Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.
A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.
Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.
I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.
This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.
He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
Just to play Devil's advocate: in the 1960s, rail was struggling to compete with bus on journeys of under 50 miles. Rail was inflexible, expensive, infrequent, dirty and not particularly fast. There was no reason obvious at the time to retain most stopping services. Few at the time anticipated how traffic congestion would grow and give railback an advantage. I regret the closures - many of the lines would now be viable, and many of those that wouldn't be be lovely to have for sentimental reasons - but I sympathise with the reasons for their closure.
In much of rural Britain, bus is still better at getting you from A to B than the defunct rail lines ever were.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Moscow is (currently) a hostile foreign power. Brussels is us.
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
Age is now the key determinant of how we vote, then whether we live in rural areas, suburbs or the inner city and university towns then class. Class is now far less a predictor of voting intention than it was half a century ago
I agree - as far as age is concerned where does the ever-shifting boundary lie? Will the under 40s carry their Labour affiliation forward as they age?
I doubt it, pensioners have not voted Labour since 1997 just as 18 to 24s have not voted Tory since 1983
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Dunno. Is the EU murdering its critics, propping up a regime that uses chemical weopons in the Middle East, and responsible for widespread propaganda designed to destabilise its opponents?
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Nah. Derby's the true regional capital.
Loughborough is the obvious neutral capital located between the 3 rival cities. Plus it has 'The Sock'.
It's odd that people who consider themselves to be anti-imperialist will make an exception for Russian imperialism.
I’ve never got the pro-Russian line. The Baltics actually want us there. It’s Russia they’re afraid of. What moral or lawful right does Russia have from preventing those countries from joining NATO?
None.
Less than none, given the record of Soviet imperialism.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
The Russians would have a case, if the Baltic States were a threat. But, they are entirely harmless, and not remotely capable of harming Russia. They have penny packets of soldiers, and just want to be left alone.
So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!
Love it!!
If you think our railways are third world then you have led an incredibly sheltered life. Either that or Sri Lanka has some extraordinarily advanced railways compared to the rest of India.
Third world is Rome to Sorrento. Venice to Rome, first class, on my honeymoon, was as good as anything in Germany. Continuing the journey to Sorrento was something else entirely.
On Russia, the Italian government-in-waiting is in favour of dropping sanctions against Russia.
Russia has done an extraordinary job of suborning certain individuals and parties across the West. You have to hand it to them.
They've managed to do it because the discontent with the elites exists in the first place. In places like Italy the people are fed up of the cosy EUphile theocracy offered by the traditional parties. It gives the Russians an easy opening gambit, just as it did with Trump and, by the sounds of things, Brexit. The Russians haven't created anything, all they have done is take advantage of a situation that already exists to further their own aims.
Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
Which would undoubtedly be the optimum solution, and only not feasible because nobody on either side is willing to accept it.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Fair points, Ms Cyclefree. You can’t blame them, especially after what happened in Middle Europe 1935-45
However, one wonders about some of the ‘Jews”. The Ethiopans yes, the Iraqis yes, but some of the recent European migrants are, I understand ‘barely’ Jewish.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Nah. Derby's the true regional capital.
Loughborough is the obvious neutral capital located between the 3 rival cities. Plus it has 'The Sock'.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
STEPHEN Lawrence’s close pal who was with him when he was murdered is being lined up to be the next Tory Mayor of London, The Sun can reveal.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!
Love it!!
If you think our railways are third world then you have led an incredibly sheltered life. Either that or Sri Lanka has some extraordinarily advanced railways compared to the rest of India.
I love that line 'Sri Lanka ... compared to the rest of India'
I guess it's all bongo-bongo land to some people...
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Didn't quite work out that way though for Jews living in Nazi Germany or Nazi occupied Europe though did it.
Hence the reason why they feel they need at least 1 country where they are a majority
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Moscow is (currently) a hostile foreign power. Brussels is us.
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
Genuine question: what is it about Russia that you like?
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Didn't quite work out that way though for Jews living in Nazi Germany or Nazi occupied Europe though did it.
Hence the reason why they feel they need at least 1 country where they are a majority
No it didn't work out for Jews in Nazi Germany. And you know what? It is utterly irrelevant to Israel. Countries are for those that live in them and not for ghosts, however outrageous the history. Sorry.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
The Beeching Cuts were essentially an ass-covering exercise by government. Both Labour and the Conservatives wanted the railways to stop haemorrhaging money, and either could have stopped the closures if they had desired. In fact, they did in some cases (famously the loss-making Mid Wales line, which ran through several Labour constituencies). In other cases, lines that were not in the report were closed (e.g. Matlock to Buxton).
Don't blame Beeching: he did what his political masters asked of him. Although as Richard T says below, the data on which he made his decisions was limited, generally he got it right and there are far more lines rightfully closed - even with hindsight - than were wrongly closed.
Even the Great Central closure made sense at the time, as did the Waverley.
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester)
Ivanhoe
Chapter 1
In that pleasant district of merry England which is watered by the river Don, there extended in ancient times a large forest, covering the greater part of the beautiful hills and valleys which lie between Sheffield and the pleasant town of Doncaster. The remains of this extensive wood are still to be seen at the noble seats of Wentworth, of Wharncliffe Park, and around Rotherham. Here haunted of yore the fabulous Dragon of Wantley; here were fought many of the most desperate battles during the Civil Wars of the Roses; and here also flourished in ancient times those bands of gallant outlaws, whose deeds have been rendered so popular in English song.
Such being our chief scene ...
The Ivanhoe line runs Doncaster-Conisbrough-Rotherham-Sheffield.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
While I understand the attraction of Jerusalem and the Holy Land as the most romantically/historically/religiously perfect place for a Jewish state, I do wonder what the world would look like if Israel has been set up in, say, Namibia, or Western Australia, or Texas.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
It’s not easy though is it. Yes, the Jews were expelled by the Romans but were they all? How many ‘Arabs’ are the descendants of Jews who for whatever reason managed to stay? The Jews are also defined by their religion, but people change their religion for a variety of reasons, including because it’s the religion of the conquerers. Paris was after all, well worth a Mass, and early Islam wasn’t too dissimilar from Judaism. And anyway, the Arabs, Christian or Moslem have lived in Palestine for at least 1000 years; does that not give them some rights?
It’s a complex mess and taking rigid political positions doesn’t help.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Didn't quite work out that way though for Jews living in Nazi Germany or Nazi occupied Europe though did it.
Hence the reason why they feel they need at least 1 country where they are a majority
No it didn't work out for Jews in Nazi Germany. And you know what? It is utterly irrelevant to Israel. Countries are for those that live in them and not for ghosts, however outrageous the history. Sorry.
If that were any kind of point at all, it would have been a point in 1948 or thereabouts. The people who live in Israel today are on the whole Jews, and Jews are therefore who it is now for. We have to start from where we currently are.
STEPHEN Lawrence’s close pal who was with him when he was murdered is being lined up to be the next Tory Mayor of London, The Sun can reveal.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
Brooks was once an LD Councillor and ran as an independent as recently as two weeks ago so he's the newest of converts. It hardly seems likely the Conservatives will see him as the standard bearer (or should that be human sacrifice) to stand against Khan in 2020.
As for his attack on Khan over the "Gang Matrix", I don't really understand. The Matrix was apparently set up in 2012 when Boris was Mayor - did he know ? Apparently it's all Sadiq's fault because he is the current Mayor. That seems flimsy reasoning - there's a question to be asked about the role of the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and whether either the current incumbent, Sophie Linden, or her predecessor, Stephen Greenhalgh, were involved with or knew about the Matrix and its function.
There has been plenty of criticism of the Gangs Matrix within London but the Met have stood by its use.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
A liberal secular state doesn't include the expulsion of Jews.Indeed it protects the right of Jews and others to exercise their beliefs in a non-discriminatory way. Nor does it result in the destruction of Israel, except to the extent it removes discrimination. There some substantial straw man arguments in there.
It's also highly questionable to say Jews have lived longer in Israel/Palestine than Arabs. It has been an Arab majority state for most of the past two thousand years. (Not that any of this is a justification for any form of governance now).
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
I don't know about you, but if there had been a systematic attempt in recent times to exterminate my own ethnic group, I'd want to make damn sure that a State existed where my ethnic group formed a clear majority.
On / off topic: all these railway discussions almost make me want to visit the East Midlands - surely the *least* glamorous of the English regions.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line? Stirring stuff.
Derbyshire encapsulates the heart of what England means in my opinion.
But haven't you moved to Nottinghamshire ?
Yep, but I've only been here a couple of months and don't really know it too well aside from my small part of Bassetlaw The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
STEPHEN Lawrence’s close pal who was with him when he was murdered is being lined up to be the next Tory Mayor of London, The Sun can reveal.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
Brooks was once an LD Councillor and ran as an independent as recently as two weeks ago so he's the newest of converts. It hardly seems likely the Conservatives will see him as the standard bearer (or should that be human sacrifice) to stand against Khan in 2020.
I should think that will depend on if he is still with them come 2020 - I don't get the impression parties are sentimental about loyalty when it might conceivably be the difference between losing and winning (whether that is at all possible for the Tories in the current situation is a separate question). That he used to be a LD might be seen as a positive if they think he might open them up to the more liberally minded as well as their base. I have no idea if that is likely, or if it would be enough, but if he looks like he has a shot, that in itself would be enough for him to be the standard bearer, I should think.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Moscow is (currently) a hostile foreign power. Brussels is us.
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
Genuine question: what is it about Russia that you like?
Language, culture, history, people. Moscow is one of the most inspiring cities in the world and the country itself is a vast melting pot.
On / off topic: all these railway discussions almost make me want to visit the East Midlands - surely the *least* glamorous of the English regions.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line? Stirring stuff.
Derbyshire encapsulates the heart of what England means in my opinion.
But haven't you moved to Nottinghamshire ?
Yep, but I've only been here a couple of months and don't really know it too well aside from my small part of Bassetlaw The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
In a former life, Derbyshire County Council was a client, and I travelled regularly to Matlock, which was lovely.
I remember asking one Director if she was from Derbyshire. She looked at me with horror.
STEPHEN Lawrence’s close pal who was with him when he was murdered is being lined up to be the next Tory Mayor of London, The Sun can reveal.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
Brooks was once an LD Councillor and ran as an independent as recently as two weeks ago so he's the newest of converts. It hardly seems likely the Conservatives will see him as the standard bearer (or should that be human sacrifice) to stand against Khan in 2020.
As for his attack on Khan over the "Gang Matrix", I don't really understand. The Matrix was apparently set up in 2012 when Boris was Mayor - did he know ? Apparently it's all Sadiq's fault because he is the current Mayor. That seems flimsy reasoning - there's a question to be asked about the role of the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and whether either the current incumbent, Sophie Linden, or her predecessor, Stephen Greenhalgh, were involved with or knew about the Matrix and its function.
There has been plenty of criticism of the Gangs Matrix within London but the Met have stood by its use.
Saying someone is the worst Mayor ever seems far from wise too. I'd find it pretty hard even to describe SK as a bad Mayor, although I'm all over 'indifferent'.
London is far too important to have novice politicians running for the Mayoralty. (I know some will suggest Boris was and is a politician still with his stabiliser wheels, but it's not really fair)
The right candidate could win for the Tories even given their poor ratings in London overall. Zac Goldsmith was the wrong candidate, so it should be easy to find someone a little better, but finding the person that can win is a challenge - I'm pretty sure they're out there though.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
It’s not easy though is it. Yes, the Jews were expelled by the Romans but were they all? How many ‘Arabs’ are the descendants of Jews who for whatever reason managed to stay? The Jews are also defined by their religion, but people change their religion for a variety of reasons, including because it’s the religion of the conquerers. Paris was after all, well worth a Mass, and early Islam wasn’t too dissimilar from Judaism. And anyway, the Arabs, Christian or Moslem have lived in Palestine for at least 1000 years; does that not give them some rights?
It’s a complex mess and taking rigid political positions doesn’t help.
Indeed, Arabs do have some rights and that is why I would very much like there to be a Palestinian state alongside Israel. This was on offer in 1948 and also when Clinton pushed his peace plan. It has been a tragedy that Palestinian leadership has been so poor that in seeking everything during the last 70 years and befoehanded it has ended up with nothing. It is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process. In that sense, Israeli leaders have become more Middle Eastern - focusing more on "might is right" than is wise.
As you say, a complex mess.
But if insisting on the survival - rather than the destruction - of Israel is deemed to be taking a rigid political position, then I am happy to plead guilty. Some things are non-negotiable and in my book the survival of Israel is one of them.
On / off topic: all these railway discussions almost make me want to visit the East Midlands - surely the *least* glamorous of the English regions.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line? Stirring stuff.
Derbyshire encapsulates the heart of what England means in my opinion.
But haven't you moved to Nottinghamshire ?
Yep, but I've only been here a couple of months and don't really know it too well aside from my small part of Bassetlaw The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
In a former life, Derbyshire County Council was a client, and I travelled regularly to Matlock, which was lovely.
I remember asking one Director if she was from Derbyshire. She looked at me with horror.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Moscow is (currently) a hostile foreign power. Brussels is us.
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
Genuine question: what is it about Russia that you like?
Language, culture, history, people. Moscow is one of the most inspiring cities in the world and the country itself is a vast melting pot.
Martin Sixsmith wrote a very entertaining book about Russian History. I can't remember the title, but it ought to have been '1,000 years of unrelenting bloody misery'. The lot of a Russian appears never to have been a happy one.
The East Midlands has plenty of interesting places to visit, like Dovedale, Lincoln, Rutland, Suthwell, Buxton, etc.
Indeed so. I've lived in the East Midlands for the vast majority of my life and love the area. I grew up in Nottinghamshire and have spent most of my adult life in Lincolnshire (and much of that in Lincoln itself). Only my university years (in North Wales) interrupted my time in the region.
I see that a Labour councillor in Oxford has had the whip withdrawn for tweeting picures of children being threatened by armed soldiers. One picture showed a Nazi soldier from World War 2 whilst another showed an Israeli doing something similar a mere few days ago. Personally , I feel his point is well made by those photos - and fail to see how producing them amounts to Anti-Semitism at all. At the end of the day, Netanyahu is little better than Himmler et al.
The more-or-less official definition of antisemitism includes drawing parallels with the Nazis.
No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.
To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?
Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
To repeat what I said on the last thread. Based on their actions at the moment they deserve to be pretty fucking insulted. And that is a very weird attitude. Its okay to shoot people but not to insult them?
Who said anything about it being okay to shoot people? The Israelis may be defending what happened; I'm certainly not. I'm asking why bring the Nazis into it. You've got to be a proper Ken to think that's okay.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
A liberal secular state doesn't include the expulsion of Jews.Indeed it protects the right of Jews and others to exercise their beliefs in a non-discriminatory way. Nor does it result in the destruction of Israel, except to the extent it removes discrimination. There some substantial straw man arguments in there.
It's also highly questionable to say Jews have lived longer in Israel/Palestine than Arabs. It has been an Arab majority state for most of the past two thousand years. (Not that any of this is a justification for any form of governance now).
A liberal secular state. Like France for instance. Where despite it being both liberal and secular the rights of Jews have not, in practice, been protected. They cannot, for instance, go round in public wearing the kippah because of the risk of being attacked for being Jewish. They have to have armed guards protecting schools and places of worship.
And if that is the position in France (and see what is also happening in Germany) it is simply naive to think that a liberal secular state populated by Jews and Arabs could be created and survive in the Middle East, at least in the world as it is now.
Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.
It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.
I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
Moscow is (currently) a hostile foreign power. Brussels is us.
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
Genuine question: what is it about Russia that you like?
Language, culture, history, people. Moscow is one of the most inspiring cities in the world and the country itself is a vast melting pot.
It's a shame it's being run by villains and despots.
And having been to Moscow a few times, I'd struggle to call it inspiring
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
It’s not easy though is it. Yes, the Jews were expelled by the Romans but were they all? How many ‘Arabs’ are the descendants of Jews who for whatever reason managed to stay? The Jews are also defined by their religion, but people change their religion for a variety of reasons, including because it’s the religion of the conquerers. Paris was after all, well worth a Mass, and early Islam wasn’t too dissimilar from Judaism. And anyway, the Arabs, Christian or Moslem have lived in Palestine for at least 1000 years; does that not give them some rights?
It’s a complex mess and taking rigid political positions doesn’t help.
Indeed, Arabs do have some rights and that is why I would very much like there to be a Palestinian state alongside Israel. This was on offer in 1948 and also when Clinton pushed his peace plan. It has been a tragedy that Palestinian leadership has been so poor that in seeking everything during the last 70 years and befoehanded it has ended up with nothing. It is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process. In that sense, Israeli leaders have become more Middle Eastern - focusing more on "might is right" than is wise.
As you say, a complex mess.
But if insisting on the survival - rather than the destruction - of Israel is deemed to be taking a rigid political position, then I am happy to plead guilty. Some things are non-negotiable and in my book the survival of Israel is one of them.
The end of Israel would not mean the creation of a secular democracy. It would mean the end of its Jewish population.
On / off topic: all these railway discussions almost make me want to visit the East Midlands - surely the *least* glamorous of the English regions.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line? Stirring stuff.
Derbyshire encapsulates the heart of what England means in my opinion.
But haven't you moved to Nottinghamshire ?
Yep, but I've only been here a couple of months and don't really know it too well aside from my small part of Bassetlaw The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
In a former life, Derbyshire County Council was a client, and I travelled regularly to Matlock, which was lovely.
I remember asking one Director if she was from Derbyshire. She looked at me with horror.
“Good God, no! I’m from Nottinghamshire.”
The Peak District is stunning.
The sudden change between suburban Sheffield and the Peak District is very striking.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
It’s not easy though is it. Yes, the Jews were expelled by the Romans but were they all? How many ‘Arabs’ are the descendants of Jews who for whatever reason managed to stay? The Jews are also defined by their religion, but people change their religion for a variety of reasons, including because it’s the religion of the conquerers. Paris was after all, well worth a Mass, and early Islam wasn’t too dissimilar from Judaism. And anyway, the Arabs, Christian or Moslem have lived in Palestine for at least 1000 years; does that not give them some rights?
It’s a complex mess and taking rigid political positions doesn’t help.
Indeed, Arabs do have some rights and that is why I would very much like there to be a Palestinian state alongside Israel. This was on offer in 1948 and also when Clinton pushed his peace plan. It has been a tragedy that Palestinian leadership has been so poor that in seeking everything during the last 70 years and befoehanded it has ended up with nothing. It is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process. In that sense, Israeli leaders have become more Middle Eastern - focusing more on "might is right" than is wise.
As you say, a complex mess.
But if insisting on the survival - rather than the destruction - of Israel is deemed to be taking a rigid political position, then I am happy to plead guilty. Some things are non-negotiable and in my book the survival of Israel is one of them.
No problem with the survival of some form of Jewish state; not necessarily Israel as presently understood. However, did you mean what you wrote when you wrote: 'It i(presumably the 'Arab state’) is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.’
I really don’t get the impression that the Israeli leadership "does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.” I would have said ‘doesn’t. Not does,
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
However, did you mean what you wrote when you wrote: 'It i(presumably the 'Arab state’) is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.’
I really don’t get the impression that the Israeli leadership "does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.” I would have said ‘doesn’t. Not does,
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
A liberal secular state doesn't include the expulsion of Jews.Indeed it protects the right of Jews and others to exercise their beliefs in a non-discriminatory way. Nor does it result in the destruction of Israel, except to the extent it removes discrimination. There some substantial straw man arguments in there.
It's also highly questionable to say Jews have lived longer in Israel/Palestine than Arabs. It has been an Arab majority state for most of the past two thousand years. (Not that any of this is a justification for any form of governance now).
A liberal secular state. Like France for instance. Where despite it being both liberal and secular the rights of Jews have not, in practice, been protected. They cannot, for instance, go round in public wearing the kippah because of the risk of being attacked for being Jewish. They have to have armed guards protecting schools and places of worship.
And if that is the position in France (and see what is also happening in Germany) it is simply naive to think that a liberal secular state populated by Jews and Arabs could be created and survive in the Middle East, at least in the world as it is now.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
The breaking up of the big audit firms is long overdue
There are way too many cosy cartels in this country. It’s one of the key reasons that we suffer from low productivity, in my opinion.
Not least in politics, of course. Prior to 2010 the last time we had a de jure two party government was 1964, the last time in practice we had a multiparty government was 1945, the last time a party other than Labour or the Conservatives/Unionists won over 100 seats was in 1923, the last time we had a government led by a party other than Labour or the Conservatives/Unionists was 1915 and the last time a party other than those two won an actual majority was 1906.
The Senate on Wednesday voted to reinstate the FCC's net neutrality rules, passing a bill that has little chance of advancing in the House but offers net neutrality supporters and Democrats a political rallying point for the midterm elections.
However, did you mean what you wrote when you wrote: 'It i(presumably the 'Arab state’) is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.’
I really don’t get the impression that the Israeli leadership "does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.” I would have said ‘doesn’t. Not does,
On / off topic: all these railway discussions almost make me want to visit the East Midlands - surely the *least* glamorous of the English regions.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line? Stirring stuff.
Derbyshire encapsulates the heart of what England means in my opinion.
But haven't you moved to Nottinghamshire ?
Yep, but I've only been here a couple of months and don't really know it too well aside from my small part of Bassetlaw The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
In a former life, Derbyshire County Council was a client, and I travelled regularly to Matlock, which was lovely.
I remember asking one Director if she was from Derbyshire. She looked at me with horror.
“Good God, no! I’m from Nottinghamshire.”
The Peak District is stunning.
The sudden change between suburban Sheffield and the Peak District is very striking.
Here's why the Lib Dems are coming back in West Sheffield in one picture: https://tinyurl.com/y7ledoyj . I'm afraid alot of east Sheffield is still red rosette on an AMEY donkey van though. To be honest the results were about as good as can be hoped for overall, only 40.1% of voters ticked the Labour box which is a minor miracle round those parts.
STEPHEN Lawrence’s close pal who was with him when he was murdered is being lined up to be the next Tory Mayor of London, The Sun can reveal.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
Brooks was once an LD Councillor and ran as an independent as recently as two weeks ago so he's the newest of converts. It hardly seems likely the Conservatives will see him as the standard bearer (or should that be human sacrifice) to stand against Khan in 2020.
As for his attack on Khan over the "Gang Matrix", I don't really understand. The Matrix was apparently set up in 2012 when Boris was Mayor - did he know ? Apparently it's all Sadiq's fault because he is the current Mayor. That seems flimsy reasoning - there's a question to be asked about the role of the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and whether either the current incumbent, Sophie Linden, or her predecessor, Stephen Greenhalgh, were involved with or knew about the Matrix and its function.
There has been plenty of criticism of the Gangs Matrix within London but the Met have stood by its use.
Agreed. This seems like the Sol Campbell debacle all over again, IMO.
On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.
From a European / US perspective I would agree.
From the Israeli perspective they have an opponent who still challenges their right to exist.
I can quite see why they think that, until Hamas is willing to enter into meaningful negotiations, then to show (what they would view as) weakness is a mistake.
I would have thought (without being any more than an armchair general) it would be possible to control a demonstration with non-lethal forms of crowd control. But for 50 of the 62 fatalities to be members of Hamas (i.e. active terrorists) is a high strike rate.
Active terrorists who were shooting or planting bombs when shot, or members of a terrorist organisation. It's not quite the same thing. Shades of recent Nobel peace prize winners defining terrorists as anyone killed by a drone.
I’m sure some of each. But Israel has a more robust approach than we do.
But I think your comparison is unfair. Hamas has acknowledged Israel’s estimate to be correct
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case now, it certainly wasn't in the past. Leicester was the civitas capital in Iron Age and Roman times. That all changed when Danelaw came along and Nottingham took its place as one of the 5 towns of Danelaw.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
The breaking up of the big audit firms is long overdue
There are way too many cosy cartels in this country. It’s one of the key reasons that we suffer from low productivity, in my opinion.
Hmm I'm not a massive fan of the big four and not bitter at all that PWC rejected my application about 15 years ago but I think people misunderstand the role of auditors... this sort of comment 'Given the relative size of the goodwill in the Group balance sheet, particularly in the UK Services CGU, relatively small changes in these assumptions could give rise to material changes in the assessment of the carrying value of goodwill.' is a bit of a danger warning flag to anyone who cares to read the annual statement. KPMG had a good few such statements in Carrillion's audit report.
For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.
And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?
Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.
There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.
But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.
And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -
Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.
I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.
Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
Wasn’t that the proposal made by Richard the Lionheart?
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case now, it certainly wasn't in the past. Leicester was the civitas capital in Iron Age and Roman times. That all changed when Danelaw came along and Nottingham took its place as one of the 5 towns of Danelaw.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
The one that causes the most confusion is Robin Hood Airport at Doncaster. No end of people travel there thinking it is near Nottingham because of the Robin Hood name.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
The breaking up of the big audit firms is long overdue
There are way too many cosy cartels in this country. It’s one of the key reasons that we suffer from low productivity, in my opinion.
Hmm I'm not a massive fan of the big four and not bitter at all that PWC rejected my application about 15 years ago but I think people misunderstand the role of auditors... this sort of comment 'Given the relative size of the goodwill in the Group balance sheet, particularly in the UK Services CGU, relatively small changes in these assumptions could give rise to material changes in the assessment of the carrying value of goodwill.' is a bit of a danger warning flag to anyone who cares to read the annual statement. KPMG had a good few such statements in Carrillion's audit report.
No doubt a bit buried in the statement. When they state something unusual it should be highlighted and flagged as unusual for the non-specialist.
However, did you mean what you wrote when you wrote: 'It i(presumably the 'Arab state’) is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.’
I really don’t get the impression that the Israeli leadership "does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.” I would have said ‘doesn’t. Not does,
I read that as a typo!
I hoped it was, but wanted to be sure!
It was indeed a typo!
Sadly, the Israeli leadership does not have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.
Until it does it is hard to see a way out of the current bloody impasse.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case now, it certainly wasn't in the past. Leicester was the civitas capital in Iron Age and Roman times. That all changed when Danelaw came along and Nottingham took its place as one of the 5 towns of Danelaw.
Now I am just being trolled
Nottingham has been on the decline for a couple of decades, and Leicester ascendant. In particular Leicester has become the detination for shopping in the region, and of course our Football team is far better too.
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
Strawman argument. No one on here has said anything about destroying Israel. But Israel neds to be back in its 1967 borders as agreed by the UN. The fact they were persecuted in the past does not give them the right to persecute others now.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
The one that causes the most confusion is Robin Hood Airport at Doncaster. No end of people travel there thinking it is near Nottingham because of the Robin Hood name.
I can imagine. Whether or not Hood existed and whether or not, if he did, he was in fact from South Yorkshire, he is inextricably linked both domestically and internationally with Nottingham and that simply isn’t going to change. Doncaster might try to find its own hero.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case now, it certainly wasn't in the past. Leicester was the civitas capital in Iron Age and Roman times. That all changed when Danelaw came along and Nottingham took its place as one of the 5 towns of Danelaw.
Now I am just being trolled
Nottingham has been on the decline for a couple of decades, and Leicester ascendant. In particular Leicester has become the detination for shopping in the region, and of course our Football team is far better too.
It also has produced some marvelous graduates, including yours truly.
I don't feel I really took advantage of the city as much as I could have though.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
Strawman argument. No one on here has said anything about destroying Israel. But Israel neds to be back in its 1967 borders as agreed by the UN. The fact they were persecuted in the past does not give them the right to persecute others now.
It does not matter what we say on here. It does matter what Hamas and the Palestinian authority say. Hamas does want the destruction of Israel. The expressed view of the PLA depends on which audience they are speaking to.
Until those on the ground agree that Israel can exist - whether within the 1967 borders or some other agreed borders - there can be no peace. Currently Israel's enemies - some of them - want the country to disappear.
The East Midlands has plenty of interesting places to visit, like Dovedale, Lincoln, Rutland, Suthwell, Buxton, etc.
Indeed so. I've lived in the East Midlands for the vast majority of my life and love the area. I grew up in Nottinghamshire and have spent most of my adult life in Lincolnshire (and much of that in Lincoln itself). Only my university years (in North Wales) interrupted my time in the region.
Funny coincidence. I grew up in Nottinghamshire living there for 40 years. I have now moved over the birder into Lincolnshire for the last 9 years and my university years were in South Wales rather than North
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
The one that causes the most confusion is Robin Hood Airport at Doncaster. No end of people travel there thinking it is near Nottingham because of the Robin Hood name.
Its not particularly near Sheffield either.
It was the Sherrif who was in Nottingham not Robin Hood.
Though the airport should have been named Pilgrim Fathers as many of them came from villages surrounding the airport and it is a travel associated name.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.
I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years
Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case now, it certainly wasn't in the past. Leicester was the civitas capital in Iron Age and Roman times. That all changed when Danelaw came along and Nottingham took its place as one of the 5 towns of Danelaw.
Now I am just being trolled
Nottingham has been on the decline for a couple of decades, and Leicester ascendant. In particular Leicester has become the detination for shopping in the region, and of course our Football team is far better too.
But Nottingham does have two league football teams rather than just one And of course the Leading Ice Hockey team in the UK.
I see that a Labour councillor in Oxford has had the whip withdrawn for tweeting picures of children being threatened by armed soldiers. One picture showed a Nazi soldier from World War 2 whilst another showed an Israeli doing something similar a mere few days ago. Personally , I feel his point is well made by those photos - and fail to see how producing them amounts to Anti-Semitism at all. At the end of the day, Netanyahu is little better than Himmler et al.
The more-or-less official definition of antisemitism includes drawing parallels with the Nazis.
No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.
To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?
Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
To repeat what I said on the last thread. Based on their actions at the moment they deserve to be pretty fucking insulted. And that is a very weird attitude. Its okay to shoot people but not to insult them?
Who said anything about it being okay to shoot people? The Israelis may be defending what happened; I'm certainly not. I'm asking why bring the Nazis into it. You've got to be a proper Ken to think that's okay.
Except at no point did I bring Nazis into it. I think your argument must have been with someone else.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
The one that causes the most confusion is Robin Hood Airport at Doncaster. No end of people travel there thinking it is near Nottingham because of the Robin Hood name.
I can imagine. Whether or not Hood existed and whether or not, if he did, he was in fact from South Yorkshire, he is inextricably linked both domestically and internationally with Nottingham and that simply isn’t going to change. Doncaster might try to find its own hero.
I guess they came close with Ed Miliband!
The Doncaster fictional hero is Ivanhoe - who it seems Leicestershire is trying to claim.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).
I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ...
This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
Whilst I agree that is the case snip
Now I am just being trolled
Nottingham has been on the decline for a couple of decades, and Leicester ascendant. In particular Leicester has become the detination for shopping in the region, and of course our Football team is far better too.
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Why shouldn't they? It was after all the decision of the UN - which pretty much represents the rest of the world - and it provides a homeland for both Jews and Palestinians. Jews have lived in the land of Israel for much much longer than Arabs. I don't accept the assumption that the group which arrived last in a region has somehow a greater right to live there than those who were there beforehand and who continue to live there.
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
Strawman argument. No one on here has said anything about destroying Israel. But Israel neds to be back in its 1967 borders as agreed by the UN. The fact they were persecuted in the past does not give them the right to persecute others now.
Tricky to have aggression by the Arab League etc allowed to result in just being able to rewind and try again though. What did Israel claim prior to hostilities? Certainly Jerusalem I'd imagine.
There must be a price for aggressive war if you lose. The price paid for losing their defensive war, had Israel lost, would undoubtedly have been absolutely awful.
(Apologies for any misremembered detail here, but I think the general theme stands)
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
I don't see Jews ever again accepting a situation where they are a minority in a country dependant on the kindness or tolerance of non-Jews, no matter what the constitution or laws say and no matter what guarantees they get from outsiders.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
Why should anyone else accept this? Countries should be for people that live in them.
Didn't quite work out that way though for Jews living in Nazi Germany or Nazi occupied Europe though did it.
Hence the reason why they feel they need at least 1 country where they are a majority
No it didn't work out for Jews in Nazi Germany. And you know what? It is utterly irrelevant to Israel. Countries are for those that live in them and not for ghosts, however outrageous the history. Sorry.
If that were any kind of point at all, it would have been a point in 1948 or thereabouts. The people who live in Israel today are on the whole Jews, and Jews are therefore who it is now for. We have to start from where we currently are.
The people living in Israel today are not "on the whole Jews". Including the bantustans they are about half Jewish. Even if they were majority Jewish it still doesn't excuse discrimination. Countries are rightly judged by how they treat minorities. To be fair to Israel, it doesn't have a monopoly on discrimination in that part of the world.
For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.
And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?
Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.
There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.
But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.
And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -
Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.
I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.
Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
Wasn’t that the proposal made by Richard the Lionheart?
(Yes, seriously! Albeit Christians/Muslims/Jews)
Lebanon. You've invented Lebanon.
Also, if your solution to middle east peace is "Israel should be more like Lebanon" then you're off your nut.
I see that a Labour councillor in Oxford has had the whip withdrawn for tweeting picures of children being threatened by armed soldiers. One picture showed a Nazi soldier from World War 2 whilst another showed an Israeli doing something similar a mere few days ago. Personally , I feel his point is well made by those photos - and fail to see how producing them amounts to Anti-Semitism at all. At the end of the day, Netanyahu is little better than Himmler et al.
The more-or-less official definition of antisemitism includes drawing parallels with the Nazis.
No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.
To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?
Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
To repeat what I said on the last thread. Based on their actions at the moment they deserve to be pretty fucking insulted. And that is a very weird attitude. Its okay to shoot people but not to insult them?
Who said anything about it being okay to shoot people? The Israelis may be defending what happened; I'm certainly not. I'm asking why bring the Nazis into it. You've got to be a proper Ken to think that's okay.
Except at no point did I bring Nazis into it. I think your argument must have been with someone else.
You replied to a comment about exactly that! And then said it's good they get get insulted when I asked specifically about bringing comparisons to Nazis into it.
Why did you reply to the comment that said comparing Israel to Nazis is antisemitic by disagreeing with it? How Ken are you?
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Technically Nottingham is a one club city as Forest play in Rushcliffe.
Which is itself an oddity with the 'city' club playing in the county and the 'county' club playing in the city.
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Technically Nottingham is a one club city as Forest play in Rushcliffe.
Which is itself an oddity with the 'city' club playing in the county and the 'county' club playing in the city.
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Technically Nottingham is a one club city as Forest play in Rushcliffe.
Which is itself an oddity with the 'city' club playing in the county and the 'county' club playing in the city.
I never knew that. Same applies to Manchester as United play in Trafford.
The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...
...
The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
I didn't take it as a parochial comment, just simple fact.
The one that causes the most confusion is Robin Hood Airport at Doncaster. No end of people travel there thinking it is near Nottingham because of the Robin Hood name.
I can imagine. Whether or not Hood existed and whether or not, if he did, he was in fact from South Yorkshire, he is inextricably linked both domestically and internationally with Nottingham and that simply isn’t going to change. Doncaster might try to find its own hero.
I guess they came close with Ed Miliband!
The Doncaster fictional hero is Ivanhoe - who it seems Leicestershire is trying to claim.
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Technically Nottingham is a one club city as Forest play in Rushcliffe.
Which is itself an oddity with the 'city' club playing in the county and the 'county' club playing in the city.
I never knew that. Same applies to Manchester as United play in Trafford.
You replied to a comment about exactly that! And then said it's good they get get insulted when I asked specifically about bringing comparisons to Nazis into it.
Why did you reply to the comment that said comparing Israel to Nazis is antisemitic by disagreeing with it? How Ken are you?
Now you are just getting desperate. I replied to an ongoing conversation thread about anti-Semitism with the following comment:
"No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.
To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate."
At no point did I mention Nazis nor did my comment make an reference or inference about them. It was a general comment and if the only way you can counter it is by straw man arguments then clearly you lack the ability to argue your case cogently or reasonably.
Comments
(And I am a rail enthusiast).
And I speak as a Russophile who regrets the current schism.
It reminds me of this classic story.
Episode 1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3412149.stm
Episode 2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nottingham/content/articles/2006/12/07/rename_nottingham_ema_feature.shtml
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/05/12/0212244/russian-fake-news-ecosystem-targets-syrian-human-rights-workers
Russia has done an extraordinary job of suborning certain individuals and parties across the West. You have to hand it to them.
Robin Hood Line? Ivanhoe Line?
Stirring stuff.
Jews have learnt the hard way that when you are in a minority you are vulnerable, no matter how integrated you are, no matter what your contributions, no matter how good a citizen you are, no matter even if you fight for your country of birth. They are determined to have one place in the world where that does not obtain. And looking at recent history and, indeed, at what has been happening in places such as France in recent years, it is perfectly understandable. Even if it does mean that in their Jewish home they behave to other minorities in a way which is bloody awful and damaging to their own long term interests.
But I think they prefer being disliked but alive to being victims (again) and dead or persecuted.
A two-state solution - as envisaged 70 years ago - is the only way to go.
However, one wonders about some of the ‘Jews”. The Ethiopans yes, the Iraqis yes, but some of the recent European migrants are, I understand ‘barely’ Jewish.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, gang crime campaigner Duwayne Brooks branded Labour's Sadiq Khan “the worst Mayor ever” as he revealed he has joined Theresa May’s party.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6304807/stephen-lawrence-pal-joins-the-tories-and-is-tipped-as-future-mayor-of-london-after-furious-blast-at-sadiq-khan/
But the four region fact is clever!
I love this place. If I was to trot out facts like that in the real world, people would look at me strangely.
Hence the reason why they feel they need at least 1 country where they are a majority
While it was a convenient fiction for early Israeli leaders to describe Israel as "A land without a people for a people without a land" it is also a fiction to say that there were no Jews living in the land of Israel before the 20th century and that only the Palestinians have a claim to live there.
While I would like there to be a homeland for the Palestinians I simply will not support any solution which entails the destruction of Israel and the expulsion (or worse) of Jews. It might be easier for peace to be achieved if some of those groups complaining about Israel's behaviour explicitly forswore these as ambitions.
"Stephen Lawrence pal Duwayne Brooks joins the Tories and is tipped as future Mayor of London after furious blast at Sadiq Khan"
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6304807/stephen-lawrence-pal-joins-the-tories-and-is-tipped-as-future-mayor-of-london-after-furious-blast-at-sadiq-khan/
Chapter 1
In that pleasant district of merry England which is watered by the river Don, there extended in ancient times a large forest, covering the greater part of the beautiful hills and valleys which lie between Sheffield and the pleasant town of Doncaster. The remains of this extensive wood are still to be seen at the noble seats of Wentworth, of Wharncliffe Park, and around Rotherham. Here haunted of yore the fabulous Dragon of Wantley; here were fought many of the most desperate battles during the Civil Wars of the Roses; and here also flourished in ancient times those bands of gallant outlaws, whose deeds have been rendered so popular in English song.
Such being our chief scene ...
The Ivanhoe line runs Doncaster-Conisbrough-Rotherham-Sheffield.
The Jews are also defined by their religion, but people change their religion for a variety of reasons, including because it’s the religion of the conquerers. Paris was after all, well worth a Mass, and early Islam wasn’t too dissimilar from Judaism.
And anyway, the Arabs, Christian or Moslem have lived in Palestine for at least 1000 years; does that not give them some rights?
It’s a complex mess and taking rigid political positions doesn’t help.
As for his attack on Khan over the "Gang Matrix", I don't really understand. The Matrix was apparently set up in 2012 when Boris was Mayor - did he know ? Apparently it's all Sadiq's fault because he is the current Mayor. That seems flimsy reasoning - there's a question to be asked about the role of the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and whether either the current incumbent, Sophie Linden, or her predecessor, Stephen Greenhalgh, were involved with or knew about the Matrix and its function.
There has been plenty of criticism of the Gangs Matrix within London but the Met have stood by its use.
It's also highly questionable to say Jews have lived longer in Israel/Palestine than Arabs. It has been an Arab majority state for most of the past two thousand years. (Not that any of this is a justification for any form of governance now).
But yes, I agree. It's a smahing place.
The last place I visited for recreation was Hardwick Hall in err Derbyshire.
I remember asking one Director if she was from Derbyshire. She looked at me with horror.
“Good God, no! I’m from Nottinghamshire.”
London is far too important to have novice politicians running for the Mayoralty. (I know some will suggest Boris was and is a politician still with his stabiliser wheels, but it's not really fair)
The right candidate could win for the Tories even given their poor ratings in London overall. Zac Goldsmith was the wrong candidate, so it should be easy to find someone a little better, but finding the person that can win is a challenge - I'm pretty sure they're out there though.
' Concentration in this market has now reached absurd levels – the big four are auditors to 97% of FTSE 350 companies. Carillion perfectly illustrated the closed shop in action. KMPG approved the accounts, Deloitte advised the board on risk management, and EY was consulted on turnaround plans. That left the field clear for PwC to name its price as adviser to the Official Receiver. '
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2018/may/16/entire-system-failed-carillion-not-just-directors-at-the-top
The breaking up of the big audit firms is long overdue
Indeed, Arabs do have some rights and that is why I would very much like there to be a Palestinian state alongside Israel. This was on offer in 1948 and also when Clinton pushed his peace plan. It has been a tragedy that Palestinian leadership has been so poor that in seeking everything during the last 70 years and befoehanded it has ended up with nothing. It is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process. In that sense, Israeli leaders have become more Middle Eastern - focusing more on "might is right" than is wise.
As you say, a complex mess.
But if insisting on the survival - rather than the destruction - of Israel is deemed to be taking a rigid political position, then I am happy to plead guilty. Some things are non-negotiable and in my book the survival of Israel is one of them.
And if that is the position in France (and see what is also happening in Germany) it is simply naive to think that a liberal secular state populated by Jews and Arabs could be created and survive in the Middle East, at least in the world as it is now.
And having been to Moscow a few times, I'd struggle to call it inspiring
St Petersburg, though...
However, did you mean what you wrote when you wrote: 'It i(presumably the 'Arab state’) is now facing an Israeli leadership which does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.’
I really don’t get the impression that the Israeli leadership "does have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.” I would have said ‘doesn’t. Not does,
The Senate on Wednesday voted to reinstate the FCC's net neutrality rules, passing a bill that has little chance of advancing in the House but offers net neutrality supporters and Democrats a political rallying point for the midterm elections.
To be honest the results were about as good as can be hoped for overall, only 40.1% of voters ticked the Labour box which is a minor miracle round those parts.
But I think your comparison is unfair. Hamas has acknowledged Israel’s estimate to be correct
'Given the relative size of the goodwill in the Group balance sheet, particularly in the UK Services CGU, relatively small changes in these assumptions could give rise to material changes in the assessment of the carrying value of goodwill.' is a bit of a danger warning flag to anyone who cares to read the annual statement.
KPMG had a good few such statements in Carrillion's audit report.
(Yes, seriously! Albeit Christians/Muslims/Jews)
Sadly, the Israeli leadership does not have the ambition or compassion or farsightedness or generosity necessary to kickstart a fresh peace process.
Until it does it is hard to see a way out of the current bloody impasse.
Nottingham has been on the decline for a couple of decades, and Leicester ascendant. In particular Leicester has become the detination for shopping in the region, and of course our Football team is far better too.
Nottingham is a superior city in an ordinary county.
Derby is an ordinary city in a superior county.
I guess they came close with Ed Miliband!
I don't feel I really took advantage of the city as much as I could have though.
Until those on the ground agree that Israel can exist - whether within the 1967 borders or some other agreed borders - there can be no peace. Currently Israel's enemies - some of them - want the country to disappear.
It was the Sherrif who was in Nottingham not Robin Hood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doncaster_Sheffield_Airport#Name
Though the airport should have been named Pilgrim Fathers as many of them came from villages surrounding the airport and it is a travel associated name.
There must be a price for aggressive war if you lose. The price paid for losing their defensive war, had Israel lost, would undoubtedly have been absolutely awful.
(Apologies for any misremembered detail here, but I think the general theme stands)
Nottingham miles ahead in retail.
http://hdh.co.uk/uploads/2017/06/HDH-Vitality-Index-June-2017.pdf
Nottingham is a two-club city so really Leicester City ought to do better. Historically though Forest are the biggest club in the region and have won two European cups.
Unfortunately governments seem to have a liking for cosy cartels.
Also, if your solution to middle east peace is "Israel should be more like Lebanon" then you're off your nut.
Why did you reply to the comment that said comparing Israel to Nazis is antisemitic by disagreeing with it? How Ken are you?
Which is itself an oddity with the 'city' club playing in the county and the 'county' club playing in the city.
"No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.
To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate."
At no point did I mention Nazis nor did my comment make an reference or inference about them. It was a general comment and if the only way you can counter it is by straw man arguments then clearly you lack the ability to argue your case cogently or reasonably.