Friday 24th November 2017
Posted: Fri 24 Nov, 2017 7:10 am
Morning all.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... rs-inquiry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;”The point was made by the Isle of Man’s chief constable, Gary Roberts. In May he described financial crime as a “genuinely strategic threat”. He said that the nature and scale of the investigations engaging his small force were “without precedent”. And he added: “If you are going to play in the big world of offshore finance, you’ve got to have the infrastructure to support it.”
From the Paradise Papers documents, it’s clear the police and the regulators don’t have that. The people who do are the accountants, lawyers and tax advisers who run legal rings around investigators, and conjure arrangements and schemes that allow their already wealthy clients to shelter more of their cash. You don’t have to be a chief constable to see there is something morally very wrong about this.””
Very true. I hadn't thought about it quite like that before.Shrinking the State fits very well with impunity for the oligarchs .
Hi Willow.Willow904 wrote:Morning all.
Does anyone know anything about 'tells' people give when lying?
I was just watching Theresa May talking on Victoria Derbyshire and as she said "we may be leaving the European Union" she gave a very noticeable flick of her eyes to the right, having previously held a very steady forward gaze.
It might just be a normal tic, I haven't exactly spent a lot of time studying May's mannerisms, but it was distinctive enough to catch my attention in conjunction with what she was saying when she did it and rewind and watch it again and it really looked like she was avoiding eye contact when she said the first part of "we may be leaving the European Union, but we're not leaving Europe".
Is she right handed, does anyone know? I think right handed people are supposed to look to the right when they're making things up, but I'm not an expert or anything. Rather curious if I'm correct though. If Theresa May doesn't truly believe we're leaving the EU....well, I'm not sure what that means!
Yes, that's what googling suggests, but I don't know how true it is. I know people can appear stiff and unnatural when lying, but she's always like that! It was very distinctive, though. I might watch some other interviews with her to see if you can see her hands when she's talking about leaving the EU, hands are supposed to be more revealing I think. Compared to David Cameron, who appeared to be a habitual, and therefore practised liar, I get the impression dishonesty doesn't come as naturally to May, so she may be easier to read for those who know what to look for.discordantharmony wrote:Hi Willow.Willow904 wrote:Morning all.
Does anyone know anything about 'tells' people give when lying?
I was just watching Theresa May talking on Victoria Derbyshire and as she said "we may be leaving the European Union" she gave a very noticeable flick of her eyes to the right, having previously held a very steady forward gaze.
It might just be a normal tic, I haven't exactly spent a lot of time studying May's mannerisms, but it was distinctive enough to catch my attention in conjunction with what she was saying when she did it and rewind and watch it again and it really looked like she was avoiding eye contact when she said the first part of "we may be leaving the European Union, but we're not leaving Europe".
Is she right handed, does anyone know? I think right handed people are supposed to look to the right when they're making things up, but I'm not an expert or anything. Rather curious if I'm correct though. If Theresa May doesn't truly believe we're leaving the EU....well, I'm not sure what that means!
I was told that eyes looking up and to the right signify not necessarily lying but rather trying to 'build the story' whereas left signifies 'recalling an event'.
It was more of a rag-bag of bits and bobs designed to placate Conservative MPs and attempt to distract from the main picture. It didn't feel like a Budget to me.HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017 ... ather.html
November 2017 Budget: Tinkering rather than Transforming
Mainlymacro
Downing Street appears confused.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... of-culture" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The EU will not allow a British city to become European capital of culture in 2023 after Brexit, dashing the hopes of Dundee, Leeds and others that were preparing bids costing hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The European commission said it would not be possible because only countries that were in the EU, the European Economic Area (EEA) or in the process of becoming members were eligible for inclusion.
Downing Street said it disagreed with the decision and had begun “urgent discussions” with the commission. However, a spokesman was unable to say on what grounds the UK was objecting.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bre ... 72481.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The people of a country that likes to be more British than the British has said to the British: 'No, don’t be that British – or we might end up not being British'
If there’s an argument about pickled onions, the EU proposes a series of renegotiated arrangements based on figures drawn up by the EU pickled onion office, derived from a projected pickled onion consumption module assessed by the Strasbourg Office for Pickling and Retaining Requisite Crunchness. And we respond by going: “Bollocks. WE eat what we like. Napoleon thought he could tell us about pickled onions and look what happened to him.”
Wonderful - thank you! And the mystery of the falsetto voice on Jackson Browne's "Stay" finally solved, too.HindleA wrote:[youtube]LdYjav7LiVQ[/youtube]
Where are those impact assessments? Even if the one on pickled onions isn't available, we could have the rest to be going on with . . .tinyclanger2 wrote:If there’s an argument about pickled onions, the EU proposes a series of renegotiated arrangements based on figures drawn up by the EU pickled onion office, derived from a projected pickled onion consumption module assessed by the Strasbourg Office for Pickling and Retaining Requisite Crunchness. And we respond by going: “Bollocks. WE eat what we like. Napoleon thought he could tell us about pickled onions and look what happened to him.”
Just another day ending in "-day", then?tinyclanger2 wrote:Downing Street appears confused.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... of-culture" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The EU will not allow a British city to become European capital of culture in 2023 after Brexit, dashing the hopes of Dundee, Leeds and others that were preparing bids costing hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The European commission said it would not be possible because only countries that were in the EU, the European Economic Area (EEA) or in the process of becoming members were eligible for inclusion.
Downing Street said it disagreed with the decision and had begun “urgent discussions” with the commission. However, a spokesman was unable to say on what grounds the UK was objecting.
That is *not* what they originally pledged, is it?AngryAsWell wrote:Daniel HewittVerified account
@DanielHewittITV
Follow Follow @DanielHewittITV
More
NEW: I’m told the Prime Minister has written to Mayor Andy Burnham to say govt will only pay “reasonable” costs spent by Manchester in response to May’s terror attack, NOT the full £17m.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No, at the time it was "do whatever you need to do."AnatolyKasparov wrote:That is *not* what they originally pledged, is it?AngryAsWell wrote:Daniel HewittVerified account
@DanielHewittITV
Follow Follow @DanielHewittITV
More
NEW: I’m told the Prime Minister has written to Mayor Andy Burnham to say govt will only pay “reasonable” costs spent by Manchester in response to May’s terror attack, NOT the full £17m.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 72761.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Navy, I can tell you, we're ordering ships, with the Air Force i can tell you we're ordering a lot of planes, in particular the F-35 fighter jet, which is like almost like an invisible fighter. I was asking the Air Force guys, I said, how good is this plane? They said, well, sir, you can't see it. I said but in a fight. You know, in a fight, like I watch on the movies. The fight, they're fighting. How good is this? They say, well, it wins every time because the enemy cannot see it. Even if it's right next to them, it can't see it. I said that helps. That's a good thing.
But I mean we have equipment that — nobody has the equipment that we have. And it's sad when we're selling our equipment to other countries but we're not buying it ourselves. But now that's all changed. And I said, the stuff that we have is always a little bit better too. When we sell to other countries, even if they're allies you never know about an ally. An ally can turn. You're going to find that out. But I always say make lives a little bit better. Give it that extra speed, a little bit — keep a little bit — keep about 10% in the bag. We have -- nobody has what with we have. That's what we're doing.
Could have been a kite flying exercise, I suppose?AngryAsWell wrote:Shambolic
Downing Street Denies Brexit U-Turn After Initially Claiming Northern Ireland Could Stay In Customs Union
It would have been a major policy shift...but it was soon denied.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/b ... 73cf70?mpw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Grim indeed - over 200 confirmed dead nowAnatolyKasparov wrote:Grim news from Egypt
HindleA wrote:http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/c ... s-11576182
I wonder if Tribunals have the equivalent to "wasting police time" ?""In a meeting held immediately before the Budget speech, the Work and Pensions Select Committee heard that over 200,000 disabled people were forced through formal tribunal appeals or through mandatory reconsiderations this year before they were awarded help through PIP.""
Unless the people are formerly asked whether they want to put trade before controlling immigration or vice versa, the "will of the people" isn't going to provide much of a mandate for the next part of the negotiations. Which is why I get so angry when Corbyn or Gardiner try to suggest there is just such a mandate from the EU referendum. I find this a big leap based on supposition not fact and thus very open to being bent to whatever politicians choose to impose, rather than true democracy. Theresa May called a snap election in order to win a mandate for her hard Brexit policy and failed to win one. I feel that's as good a picture of where the will of the people currently is on this as we're going to get and it appears the "will of the people" is well and truly on the fence without a true mandate for any option.When Britain enters phase two, it will be confronted with a simple choice: do we want trade or control? And we don’t know the answer to this question. Indeed, we haven’t even accepted it’s a choice we’ll have to make. But the reality is that if we want lots of trade, we have to give up some control. If we want lots of control, we have to give up some trade.
Or Labour will oppose? He doesn't make that entirely clear, though it's the natural conclusion.Keir Starmer: Tories Must Put National Interest First And Rewrite The Brexit Bill
I post this because I'm horrifyingly fascinated by it. I don't think the commentator realises the fundamental incongruity in their post. I doubt it's an intentionally illogical comment."I think most politicians understand the reality of Brexit perfectly well, including May and much of her government. There have been many reports on the predicted economic effects of Brexit and they all say much the same thing.
But what those reports describe is not calamity but a long, slow relative decline. That isn't enough for the politicians to declare some kind of national emergency. Therefore they feel, as democrats, that they are bound by the referendum result. Unless the public appear to dramatically change their minds on this (no sign of this yet) the referendum result will continue to be respected.
The debate has quite rightly moved on to how we Brexit, not whether we will. The big disappointment is Labour's refusal to stand up for our continued membership of the single market. They have meekly conceded that this is somehow incompatible with the referendum decision, which is simply factually wrong."
below the line post elsewhere
AngryAsWell wrote:48 things you need to know about Nigel Farage
http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-sto ... -1-5292286" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... e-incidentOxford Circus: armed London police respond to reports of gunfire
Underground station closed and public advised to avoid area of central London as officers investigate incident (Guardian)
I'm surprised they forgot that one as well! Thanks for digging it outfrog222 wrote:AngryAsWell wrote:48 things you need to know about Nigel Farage
http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-sto ... -1-5292286" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm surprised they forgot this one !
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Nigel Farage would 'pick up a rifle' if Brexit is not delivered
It is not the first time the former Ukip leader has threatened civil disobedience over Brexit
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 41331.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That sounds more like armed insurrection to me !
People are manipulated and misunderstanding what the hell is really going oncitizenJA wrote:@Willow904
Please know I'm not suggesting your open and conscious questions regarding Labour and Brexit are part of what I've posted above.
PorFavor wrote:Re the Oxford Circus incident -
According to Sky News (TV) the police have, so far, found no evidence of anything at all.
Metropolitan PoliceVerified account
@metpoliceuk
Follow Follow @metpoliceuk
More
We have not located any trace of suspects, evidence of shots fired or casualties. Officers still on scene. If you are in a building stay there, if you are on the street in #OxfordStreet leave the area. Officers continue to search the area. More updates as soon as we have them
The boy who cried experts now rails, without irony, against spreading false information.
Even if he meets another sticky end, he’ll be back again
Why have the Tories brought Gove back from the dead? To kill him again
Marina Hyde
tories-michael-gove-back-experts-false-information
European Council President Donald Tusk set an “absolute deadline” of December 4 for the U.K. to submit a revised offer on the Brexit bill and a credible solution for the Irish border, telling U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May on Friday that otherwise it would not be possible to move on to the second phase of talks, a senior EU official said.
I am tempted to excuse the above writer because they use the word "disappointment". If you don't expect any better from the Tories, it's hard to be disappointed. If they are willing to throw the country under a bus rather than risk losing support from leave voters, the vast majority of whom are natural Tory supporters, it's only what you expect. I do object to the comment about "Labour", though, as Labour in general isn't refusing to stand up for the UK's continued membership of the single market. That impression is coming primarily from Jeremy Corbyn. Keir Starmer's piece today conversely insists that we should remain in the SM during transition and consider remaining permanently, without any apparent worries about this not fulfilling the referendum result. We'll find out where Labour truly stands when we see the final shape of the withdrawal bill and whether or not Labour vote for it.citizenJA wrote:I post this because I'm horrifyingly fascinated by it. I don't think the commentator realises the fundamental incongruity in their post. I doubt it's an intentionally illogical comment."I think most politicians understand the reality of Brexit perfectly well, including May and much of her government. There have been many reports on the predicted economic effects of Brexit and they all say much the same thing.
But what those reports describe is not calamity but a long, slow relative decline. That isn't enough for the politicians to declare some kind of national emergency. Therefore they feel, as democrats, that they are bound by the referendum result. Unless the public appear to dramatically change their minds on this (no sign of this yet) the referendum result will continue to be respected.
The debate has quite rightly moved on to how we Brexit, not whether we will. The big disappointment is Labour's refusal to stand up for our continued membership of the single market. They have meekly conceded that this is somehow incompatible with the referendum decision, which is simply factually wrong."
below the line post elsewhere
Tory government inaction and disastrous leadership is literally explained away, set aside, no animosity and Labour is meek, Labour refusing to act.