Saturday, July 18th - Sunday, July 19th 2015

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:01 pm

Cameronite = "lightweight", surely?!

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:01 pm

Charlie Brooker ‏@charltonbrooker · Jul 16
Boris Johnson wonders why the BBC didn't make Breaking Bad. It's because in the UK Walter White would receive free treatment on the NHS.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:16 pm

Fury as Tories approve dog breeding centre for medical tests - days after cancelling fox hunting vote

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fu ... ng-6079403" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:18 pm

Goodnight, everyone.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:29 pm

Cameronite --- A brittle compound. Appears solid, but no substance.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:29 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

Night PF

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:29 pm

https://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... onditions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DWP Hires Miracle Lifestyle Guru Who Claims 95% Success Rate In Curing Mental Health Conditions

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:45 pm

Neil Henderson ‏@hendopolis · 10m10 minutes ago
MAIL ON SUNDAY: Boris and Cameron: now it's open war #tomorrowspaperstoday #BBCPapers

https://twitter.com/hendopolis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 9:57 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Neil Henderson ‏@hendopolis · 10m10 minutes ago
MAIL ON SUNDAY: Boris and Cameron: now it's open war #tomorrowspaperstoday #BBCPapers

https://twitter.com/hendopolis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Look over there while the government do loads of U-turns.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:01 pm

: Cameron Wants To Bomb Isis In Syria.jpg (82.43 KiB) Viewed 7656 times

Neil Henderson ‏@hendopolis 40m40 minutes ago
SUNDAY TIMES POLITICAL LEAD: PM - we'll bomb ISIS in Syria #tomorrowspaperstoday

Never mind parliament ... that's so passe

Cameronite - utterly full of it but completely without substance.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:20 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

Goodnight, PorFavor

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:21 pm

Right-to-buy battle looms in Lords
Cross-party group backs amendment which could halt Tory plans to extend sales to housing association tenants
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ssociation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Senior figures in Whitehall have told the Observer that the Treasury is increasingly concerned about forcing housing associations to sell their properties, fearing it could add up to £60bn to government debt and mean the Treasury has to step in to fund subsidies to buyers.

The policy has already been criticised by many in the housing industry, as well as by business organisations, who say it was drawn up in haste when the Tories feared losing the election, while the London mayor, Boris Johnson, has voiced concerns about its potential negative effects on housing stock in London.

I thought it originated in the Treasury FFS - with George Osborne as a blatant pre election vote buyer. These issues were all glaringly obvious - along with the scum ethics of it. There's no way I want it to actually happen ... but another U turn, on something as totemic as they made this, surely not? They'll be hoping for this to fail then ... that would suit them fine - to blame it on Lib Dem and Labour Lords.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:22 pm

How's Dave going to pay for that war?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:24 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Right-to-buy battle looms in Lords
Cross-party group backs amendment which could halt Tory plans to extend sales to housing association tenants
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ssociation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Senior figures in Whitehall have told the Observer that the Treasury is increasingly concerned about forcing housing associations to sell their properties, fearing it could add up to £60bn to government debt and mean the Treasury has to step in to fund subsidies to buyers.

The policy has already been criticised by many in the housing industry, as well as by business organisations, who say it was drawn up in haste when the Tories feared losing the election, while the London mayor, Boris Johnson, has voiced concerns about its potential negative effects on housing stock in London.
I thought it originated in the Treasury FFS - with George Osborne as a blatant pre election vote buyer. These issues were all glaringly obvious - along with the scum ethics of it. There's no way I want it to actually happen ... but another U turn, on something as totemic as they made this, surely not? They'll be hoping for this to fail then ... that would suit them fine - to blame it on Lib Dem and Labour Lords.

It's a sad damn day we gotta rely upon the Lords to mitigate danger.
I'll take it, of course, getting saved from danger, for as many as possible.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:49 pm

- Pedestrians and pedal cyclists have the same fatality rate.
- However the killed or seriously injured (KSI) rate for pedestrians is less than half of that for pedal cyclists.
- The risk for pedestrian killed or seriously injured (KSI) casualties is 13 times higher than for car occupants and
over four times lower than for a motorcycle riders.
- The National Travel Survey (NTS) estimates that in 2013 walking trips accounted for 22
per cent of all trips and 3 per cent of the total distance travelled.
- The average number of walking trips has fallen significantly over time. The NTS shows
a 30 per cent decrease from 292 trips per person per year in 1995/97 to 203 trips in 2013.

It's because pedestrians are frightened out of going outside without being wrapped in a motor vehicle.
I love walking, hiking, I love walking & hiking with friends who ride bikes, I've never been frightened by someone on a bike because 100 kg going 15 miles an hour isn't going to hurt me.
2000 kg of inattentive driver going 40 miles an hour along the pavement I'm trying to safely walk on is going to hurt me.

Measured per mile travelled, walking is a safe activity with injuries and fatalities rare events.
Nevertheless, it has a higher risk than driving, probably as a result of a lack of pedestrian-based technologies or protection to mitigate against injuries once an accident has happened.

Oh, god damn.
What does that mean?
Walking has a higher risk of injury & fatality due to getting whacked by someone driving an automobile.
The person driving the automobile is safer staying in the vehicle.
A lack of pedestrian-based technologies?
What the f***? Pedestrian wasn't wearing body armour, is that about right then?

Nevertheless improvements to vehicle design such as pedestrian impact crumple zones and bonnet airbags have helped to reduce pedestrian injuries. There is scope for further such technologies in the future as well.

Help me out here, people, what technological scope is the Department of Transport referring to here?

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 3-data.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 18 Jul, 2015 11:58 pm

Emily Thornberry retweeted
The Guardian ‏@guardian 46m46 minutes ago
Jonathan Dimbleby urges public to rise up in support of embattled BBC http://trib.al/bIbQs4s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh the sick irony. Where was the BBC all the whilst so many people were screaming about the damage to the NHS from Lansley's Health Service 'reforms'?

I don't want Cameron to win in cowing and shrinking the BBC ... but the Beeb really should have been tougher on the way here ... held on a bit harder to some of its principles and standards.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:04 am

Natalie Rowe has some very provocative tweets on the go ... I won't reproduce here for safety's sake.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:22 am

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... bn-savings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NHS ‘will fall well short of £22bn savings target’
Health service leaders warn they will need almost double the £8bn boost promised by ministers because delivering target is ‘pie in the sky’

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:23 am

That Isis article.

Laws against people who "quietly condone"? What on earth does that mean?

And hang on? Tighter laws after Trojan Horse?
The problem wasn't the law- it was lack of oversight by the DfE and Ofsted.
Infiltrated schools here means couple of religious conservatives got onto some governing bodies.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:24 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... bn-savings

NHS ‘will fall well short of £22bn savings target’
Health service leaders warn they will need almost double the £8bn boost promised by ministers because delivering target is ‘pie in the sky’

They were meant to fail the efficiency target.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:35 am

"Laws against people who "quietly condone"? What on earth does that mean?"

No idea, not reaching a sufficient decibel level in condemnation?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:38 am

Goodnight, everyone
love
cJA

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:42 am

Goodnight.Probably best to practice sufficient vigour in your condemnations,lest future arrest on assumption of quiet condoning.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 12:47 am

HindleA wrote:https://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... onditions/

DWP Hires Miracle Lifestyle Guru Who Claims 95% Success Rate In Curing Mental Health Conditions

Gosh, look:

Company Registration No.:09523989
Incorporation Date: 2 Apr 2015 (3 Months old)
Financial Year End: 30 Apr
Capital: £1.00 on 2 Apr 2015

https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/ ... ling-again

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 1:25 am

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/more-low-incom ... niversity/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pupils on free school meals are catching up to their more advantaged peers when it comes to taking a university place after they finish school.

New official statistics released by the Department for Business, Skills and Innovation show that in 2005/06 just 13 per cent of 15-year-olds on free school meals (FSM) went on to higher education by the age of 19.

In 2012/13, the latest cohort for which figures are available, this leapt to 23 per cent – meaning nearly one in four children from low income families is now accessing higher education.

Increase in non-FSM pupils at uni too, but not bad at all.

These kids did all but 2 years of their education under rubbishy Labour who didn't care about social mobility, and just made excuses for poor kids rather than teach them anything.

I recall the preposterous Matt Hancock boasting last year (?) about FSM kids going to university as "making a good start on social mobility". They must be very smart kids indeed if they started school in Sept 2010 and were at university within 4 years.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 1:38 am

Wow look how progressive Scotland does on access.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/leaders-ne ... -1-3815230" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Around 15 per cent of 18-year-olds from Scotland’s most deprived communities had made a university application by the January 2014 deadline – a 108 per cent rise from 2004, when the application rate was just 7.2 per cent.

That's applying, not actually going. Admittedly, it was starting from a low base, but that's going from 7 to 15 in 10 years, of which 7 were under the SNP.

UK in 7 years went from 13 to 23 percent actually going.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 1:49 am

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Wow look how progressive Scotland does on access.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/leaders-ne ... -1-3815230" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Around 15 per cent of 18-year-olds from Scotland’s most deprived communities had made a university application by the January 2014 deadline – a 108 per cent rise from 2004, when the application rate was just 7.2 per cent.
That's applying, not actually going. Admittedly, it was starting from a low base, but that's going from 7 to 15 in 10 years, of which 7 were under the SNP.

UK in 7 years went from 13 to 23 percent actually going.

Shame we don't have the 2004 figures for the UK as a whole, or the Scottish figures for 2006/7 - and the Scottish figures for 'had started at university by age 19' in order to do some direct comparisons. We could also do with the 2010 and or '11 so we could see whether or not the rate of increase has changed since the Coalition took over. I understand that Scotland has its own education system but it is dependent on Barnet consequentials so the UK Government's education funding decisions must have some sort of an effect.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 5:57 am

Tubby Isaacs wrote:That Isis article.

Laws against people who "quietly condone"? What on earth does that mean?

And hang on? Tighter laws after Trojan Horse?
The problem wasn't the law- it was lack of oversight by the DfE and Ofsted.
Infiltrated schools here means couple of religious conservatives got onto some governing bodies.

Well, Cameron (or someone in his Cabinet) seemed to suggest that simply hoping for a re-founded Caliphate/truly-Islamic nation-state/empire, or believing that it would come some day, is enough. But for many Muslims (a majority?) that's a devout wish that is pretty much tied up with waiting for the coming of, or the second-coming of, the Mahdi who, according to some Hadiths and legends, will arrive at the same time as the Messiah (probably Christ, in Christianity, or an other in messianic-Judaism). The two of them will join forces to defeat the anti-Christ (the false-Messiah) heralding the Day of Judgement and then an idyllic world for the faithful who will, naturally, live according to The One God's true law. Try persuading anyone to stop holding those deeply-rooted beliefs, even though they've been exploited by charlatans (or purely misguided folk) from all three Abrahamic faiths.

Others hark back to either the early expansions of Islam, mostly by conquest, or to the great flourishing of cultural-, scientific-, and academic-development but debate how long that era lasted. Dreams of martial 'glory' are regarded as dubious by most people, of all faiths and none, these days – officially, so-called civilised or developed societies tend not to sanction martial expansions but many individuals (and nations?) have romantic notions of war and empire. Nowadays we're all supposed to be, pretty much, in favour of tact and diplomacy and trade and keeping-the-peace - 'jaw-jaw, not war-war.' Once the Muslim territorial expansion had settled down that great flourishing of learning could arise – the re-founding of libraries, establishment of universities, discovery and translation of historic, even ancient, greek and latin texts, combining and formalising great swathes of arithmetics and mathematics (algebra! algorithms! other things beginning with al...) or medicine, history, botany, astronomy, and more - and that is the one that most of the Muslims I know would like to see come again – regardless of whether or not they have a belief in the New Jerusalem/Paradise on Earth. That last is 'divinely-ordained' and the timing is not in the hands of man (for believers) but a flourishing culture of education, peace, and prosperity, is in the hands of man, if all are willing to work together.

There's a deep problem with this 'quiet condoning' thing. Muslims tend to shy away from criticising others, in some areas, and from prying into the way others believe. One of the injunctions in Islam is, "Do not inquire into the nature of God/Allah.' which goes along with do not pry deeply into another's conception of Allah's will: if they declare themselves Moslem, and if they abide by the Pillars of Islam, those five Commandments which are central to all strands of Islam, then they are as Moslem as anyone else. Another injunction (although it might be one of the Hadiths) says, '~~Islam does not divide itself into Sects.~~' (woops, no it doesn't! It says 'Do not follow a religion that divides itself into Sects.' However strongly a Sunni-muslim might regard a Shia-muslim as an enemy or as wrong, if you admit them to be of a different 'sect' then that is a difficult religious problem - Islam would become a forbidden religion to Muslims and that cannot be so. The same problem would exist in regard of these young people who fall for the 'way to be a true Muslim' that the extremist preachers espouse - it is difficult to say 'they are not Muslims.'

So, to the matter of the particular type of 'future Caliphate/prophesied Caliphate' and the ways of achieving it. The vast, vast majority of Muslims in this country do speak out and condemn, absolutely, the actions - the way of going about things - of the extremists, of the hate-preachers, of Daesh/IS/ISIL/ISIS. They don't want their sons and daughters, friends, neighbours, or relatives, to become murderers - to fall under the sway of charismatic but dangerous people. They speak out, they condemn, they protest, they try to explain that murder, theft (property, people, land,) rape, forcing conversions of others, are all wrong and contrary to the tenets of Islam - that those things are crimes and terrorism. But their protests and outreach-programmes and speaking-out and condemnation does not get anywhere near the press/media coverage that the atrocities get. They just keep getting told that they're not doing 'enough', whatever 'enough' would look like. And when those good people's beliefs in a paradise-on-earth-type or flowering-of-civilisation-type Caliphate are regarded by this Government as 'quietly condoning' the Caliphate-imposed-by-invasion-and-terrorism that so-called Islamic State is going for, when they have argued and shouted loudly against the latter way of doing things? Well, what are people to do? Some will succumb to despair and fear, and the sense that they are being persecuted – damned if they do and damned if they don't. Most will just try to do the best that they can; some will succeed in turning others away from a path of violence so restoring harmony; a few will try just as hard but, unfortunately, fail; another few will have a sudden and awful shock when one (or more) of their loved ones is discovered to have successfully hidden their true intentions and disappears, is arrested, or – worse - commits an atrocity. And worse, for those last: right at the point when they are in shock and grieving, or desperately trying to find the missing, the police- and security-forces will invade their lives because 'they must have known' or 'probably knew' or 'might have encouraged'...

Under Cameron's 'One Nation' leadership Muslims are being condemned and denigrated for not protesting 'enough' about things they are protesting about and the poor, the sick and disabled, the anti-hunt/animal-welfare people, the environmentalists, and the trades-unions, etc., are condemned and denigrated for protesting too much. Divide and rule is alive and better-than-well. We're all guilty-by-association of something, we're being divided and set against each other - the cocks or bears in their pit, the dogs in their fight. It feels as if they're turning these islands into something that is not the sort of country I want to live in - into one where everyone is suspicious of everyone else; where everyone is fearful for their loved ones; where it seems safer/easier to stay in one's designated box, keep to oneself, look out for number one, ignore everything else. But there's this hope inside me, this intense dislike of injustice, this affection for people, for the flora, fauna, and landscapes of my locale, my country, my planet and beyond, not giving in.

A 'Statesman' would, oh I dunno, perhaps explain that a lot of our fellow citizens are suffering because some of their young people, along with some vulnerable adults, are being lured into danger, being groomed/brain-washed by (what?) cynical cult-leaders; that those fellow citizens need our solidarity, friendship, and sympathy, while they try to protect their families and find the missing; that we (that's officialdom) are giving them expert help and putting in whatever resources we can to support them in their time of need; that we will do whatever is in our power to help them get their children back, to undo the conditioning they have been subjected to, and help them adjust back into their families and into our society. They'd probably finish by saying, "The families of the missing ask that you hold them in your thoughts and prayers."

Or summat. I've rambled again, so I hope it makes sense.

Edit: removed the excess of 'officially'-s, found some of the rogue punctuation in honour of PF (BUMBOILS™ to anything I've missed!), corrected a saying I'd misquoted, and generally attempted to make a bit more sense...

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 7:18 am

Don't think we saw this very 'lively' debate on Housing Supply (London) from Westminster Hall on Wednesday 15th July. Mr Chope, in the chair, got really rather 'aeriated' towards the end when Sadiq Khan repeatedly referred to filibustering by the Members Opposite, and furiously denied that any such thing had happened or would happen. The debate was opened by Dr. Rupa Huq, with this:

In the 1937 novel “Coming Up for Air” by George Orwell, the narrator tells us that his neighbours all think they have bought their own homes, and remarks,

“they don’t, the building society does”.

Although it was an inter-war satire of social mores in the suburbs, many Londoners now in precarious employment and accommodation would welcome the possibility of being beholden to the building society—they may even kill to have a mortgage. As was written in the paper the other day:

“Increasingly…owning your house is the preserve of the rich. Home ownership levels in England are plummeting just as new homes are shrinking”.

That was not in the Morning Star or the Socialist Worker; it was in The Sunday Times property section. This debate is supposed to be on the housing supply in London, but it would be no exaggeration to say that it is on the housing crisis in London, as that is what we now face.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 1541000001

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 7:35 am

This, I think will be the last of this flurry of posts from me but...

@Ohso: I hope Mr. Ohso is feeling a bit stronger and more hopeful - and that the accidentally washed 'phone will be ok. If you just leave it in a dry place at room temperature (not on or by a radiator!) for 24-48 hours before attempting to switch it on, it might well be fine. Or, it is sometimes recommended that you 'bury it' in dry rice in an airtight container - tupperware, perhaps - for about 36 hours. The rice substitutes for those dessicating-gel packets you often find in the packaging of electrical or electronic goods. If it wo'n't power up after you've given it proper time to dry out you'll find phone-repair shops dotted about all over the place in even pretty small towns with guys who can work wonders for a small charge; and, of course, if it's under a replacement insurance policy you can take advantage of that and the shop he got it from should be able to retrieve any data on it. The SIM should have survived, so you could just remove that and stick it in another phone - it will have some data on it and, possibly, all his contacts. xxx

@RR2: Was it you posted about that awful plan to open a new beagle- and ferret-breeding 'kennels' with the animals being used for medical/scientific research? It's bloody heartbreaking and I would have great difficulty in accepting that it's necessary, in this day and age!
:flame:

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 8:06 am

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/jul ... rights-act" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Anti-apartheid heroes urge Cameron not to repeal Human Rights Act
Some of South Africa’s most influential intellectuals and activists have urged David Cameron to reconsider his plans to repeal the Human Rights Act, warning that the move is reminiscent of the mindset that created apartheid.

In a letter to the Observer, 25 of the country’s most eminent playwrights, lawyers, politicians and artists say that more than two decades after the British people spoke out against apartheid in South Africa, it was their turn to reciprocate with support for a country that is in danger of betraying that honourable history.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 8:45 am

Observer all pro-Kendall this am

Darling

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ir-darling" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Grim polling (with amusing blaming of electorate BTL)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... n-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nick Cohen (who I would like if he were not quite so keen on intervention abroad regardless of international law)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/com ... p-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the leader is very tough

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... SApp_Other" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

last couple of paras.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 9:10 am

SpinningHugo wrote:Observer all pro-Kendall this am

Darling

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ir-darling" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Grim polling (with amusing blaming of electorate BTL)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... n-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nick Cohen (who I would like if he were not quite so keen on intervention abroad regardless of international law)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/com ... p-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the leader is very tough

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... SApp_Other" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

last couple of paras.

It is worth pointing out the "poll" is in fact utter and complete shite.

It isn't a poll, it is a selection of focus groups. Therefore it has even less basis in reality than opinion polls.

If you look at where the focus groups come from (leading Blairite) the immediate warning is confirmation bias. The next piece of bullshit is the story is based on a very small number of Tory switchers.

What the non polling found (or at least it got a tiny number of people to say this) is that some people who voted Labour in 2010 voted Tory this time. Furthermore they won't vote Labour again until Labour has won power.

These people always exist - they are the hard wired non switchers. We know who the government is and they are ok types. They probably voted for Labour in 79, Tories in 83,87,92,97 and Labour in 2001,5,10.

They never vote for the opposition.

Yet somehow this is a valid finding.

What this tells me is the Blairite wing of the party and their ex Lib Dem media mates are desperate.

Kendall would be just as big a disaster for Labour as Corbyn, anybody with half a brain should see that.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 9:42 am

This is in response to Lady C's long post on the so called 'quietly condoning' by Muslims - that Cameron and co seem so obsessed by.

On the day of 7/7 I was working in my office in East London on a corridor where lots of other organisations also rented office space. One of these - the voluntary services council - had a TV which we were coming in and out to watch. We were all in varying states of shock and distress. We weren't allowed to go home - even by walking - as Stratford was shut down on suspicion of another device. We were Muslims, Christians, Buddhist, Jain, Hindu, Sikh and those of no religious faith.

One of the employees of NCVO was distraught - utterly beside himself - that this act seemed to have been done in the name of his religion. Another member of staff - a committed Christian - spent all afternoon comforting and talking to him - trying to explain that his hurt and devastation was shared by other faiths that see things done in their name that they don't support at all such as pro lifers burning down abortion clinics and murdering doctors etc - and that he mustn't take on all the guilt for it. He was crying and saying 'this is not Islam', this is not Islam' over and over again. His reaction was simply the most overt of what many of our Muslim colleagues and friends were saying and feeling that day.

We have an extremist government in my book. They are trying to shut people up all the time - immigrants, charities, unions, public sector, people who need social security. Don't try and suppress and oppress people at every turn and then tell them they're not loud enough.

Edited to put a comma inbetween public sector and people who need ...

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:00 am

To me what would be a disaster is for Labour to carry on as they are, ignoring the millions who don't vote in order to 'win' and do things tories would do anyway.

We need a complete about turn, and Corbyn is the only one offering hope for the future. The others are simply too timid and lacking in vision and principle. Where we would end up with Burnham or Cooper in charge, god only knows, because they would be blown around by the tabloid winds, operating the under direction of the tories.

It should not be an option for Labour leaders to talk about welfare caps, cutting disability benefits or any other of the tory light policies they are tempted by.

What a mess these Blairites have made of the party and the country.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:10 am

As a Labour member with a vote and interest in this contest. I now feel utterly harried and depressed about it all. Whichever way I vote will be seen to be at fault and the death knell of the party by some. Each of the candidates seems to come with a poisoned chalice - a pre prepared story ripe for the inevitable MSM bashing. I'm going to force myself to watch the televised hustings this morning - haven't watched or listened to anything since the Kuennsberg fiasco at the beginning - I wonder if any of their responses will have developed, if any of the questions will have changed or actually be new.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:24 am

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 6s6 seconds ago
Asked why @Corbyn4Leader gets most Twitter support, @LizforLeader tells @tnewtondunn :"You think the only world is Twitter?" @JPonpolitics

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
.@LizforLeader says @Corbyn4Leader vision is "not serious politics" and it's "ridiculous" to suggest she'd work with him. @jppo

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 4m4 minutes ago
.@LizforLeader tells R5L "I'm not doing badly in the race". "My experience of phone banks..I'm doing strong, I'm doing well"

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:29 am

@rr2

Each of the candidates seems to come with a poisoned chalice - a pre prepared story ripe for the inevitable MSM bashing.

That's inevitable. What's important is how people react to the monstering. I think Corbyn is the only one who would tell them where to get off with their narratives. The rest would try to appease, or simply fail to counter, judging from past experience.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:30 am

This morning's Observer is shrill, one sided propaganda which should embarrass all those who colluded in it.

You do realise that people who voted Labour in 2010 and Tory this year are a TINY percentage of the overall electorate, right? But the same people who think we should worry about such types obsessively are the same who sneer at the very idea that there are gains to be made amongst (for instance) non voters. Polls predicted a turnout of 70-75% when it was actually just 66%, that was a major reason both why they were wrong and Labour lost. Has there been any work done (proper *research* I mean - not the bogus mendacious stuff being touted this morning) about why that happened?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:34 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:This morning's Observer is shrill, one sided propaganda which should embarrass all those who colluded in it.

You do realise that people who voted Labour in 2010 and Tory this year are a TINY percentage of the overall electorate, right? But the same people who think we should worry about such types obsessively are the same who sneer at the very idea that there are gains to be made amongst (for instance) non voters. Polls predicted a turnout of 70-75% when it was actually just 66%, that was a major reason both why they were wrong and Labour lost. Has there been any work done (proper *research* I mean - not the bogus mendacious stuff being touted this morning) about why that happened?

Don't polls always overstate turnout?
Will you vote?
Nah, I am too lazy. (Not a popular answer)

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:37 am

On a more frivolous point, it would be interesting to see how the BBC would manage to continue their blacking of the Morning Star if the leader of the Labour party, and long-term columnist, announces policy in the paper?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:40 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:This morning's Observer is shrill, one sided propaganda which should embarrass all those who colluded in it.

You do realise that people who voted Labour in 2010 and Tory this year are a TINY percentage of the overall electorate, right? But the same people who think we should worry about such types obsessively are the same who sneer at the very idea that there are gains to be made amongst (for instance) non voters. Polls predicted a turnout of 70-75% when it was actually just 66%, that was a major reason both why they were wrong and Labour lost. Has there been any work done (proper *research* I mean - not the bogus mendacious stuff being touted this morning) about why that happened?

Don't polls always overstate turnout?
Will you vote?
Nah, I am too lazy. (Not a popular answer)

To some extent, but they were a lot closer in 2005 and 2010. To a degree in recent years, it has become fashionable amongst certain groups to say you *won't* vote in order to express your dissatisfaction with the political process.

There is also, of course, the fact that the "shortfall" in turnout this time didn't affect all parties equally. Tories and SNP got their vote out extremely efficiently - other parties, not so much.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:46 am

To attract non-voters, Labour has to start saying something different.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 10:49 am

It's either a crusade or nothing. At the moment it is closest to nothing it has ever been.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:10 am

Someone sort out the problems with Corbyn's microphone - please.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:35 am

Keep us from Liz Kendall.

Aside from not agreeing with anything she says, she presents what she says appallingly badly. She is coming across as having no conviction about anything. She's not even a conviction right-winger\right of centre-er, whatever. She's just a waffling leadership candidate. That's her raison d'etre - and it's becoming increasingly obvious.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:37 am

LadyCentauria wrote:This, I think will be the last of this flurry of posts from me but...

@Ohso: I hope Mr. Ohso is feeling a bit stronger and more hopeful - and that the accidentally washed 'phone will be ok. If you just leave it in a dry place at room temperature (not on or by a radiator!) for 24-48 hours before attempting to switch it on, it might well be fine. Or, it is sometimes recommended that you 'bury it' in dry rice in an airtight container - tupperware, perhaps - for about 36 hours. The rice substitutes for those dessicating-gel packets you often find in the packaging of electrical or electronic goods. If it wo'n't power up after you've given it proper time to dry out you'll find phone-repair shops dotted about all over the place in even pretty small towns with guys who can work wonders for a small charge; and, of course, if it's under a replacement insurance policy you can take advantage of that and the shop he got it from should be able to retrieve any data on it. The SIM should have survived, so you could just remove that and stick it in another phone - it will have some data on it and, possibly, all his contacts. xxx

@RR2: Was it you posted about that awful plan to open a new beagle- and ferret-breeding 'kennels' with the animals being used for medical/scientific research? It's bloody heartbreaking and I would have great difficulty in accepting that it's necessary, in this day and age!
:flame:

Twasn't an expensive phone. Ten quid from Sainsburys, thank goodness!

Thank God his iPad is too big to get in his trouser pockets otherwise it would only be a matter of time.

Our granddaughter nipped along there yesterday and brought a replacement for nine pound...He only has it for emergencies, and the hospital sends him reminders for appointment texts.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:38 am

Oh - and good morfternoon.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:42 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:This morning's Observer is shrill, one sided propaganda which should embarrass all those who colluded in it.

You do realise that people who voted Labour in 2010 and Tory this year are a TINY percentage of the overall electorate, right? But the same people who think we should worry about such types obsessively are the same who sneer at the very idea that there are gains to be made amongst (for instance) non voters. Polls predicted a turnout of 70-75% when it was actually just 66%, that was a major reason both why they were wrong and Labour lost. Has there been any work done (proper *research* I mean - not the bogus mendacious stuff being touted this morning) about why that happened?

Don't polls always overstate turnout?
Will you vote?
Nah, I am too lazy. (Not a popular answer)
To some extent, but they were a lot closer in 2005 and 2010. To a degree in recent years, it has become fashionable amongst certain groups to say you *won't* vote in order to express your dissatisfaction with the political process.

There is also, of course, the fact that the "shortfall" in turnout this time didn't affect all parties equally. Tories and SNP got their vote out extremely efficiently - other parties, not so much.

I honestly think the Tories were taken aback when they won. And the low polling figures were a shock to them too.

When I was telling on the day, the big wigs on the council toured all the polling stations. They were all confidently saying they expected a high turnout, and there'd be another election very, very soon. They didn't for one minute think they'd get a workable majority.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Sun 19 Jul, 2015 11:49 am

And they had built up a massive war chest for a second election...I wonder what's happened to that? A very tempting morsel to dangle in a shark-filled tank, I would say.