But the basic premise of balancing productivity reforms with income distribution is still sound. In fact, it is more fitting for the 2010s than previously, as automation and digitisation allows us to provide universal public services for less and increasing returns to the wealthy means we can tax at the top end more without reducing work incentives. Plus we can make reforms based on what works, without the ideological dogma of the far left or reactionary right.
That might not be able to be summed up neatly in a tweet, but it has the benefit of being correct, unlike Corbynism or Moggism.
There is nothing whatsoever in this new 'evidence' that disputes the Russians did it
So where in this evidence is there to show Russia did it?
They are the only ones really capable of producing it and with the motive to assassinate a defected former Russian agent
You've never heard of false flag operations? Look up the Zinoviev letter, the Tories and their allies have form for using bullshit about Russia to harm Labour
So what makes Mrs May say the Russians were behind it but Porton Down doesn't back her.
You’re either a troublemaker or an idiot.
Porton Down said very clearly that “other inputs” available only to the government were required to connect it to Russia.
The government shouldn’t be making intelligence public
Boris did, see my post at 6.13pm
That doesn’t say what you think it does. Boris doesn’t say what PD confirmed.
What do.
THE samples from Salisbury
She's asking if we have samples of Novichok to compare them with.
The first timecyes.
Then she said “do they have THE samples?”
Boris answered the question he wanted to answer
Quite. The whole government case that it is Russia has unravelled spectacularly at the seams today. Gary Aitkenhead, the Porton Down chief executive clearly didn't have a Russian Novichok sample with which to compare. It wasn't made in Russia anyway back in the 1990's, it was in modern day Uzbekistan. How did Porton Down come to the conclusion it was from Russia within a week of the incident, when the OPCW has taken over 3 weeks? And note that Russia has not received any satisfactory answer to any of the following 14 questions:
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
I want to attack this idea that social democracy doesn't have any answers for the post-2008 world. It needs to be modified, sure. We need to spend a little less and tax a bit more. We need to regulate financial institutions more tightly. We need to pay more attention to the disruptions on local communities. But the basic premise of balancing productivity reforms with income distribution is still sound. In fact, it is more fitting for the 2010s than previously, as automation and digitisation allows us to provide universal public services for less and increasing returns to the wealthy means we can tax at the top end more without reducing work incentives. Plus we can make reforms based on what works, without the ideological dogma of the far left or reactionary right.
That might not be able to be summed up neatly in a tweet, but it has the benefit of being correct, unlike Corbynism or Moggism.
you'll be upsetting AM, taking over his mantle of self-righteousness.
Turns out in the dim and distant past I used the company formation services at Finchley Road.
Normally I used Formations Direct.
Yeh, a family business did too. It wasn't exactly under the radar - advertised swift formation services, I believe?
Still not sure what we're meant to be reading into the fact that a formation agency formed lots of companies.
I think if you're the formation agent, you'll be listed as the first secretary/director for a day.
So you'll be on the books for thousands of companies.
Some of these companies eventually go bust, some of these eventually companies commit illegal acts but it is all the fault of the formation company apparently.
I'm sure if you go to Woodberry House, 2 Woodberry Grove, London N12 0DR you might find something similar.
Turns out in the dim and distant past I used the company formation services at Finchley Road.
Normally I used Formations Direct.
Yeh, a family business did too. It wasn't exactly under the radar - advertised swift formation services, I believe?
Still not sure what we're meant to be reading into the fact that a formation agency formed lots of companies.
Ah you see, it's very suspicious that there are lots of companies which share directors, and then the directors quit and are replaced by other directors. Some of these people are directors of companies for literally just days!
Clearly there's something very suspicious going on.
Or it's a firm that sells off the shelf limited companies.
I think it says a lot more about you when you resort to cheap insults when you have no evidence to assert your case that the Russian government was behind the Salisbury attack.
I want to attack this idea that social democracy doesn't have any answers for the post-2008 world. It needs to be modified, sure. We need to spend a little less and tax a bit more. We need to regulate financial institutions more tightly. We need to pay more attention to the disruptions on local communities. But the basic premise of balancing productivity reforms with income distribution is still sound. In fact, it is more fitting for the 2010s than previously, as automation and digitisation allows us to provide universal public services for less and increasing returns to the wealthy means we can tax at the top end more without reducing work incentives. Plus we can make reforms based on what works, without the ideological dogma of the far left or reactionary right.
That might not be able to be summed up neatly in a tweet, but it has the benefit of being correct, unlike Corbynism or Moggism.
1.No one has a genuinely detailed and plausible alternative to who carried out the attack. Claiming a conspiracy with nothing behind it doesn't fly. 2. There never was an alliance. Convenience would always trump principle for most of the collective West.
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
I found you amusing in the past
Now you are just a useful idiot for Putin
Some people just aren't worth arguing with. You can see premise after premise is incorrect, but they fight with ever more obscure links on every point to wear your attention down until you give up. There is no level of evidence and probability to eliminate their uncertainties in some matters, yet they seize upon the smallest bit of evidence to come to concrete conclusions in others.
I want to attack this idea that social democracy doesn't have any answers for the post-2008 world. It needs to be modified, sure. We need to spend a little less and tax a bit more. We need to regulate financial institutions more tightly. We need to pay more attention to the disruptions on local communities. But the basic premise of balancing productivity reforms with income distribution is still sound. In fact, it is more fitting for the 2010s than previously, as automation and digitisation allows us to provide universal public services for less and increasing returns to the wealthy means we can tax at the top end more without reducing work incentives. Plus we can make reforms based on what works, without the ideological dogma of the far left or reactionary right.
That might not be able to be summed up neatly in a tweet, but it has the benefit of being correct, unlike Corbynism or Moggism.
I agree with that, but I don't see that it's very different to the thrust of the Labour manifesto last year.
Turns out in the dim and distant past I used the company formation services at Finchley Road.
Normally I used Formations Direct.
Yeh, a family business did too. It wasn't exactly under the radar - advertised swift formation services, I believe?
Still not sure what we're meant to be reading into the fact that a formation agency formed lots of companies.
I think if you're the formation agent, you'll be listed as the first secretary/director for a day.
So you'll be on the books for thousands of companies.
Some of these companies eventually go bust, some of these eventually companies commit illegal acts but it is all the fault of the formation company apparently.
I'm sure if you go to Woodberry House, 2 Woodberry Grove, London N12 0DR you might find something similar.
Don't forget Winnington House, Ascot House, Ground Floor Flat, 1st Floor Flat, 2nd Floor Flat and 3rd Floor Flat all at that address that is a single storey building, next to Finchley Spirtualist Church:
automation and digitisation allows us to provide universal public services for less
There has been a trend of greater productivity and improved technology for over two centuries in the UK, of which automation and digitalisation are just the latest incarnation. Is it clear that they will radically transform the delivery of public services any more than, say, the coming of e-government and online portals to services was hoped to in the 1990s and 2000s, or computerised record processing in the 70s/80s? Or when public servants were first freed up to cover a wider local area by internal combustion transportation, or communicate with each other faster than mail by the advent of the telephone or telegram? (An incalculable boon to colonial administrators so I'm not doing it down at all. Merely pointing out that radical change is nothing new, indeed it's been with us for our entire lifespans and those of our grandparents too. There's a lovely video here of a 94 year-old woman - Rebecca Latimer Felton, a former slave-owner and the first woman to serve in the US Senate - interviewed in 1929, who recounts as a child in the late 1830s watching the Native Americans being marched out during the Indian Removal. Now the airplanes are such a common sight and sound overhead, she doesn't even bother running out of the house to watch them anymore.
Anyhow, I digress. One reason I'm less convinced about automation/digitalisation freeing up public resources is Baumol's cost disease. As our age pyramid travels along its conveyer belt, our public services are becoming ever-disproportionately dominated by the need to provide health and social care, principally to the elderly. That is not an easily automated task with the technology of the coming decade or two. It's not even a task that is easily rendered efficient by Taylorist time-and-motion studies - it would be hard to run care in the manner of a sausage-widget factory, and I'm not sure we even want that.
Moreover, even areas of government service provision that do have significant potential for efficiencies through automation and digitalisation with the technology now coming on-screen - education, for instance - are likely to be held back not only by practical difficulties of implementation but by the conservatism with which voters prefer to consume services. Parents' ideal standard for numeracy education is likely to remain a highly skilled teacher and a couple of learning support assistants in a classroom of 15-20 students (though they'd take 25, and 30 will be seen as overcrowded and 30+ a sign that private fees may be worth paying) rather than one-to-one provision by an AI-driven e-tutor with a deeper personalised programme for that child's needs, long after that technological solution has been refined. (As long-standing PBers will be aware, I'm basically trying to tempt @MTimT2 to humblebrag on the behalf of his daughter, but he is unusually progressive in his parental attitude!)
There is a long and clear connection between Jews and left wing politics. Off the top of my head - Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Luxemburg, Kaganovich, Radek, Slansky, Cohn-Bendit,Liebknecht, Gero, Rakosi,Trepper,,Yagoda,Kamenev,Benjamin,Wolf,Lukacs, Rajk, Kriegel, Marcuse, Adorno, Litvinov, Fuchs. And allegedly Andropov ( originally Lieberman, and Gromyko (Originally Katz).
There is a long and clear connection between Jews and left wing politics. Off the top of my head - Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Luxemburg, Kaganovich, Radek, Slansky, Cohn-Bendit,Liebknecht, Gero, Rakosi,Trepper,,Yagoda,Kamenev,Benjamin,Wolf,Lukacs, Rajk, Kriegel, Marcuse, Adorno, Litvinov, Fuchs. And allegedly Andropov ( originally Lieberman, and Gromyko (Originally Katz).
And those other left-wing fanatics Nigel Lawson, keith Joseph, Rothschild,, goldman/sachs, need I go on
Comments
https://twitter.com/RuggedyBaba/status/981269331853107200
On the negative side, there have been casualties though no reports of fatalities.
https://news.sky.com/story/salisbury-poisoning-russia-issues-list-of-14-questions-for-uk-11312423
Mr Lavrov rather hit the nail on the head when he said it would be in the UK's interest to poison the Skripal's didn't he? UK government telling porkies........surely not!
Normally I used Formations Direct.
Russia consistently wanted better relations with the West. The West said back in the early 1990's that they wouldn't take NATO up to the Russian border and take advantage of the then weakness of Russia. We surrounded Russia with military bases. Along with Qatar we tried to get an oil pipeline through Syria in order to reduce energy reliance on Russia......not that the true story of Syria has ever been told to the UK general public. Funny that isn't it?
"Of a type developed in Russia" is all I can say.
Over to FU?
That might not be able to be summed up neatly in a tweet, but it has the benefit of being correct, unlike Corbynism or Moggism.
Now you are just a useful idiot for Putin
Still not sure what we're meant to be reading into the fact that a formation agency formed lots of companies.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/981281453202911233
So you'll be on the books for thousands of companies.
Some of these companies eventually go bust, some of these eventually companies commit illegal acts but it is all the fault of the formation company apparently.
I'm sure if you go to Woodberry House, 2 Woodberry Grove, London N12 0DR you might find something similar.
Clearly there's something very suspicious going on.
Or it's a firm that sells off the shelf limited companies.
2. There never was an alliance. Convenience would always trump principle for most of the collective West.
There again trump is a gravelly sound emitted from one's bottom, and look what happened there. OGH may well be onto something
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x487619e5401a7b37:0xe481d23c6d283611!2m22!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i20!16m16!1b1!2m2!1m1!1e1!2m2!1m1!1e3!2m2!1m1!1e5!2m2!1m1!1e4!2m2!1m1!1e6!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/2+woodberry+grove+n12+0dr+streetmap/@51.6111545,-0.1782452,3a,75y,224.65h,90t/data=*213m4*211e1*213m2*211smn2O_fgos1zDbBpKF_C1CA*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x487619e5401a7b37:0xe481d23c6d283611!5s2+woodberry+grove+n12+0dr+streetmap+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2smn2O_fgos1zDbBpKF_C1CA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX5rzPiJ_aAhUMDcAKHbT8A8gQpx8IgAEwCg
Meanwhile, Twitter has already found a statement by the NRA calling for people to 'rise up' against YouTube.
NEW THREAD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FE30a4J38Q
(She's at 8m31s)
Anyhow, I digress. One reason I'm less convinced about automation/digitalisation freeing up public resources is Baumol's cost disease. As our age pyramid travels along its conveyer belt, our public services are becoming ever-disproportionately dominated by the need to provide health and social care, principally to the elderly. That is not an easily automated task with the technology of the coming decade or two. It's not even a task that is easily rendered efficient by Taylorist time-and-motion studies - it would be hard to run care in the manner of a sausage-widget factory, and I'm not sure we even want that.