Saturday 15th & Sunday 16th November 2014

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 8:42 am

Morning.

All not it seems with a Tory MP ?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 62451.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 9:15 am

Morning.

Have been looking for nuggets of interest to bring to FTN attention, but have just ended up despondent at the emotional rather than merely intellectual realisation - and I know that many finer brains than mine got here decades ago - that many journalists are just the new bankers. There are brave, honorable exceptions of course, but most of them are neither of those things, sitting smugly at their little desks typing stories that will win the brief approval of their bosses, while - through their consistently appalling misrepresentation of "reality" - perpetuating the long-term misery of many. They, like the bankers, seem to have no conscience.

Am sick of it. We have to somehow develop a genuine meritocracy as only then can our thought-leaders and decision-makers represent the country as a whole. That public school-educated Labour PM who passed up the chance to abolish public schools - I can't remember which one it was as I am ignorant - may well have left us a legacy to regret.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 9:39 am

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11- ... urs-terms/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

headline wrote:Miliband attacks Sports Direct over zero-hours contracts

Ed Miliband will single out high-street chain Sports Direct for criticism over its use of zero-hours contracts in a speech today.

'piece' wrote:Government 'already acting' on zero-hours terms

Business Minister Matthew Hancock says the government is already tackling the abuse of zero-hours contracts amid criticism from Labour leader Ed Miliband over the practice.

Hancock said Miliband's plans to ban employers from using such terms represented a "rehashed policy" and said Miliband's own Doncaster Council had admitted using 300 people on zero-hours terms.
"We're already tackling the abuse of zero-hours contracts - after 13 years of Labour doing absolutely nothing about it.

– MATTHEW HANCOCK, BUSINESS MINISTER

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/ ... tracts.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This graph which took me approx two mins to find suggests there is more to this story than what one person with a vested interest says. Indeed something - god only knows what - seems to have happened in 2010. Presumably looking into this would be far too much effort for someone actually paid to do this for a living.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 9:40 am

This is an interesting tactic - the Guardian view of the above.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -contracts

Comments are interesting.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 10:04 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

All not it seems with a Tory MP ?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 62451.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He is said to have made millions from Adfero, a business known as a “word farm” which employed young writers to churn out hundreds of online news stories a day for its corporate clients.

"word farm" somehow sends shivers.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 10:08 am

Morning all.

Late start today. We had some serious rain here last night ...

Now - I've finally got around to reading Cameron's ludicrious and dangerous proposals to prevent those who have been to fight with jihadis from reentering the UK ...

He's something else isn't he? Where are they meant to go? This is the obviously missing part of his plans - which makes me think he's got some inner dream of establishing a UK Guantanamo-lite island somewhere. Has he not thought that having disaffected people, who were already very impressionable to have been persuaded to go out to these conflicts in the first place, milling around stateless is counter productive and dangerous in itself. They will probably be even more vulnerable to getting involved in other nefarious goings on as they won't have money or the means to support themselves, the ability to work legally, house themselves etc What a dork he is.

The move has been agreed with the Liberal Democrats, although Lib Dem sources made clear they were unhappy that Cameron had chosen to unveil the measure in Australia rather than in parliament at home, and pointed out that the plan had been diluted from previous suggestions.

How pathetic and typical is that stance from the Lib Dems. Their main point of unhappiness with this is that Cameron didn't announce it here in the UK ... and their 'defence' of something so patently illiberal and unworkable, same old same old 'it would have been even worse without us'.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 10:09 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

All not it seems with a Tory MP ?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 62451.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He is said to have made millions from Adfero, a business known as a “word farm” which employed young writers to churn out hundreds of online news stories a day for its corporate clients.
"word farm" somehow sends shivers.

He and Shapps could be a business partnership made in hell - eh?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 10:23 am

Morning

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

"Tell us the truth about Orgreave"

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 10:57 am

Morning
Not sure how long they can keep the lid on this
Chris Stacey ‏@chrisstacey1 · 17h17 hours ago
@MarkWatts_1 on LBC today: Child sex abuse: 'Biggest post-war political scandal' and getting bigger all the time

Melissa Price ‏@melissa_price78 · 16h16 hours ago
Just seen @MarkWatts_1 on sky. Really hope @ExaroNews get recognised by ppl for how much they're doing for #CSAinquiry well done

Post by **refitman** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:15 am

And silliest statement in politics goes to Nicola Sturgeon:

Scotland did vote Labour at the last general election, but we still ended up with the Tories - and if the people of England vote Tory again next May, it won’t matter how we vote.

A Tory government is what we’ll get. Or worse, a Tory/Ukip government.

If that happens, the very last thing Scotland will need are Labour MPs who cosy up to the Tories.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:17 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all.

Late start today. We had some serious rain here last night ...

Now - I've finally got around to reading Cameron's ludicrious and dangerous proposals to prevent those who have been to fight with jihadis from reentering the UK ...

He's something else isn't he? Where are they meant to go? This is the obviously missing part of his plans - which makes me think he's got some inner dream of establishing a UK Guantanamo-lite island somewhere. Has he not thought that having disaffected people, who were already very impressionable to have been persuaded to go out to these conflicts in the first place, milling around stateless is counter productive and dangerous in itself. They will probably be even more vulnerable to getting involved in other nefarious goings on as they won't have money or the means to support themselves, the ability to work legally, house themselves etc What a dork he is.

The move has been agreed with the Liberal Democrats, although Lib Dem sources made clear they were unhappy that Cameron had chosen to unveil the measure in Australia rather than in parliament at home, and pointed out that the plan had been diluted from previous suggestions.
How pathetic and typical is that stance from the Lib Dems. Their main point of unhappiness with this is that Cameron didn't announce it here in the UK ... and their 'defence' of something so patently illiberal and unworkable, same old same old 'it would have been even worse without us'.

Yesterday's Yougov Daily 3 asked:

Do you support or oppose the proposal that Britons who travel to Syria & Iraq to fight should be temporarily banned from returning home ?

Of the 3991 respondents, 75% supported the proposal

What is missing from that question is the fact that those doing so don't tell anybody they are going to fight so how the bloody hell are the govt planning on identifying them ? How are they planning to identify those going to Syria & Iraq via Turkey ? How are they going to identify those going to Syria & Iraq for reasons other than to fight ?

As usual, it's empty words designed to fill the vacuum in his head because until he can answer those questions, his idea will simply be unachievable. Unfortunately, I suspect Labour will also support his idea

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:24 am

refitman wrote:And silliest statement in politics goes to Nicola Sturgeon:
Scotland did vote Labour at the last general election, but we still ended up with the Tories - and if the people of England vote Tory again next May, it won’t matter how we vote.

A Tory government is what we’ll get. Or worse, a Tory/Ukip government.

If that happens, the very last thing Scotland will need are Labour MPs who cosy up to the Tories.

Am getting REALLY 'KIN SICK OF self-righteous Scots, who'd rather have a Tory than a Labour government anyway, disingenuously acting as if all the SODD'NG ENGLISH are the same. It's MAKING MY BLOOD BOIL.

Sorry. The Mist descended.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:28 am

Salmond got his way. He pointlessly divided the nation - Britain - for his own selfish ends. Sturgeon - with her Norman-style haircut (sorry - you can help your hair) - looks set to maliciously continue his sterling work.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:31 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all.

Late start today. We had some serious rain here last night ...

Now - I've finally got around to reading Cameron's ludicrious and dangerous proposals to prevent those who have been to fight with jihadis from reentering the UK ...

He's something else isn't he? Where are they meant to go? This is the obviously missing part of his plans - which makes me think he's got some inner dream of establishing a UK Guantanamo-lite island somewhere. Has he not thought that having disaffected people, who were already very impressionable to have been persuaded to go out to these conflicts in the first place, milling around stateless is counter productive and dangerous in itself. They will probably be even more vulnerable to getting involved in other nefarious goings on as they won't have money or the means to support themselves, the ability to work legally, house themselves etc What a dork he is.

The move has been agreed with the Liberal Democrats, although Lib Dem sources made clear they were unhappy that Cameron had chosen to unveil the measure in Australia rather than in parliament at home, and pointed out that the plan had been diluted from previous suggestions.
How pathetic and typical is that stance from the Lib Dems. Their main point of unhappiness with this is that Cameron didn't announce it here in the UK ... and their 'defence' of something so patently illiberal and unworkable, same old same old 'it would have been even worse without us'.

This subject came up on BBC QT a couple of weeks back, somebody asked what should be done about people who had gone to fight and then, realising the horrible reality of what they had done, wanted to return to the UK; after all, we all do crazy stuff on a whim when we are teenagers, and that accounts for a fair percentage of these people going there. It split the panel neatly on ideological grounds; Caroline Lucas, Tristram Hunt and Anthony Horowitz were all of the opinion that they should be allowed back in (albeit with proper safeguards/debriefing to ensure they weren't a threat), Owen Paterson and Susan Kramer were both of the opinion they should be stripped of citizenship and not allwed to re-enter the UK (neatly ignoring the fact that many of them are born & bred British citizens, and that making somebody stateless is illegal under international law) - one person (either Horowitz or Lucas, can't remember now) said letting them back in was A Good Thing because their experiences could be used to put off others who wanted to go.

But not surprised to see Cameron (and May) have gone down this route, and that Clegg has fallen into line; joined up thinking hasn't been this Government's forté, much easier to let the Daily Mail and Nigel Farage write your policies for you.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:44 am

The long-anticipated defamation case – which will decide the political fate of the former Tory chief whip, Andrew Mitchell, and could affect the reputation of the Metropolitan police – is due to begin on Monday at the Royal Courts of Justice in London and could last two weeks.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014 ... e-to-begin" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:49 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:Salmond got his way. He pointlessly divided the nation - Britain - for his own selfish ends. Sturgeon - with her Norman-style haircut (sorry - you can help your hair) - looks set to maliciously continue his sterling work.

Their rhetoric is so similar, I can't help wondering if she will remain Salmond's mouthpiece. Which of them will wield the real power in the SNP?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:49 am

refitman wrote:And silliest statement in politics ....

"If that happens, the very last thing Scotland will need are Labour MPs who cosy up to the Tories."

Of course the first things we need are the SNP to split Britain's Labour vote, and at the same time for the non-rent-capping shysters doing the splitting to cosy up with the damn Tories.

Am especially curmudgeonly today. Apologies in advance.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:54 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:
refitman wrote:And silliest statement in politics goes to Nicola Sturgeon:
Scotland did vote Labour at the last general election, but we still ended up with the Tories - and if the people of England vote Tory again next May, it won’t matter how we vote.

A Tory government is what we’ll get. Or worse, a Tory/Ukip government.

If that happens, the very last thing Scotland will need are Labour MPs who cosy up to the Tories.
Am getting REALLY 'KIN SICK OF self-righteous Scots, who'd rather have a Tory than a Labour government anyway, disingenuously acting as if all the SODD'NG ENGLISH are the same. It's MAKING MY BLOOD BOIL.

Sorry. The Mist descended.

You have to understand that, in their eyes, anybody who doesn't support the SNP's single policy of 'independence at any cost' is an English Tory!

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 11:56 am

[quote="pk1"]

What is missing from that question is the fact that those doing so don't tell anybody they are going to fight so how the bloody hell are the govt planning on identifying them ? How are they planning to identify those going to Syria & Iraq via Turkey ? How are they going to identify those going to Syria & Iraq for reasons other than to fight ?

Morning, pk1.

The security services claim to know (vaguely) how many have gone - and the chances are they already know who some of them are.
The difficulty is at the border when people come back to the UK.
Unless the staff are alerted and have resources to spot them as they come back in, they'll slip through - it will be impossible to stop everyone coming off anything other than a direct flight.
Cameron seems to be saying that people known to be jihadis or ex-jihadis will be allowed back in provided they comply with whatever they are told to do - it's not clear to me what happens if they come back in and then don't comply.

So - first they have to be identified; second, they have to be investigated to make sure they really are who HMG thinks they are; third, they have to have their conditions for re-entry decided; fourth, they have to be supervised; fifth, they have to comply; and sixth, they will have to be incarcerated if they don't comply - they can't be deported anywhere if they haven't committed a crime somewhere else.

I assume that once the border people have spotted their jihadi, and the security people are sure he/she IS actually a jihadi, he/she gets arrested and the rest will be up to the courts - maybe the legal eagles here can tell me, but I'm not sure a mechanism exists to impose conditions for re-entry on a UK citizen unless they are under arrest on suspicion of something.
I'd also be grateful if someone could explain what the offence would be - I imagine it'll be something to do with the Terrorism Acts and of course they can detain people without charge for 28 days as it is.

The two issues for me are these - first, if they are not allowed back into the UK they will be stateless, with all the problems that involves, not least the lack of a roof/money etc. and I can't help wondering if that wouldn't radicalise a young person further if they weren't allowed to come home; and second, what will the rest of the world think of us, dumping our unwanted and (as judged by us) potentially dangerous people on them? They're our people - and whether they are still keen on jihad or just wanting to come home they are our problem to solve.

Cameron is a complete fuckwit.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:02 pm

ephemerid wrote:
pk1 wrote:
What is missing from that question is the fact that those doing so don't tell anybody they are going to fight so how the bloody hell are the govt planning on identifying them ? How are they planning to identify those going to Syria & Iraq via Turkey ? How are they going to identify those going to Syria & Iraq for reasons other than to fight ?

Morning, pk1.

The security services claim to know (vaguely) how many have gone - and the chances are they already know who some of them are.
The difficulty is at the border when people come back to the UK.
Unless the staff are alerted and have resources to spot them as they come back in, they'll slip through - it will be impossible to stop everyone coming off anything other than a direct flight.
Cameron seems to be saying that people known to be jihadis or ex-jihadis will be allowed back in provided they comply with whatever they are told to do - it's not clear to me what happens if they come back in and then don't comply.

So - first they have to be identified; second, they have to be investigated to make sure they really are who HMG thinks they are; third, they have to have their conditions for re-entry decided; fourth, they have to be supervised; fifth, they have to comply; and sixth, they will have to be incarcerated if they don't comply - they can't be deported anywhere if they haven't committed a crime somewhere else.

I assume that once the border people have spotted their jihadi, and the security people are sure he/she IS actually a jihadi, he/she gets arrested and the rest will be up to the courts - maybe the legal eagles here can tell me, but I'm not sure a mechanism exists to impose conditions for re-entry on a UK citizen unless they are under arrest on suspicion of something.
I'd also be grateful if someone could explain what the offence would be - I imagine it'll be something to do with the Terrorism Acts and of course they can detain people without charge for 28 days as it is.

The two issues for me are these - first, if they are not allowed back into the UK they will be stateless, with all the problems that involves, not least the lack of a roof/money etc. and I can't help wondering if that wouldn't radicalise a young person further if they weren't allowed to come home; and second, what will the rest of the world think of us, dumping our unwanted and (as judged by us) potentially dangerous people on them? They're our people - and whether they are still keen on jihad or just wanting to come home they are our problem to solve.

Cameron is a complete fuckwit.

It all seems rather pointless. Unless the UK authorities can stop them boarding a plane in (say) Turkey, they're going to be deposited on the tarmac at a British airport. Irrespective of whether they're still British or stateless, it's still a UK problem - no other country is likely to take them.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:05 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Salmond got his way. He pointlessly divided the nation - Britain - for his own selfish ends. Sturgeon - with her Norman-style haircut (sorry - you can help your hair) - looks set to maliciously continue his sterling work.
Their rhetoric is so similar, I can't help wondering if she will remain Salmond's mouthpiece. Which of them will wield the real power in the SNP?

I'm of the opinion that Salmond has been Sturgeon's mouthpiece for a while now

She's certainly quite smart, but as we can see doesn't yet have Salmond's gift of the gab!

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:13 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
refitman wrote:And silliest statement in politics goes to Nicola Sturgeon:
Am getting REALLY 'KIN SICK OF self-righteous Scots, who'd rather have a Tory than a Labour government anyway, disingenuously acting as if all the SODD'NG ENGLISH are the same. It's MAKING MY BLOOD BOIL.

Sorry. The Mist descended.
You have to understand that, in their eyes, anybody who doesn't support the SNP's single policy of 'independence at any cost' is an English Tory!

Worst of the lot are the ones who no longer live in Scotland! Billy Connolly was right, nothing so patriotic as a Scot who doesn't actually have to live there.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:16 pm

Worst of the lot are the ones who no longer live in Scotland! Billy Connolly was right, nothing so patriotic as a Scot who doesn't actually have to live there.

Yes - like Yes' original poster boy Sean Connery.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:26 pm

I see that Cameron is "warning" Putin again today - I am sure Vlad is trembling in his boots.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:36 pm

With Philae in sleep-mode until the sun shines on it for long enough to wake it up, I just grabbed this image from Sky News. Note the credit in the lower third

They honestly were not asking Dr Kanani to predict when contact will next be made

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:57 pm

Labour has made it really easy to tweet (or share on other medium) top issues (scroll down a bit)

http://www.labour.org.uk/volunteering-splash/index" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks like social media is the way they plan on getting message out...

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 12:59 pm

Do you think Deborah Orr will hate me? I've just accused her and one of her sycophants of posting middle class witty banter.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:00 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Do you think Deborah Orr will hate me? I've just accused her and one of her sycophants of posting middle class witty banter.

You'll can feel proud if she does!

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:02 pm

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11- ... ent-terms/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Perhaps the folks at ITV read FTN but anyways they now say:

According to the Office for National Statistics, around 1.4 million people were on zero-hours contracts in the UK when estimated earlier this year.

The graph I got from the ONS above seemed to show 200,000 on zero hours contracts in 2012. I can't look into it now, but looks intriguing enough to work out what means what at some point.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:09 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Do you think Deborah Orr will hate me? I've just accused her and one of her sycophants of posting middle class witty banter.

I'm with the person who called her Deborah Eey-orr, sounds about right. And as for her "I'm interested in making Miliband electable" .... of course you are Deborah, that's why you are sneering at everybody trying to engage with you.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:21 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Do you think Deborah Orr will hate me? I've just accused her and one of her sycophants of posting middle class witty banter.
I'm with the person who called her Deborah Eey-orr, sounds about right. And as for her "I'm interested in making Miliband electable" .... of course you are Deborah, that's why you are sneering at everybody trying to engage with you.

It's sneery, world weary, spiteful humour.. I can just imagine her 'set', sitting around the dining table trying to out wit each other.
I wish the Labour Party didn't need the votes of people like it. And you know they only vote that way because they'll be better off under Labour. It's not because of how the majority are suffering.

They really get on my tits....

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:23 pm

Tiny Clanger - don't switch on Radio 4, Any Questions is from Scotland today.

Alex Massie 'Scottish freelance journalist and libertarian commentator based in Edinburgh'.
Shona Robison - SNP MSP
Margaret Curran - Labour MP
Lord Forsyth - presume the Tory one

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:28 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Labour has made it really easy to tweet (or share on other medium) top issues (scroll down a bit)

http://www.labour.org.uk/volunteering-splash/index" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks like social media is the way they plan on getting message out...

I think they still need to kick a few bums face to face as it were. [Or would that be cheek to cheek?]

I've just emailed my local Labour Party about their lack of any social media presence after they trumpeted that was the way to go. It started well. I followed all their names but not a dickey bird for weeks. It's as if they've disappeared off the face of the earth and not one of them bothered to Follow. They're not even keeping the local web page updated.
The agent spasmodically tweets but all he does is put Guardian links, so I've just reminded him they aren't that Labour friendly.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:33 pm

Mark Fitton ‏@mark_fitton 17h17 hours ago
@IanLaveryMP rumored to be crossing the floor?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:38 pm

yahyah wrote:Tiny Clanger - don't switch on Radio 4, Any Questions is from Scotland today.

Ta! Best avoided today.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:41 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mark Fitton ‏@mark_fitton 17h17 hours ago
@IanLaveryMP rumored to be crossing the floor?

You need the photo that went with that tweet, and Lavery's reply, for it to make sense.

Ian Lavery MP ‏@IanLaveryMP
“@mark_fitton: @IanLaveryMP rumored to be crossing the floor? ”ha ha ha lost my way a bit !!!!

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:44 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Salmond got his way. He pointlessly divided the nation - Britain - for his own selfish ends. Sturgeon - with her Norman-style haircut (sorry - you can help your hair) - looks set to maliciously continue his sterling work.
Their rhetoric is so similar, I can't help wondering if she will remain Salmond's mouthpiece. Which of them will wield the real power in the SNP?
I'm of the opinion that Salmond has been Sturgeon's mouthpiece for a while now

She's certainly quite smart, but as we can see doesn't yet have Salmond's gift of the gab!

But she can shout louder in debates, which probably puts her higher up the party pecking order.
Oh, by the way, that's not a Norman-style haircut - it's Lego hair.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:45 pm

http://www.chad.co.uk/news/business/mil ... -1-6954999" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Staff have complained of draconian employment practices, including strip searches and a six-strike dismissal policy.

Cons better hurry up and abandon any human rights so we can let our "wealth creators" get even nastier.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:45 pm

Double amputee killed himself after benefits slashed, say anguished family

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ref=twtrec

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:45 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mark Fitton ‏@mark_fitton 17h17 hours ago
@IanLaveryMP rumored to be crossing the floor?

Did you see the photo that went with it?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:46 pm

Snap GS

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:52 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
Worst of the lot are the ones who no longer live in Scotland! Billy Connolly was right, nothing so patriotic as a Scot who doesn't actually have to live there.
Yes - like Yes' original poster boy Sean Connery.

The Alan Cumming story was amusing though - bought a flat in Edinburgh thinking it would make him eligible to vote in the referendum. It was subsequently pointed out to him that owning property isn't the same as being a resident.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 1:55 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
Worst of the lot are the ones who no longer live in Scotland! Billy Connolly was right, nothing so patriotic as a Scot who doesn't actually have to live there.
Yes - like Yes' original poster boy Sean Connery.
The Alan Cumming story was amusing though - bought a flat in Edinburgh thinking it would make him eligible to vote in the referendum. It was subsequently pointed out to him that owning property isn't the same as being a resident.

Oh dear, that is rather funny, using his probably not inconsiderable wealth but cocking it up along the way !

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:01 pm

Orr must have felt stung. She's now saying there should be debate not just slogans...Thought about pointing out it's difficult to debate on Twitter with such a small word count but honestly think it's a waste of time. Having a bit of money in the bank and being a journalist doesn't necessarily mean you have any empathy or intelligence.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:02 pm

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
Worst of the lot are the ones who no longer live in Scotland! Billy Connolly was right, nothing so patriotic as a Scot who doesn't actually have to live there.
Yes - like Yes' original poster boy Sean Connery.
The Alan Cumming story was amusing though - bought a flat in Edinburgh thinking it would make him eligible to vote in the referendum. It was subsequently pointed out to him that owning property isn't the same as being a resident.

Was that in the Graun? Tempted to go and look, but shall resist the urge.

Bless 'im, that was a bit of an own goal wasn't it. But, to be fair, I thought his contribution to the debate was constructive and well thought out, in marked contrast to Connery and Irving Welsh.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:07 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Orr must have felt stung. She's now saying there should be debate not just slogans...Thought about pointing out it's difficult to debate on Twitter with such a small word count but honestly think it's a waste of time. Having a bit of money in the bank and being a journalist doesn't necessarily mean you have any empathy or intelligence.

Tell her she should be sorting out her precious Lib Dems and the increasingly limp looking Clegg before attacking Ed.

Talking of female Lib Dem supporters - switched on Radio 4 last night when cooking supper - straight away I heard Sandy Tosvig attacking Ed yet again. Switched the radio off again pdq.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:09 pm

Lasted 5 minutes listening to Any Answers before I had to turn it off. I could feel my blood pressure rising. Labour in trouble, Miliband needs replacing.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:09 pm

Theresa May ‏@TheresaMay_MP Nov 12
The fact that every 7 minutes an old person will die this winter through fuel poverty is not an initiative, by us, to reduce state pensions.

I love the humour on Twitter.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:11 pm

There was a LibDem Tweet asking for support and to ReTweet.

I said no thank you. I didn't care to support turncoats and Tory Enablers.

Petty, but very satisfying.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Sat 15 Nov, 2014 2:12 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote: Yes - like Yes' original poster boy Sean Connery.
The Alan Cumming story was amusing though - bought a flat in Edinburgh thinking it would make him eligible to vote in the referendum. It was subsequently pointed out to him that owning property isn't the same as being a resident.
Was that in the Graun? Tempted to go and look, but shall resist the urge.

Bless 'im, that was a bit of an own goal wasn't it. But, to be fair, I thought his contribution to the debate was constructive and well thought out, in marked contrast to Connery and Irving Welsh.

Don't know if it was in the Graun, but here's an article from the Scotsman (which milked the story at the time):

http://www.scotsman.com/news/celebrity/ ... -1-3256062