The Politics Thread

[Montreal Wanderer]

Point of historical order. No-one freed us from the Nazis. You have to be enslaved to be freed.

Carry on.

What about if he was on about the channel islands?

Interesting corollary.

Though no attempt was made to recapture by force before German surrender, and there wasn't (as far as I know) any attempt at armed resistance.

Not only no resistance but active collaboration I fear. The papers that should have become public under the thirty year rule in 1975 were reclassified as fifty years. Then in 1995 they were reclassified to, I think, 100 years. I'm afraid there may be a sad and embarrassing tale there.

[Verbal]

Point of historical order. No-one freed us from the Nazis. You have to be enslaved to be freed.

Carry on.

What about if he was on about the channel islands?

Interesting corollary.

Though no attempt was made to recapture by force before German surrender, and there wasn't (as far as I know) any attempt at armed resistance.

Not only no resistance but active collaboration I fear. The papers that should have become public under the thirty year rule in 1975 were reclassified as fifty years. Then in 1995 they were reclassified to, I think, 100 years. I'm afraid there may be a sad and embarrassing tale there.

interesting. do you have a source for this, monty?

[Hoboh]

Point of historical order. No-one freed us from the Nazis. You have to be enslaved to be freed.

Carry on.

What about if he was on about the channel islands?

Interesting corollary.

Though no attempt was made to recapture by force before German surrender, and there wasn't (as far as I know) any attempt at armed resistance.

Not only no resistance but active collaboration I fear. The papers that should have become public under the thirty year rule in 1975 were reclassified as fifty years. Then in 1995 they were reclassified to, I think, 100 years. I'm afraid there may be a sad and embarrassing tale there.

Bit sceptical about this, with what's gone on about the child abuse over there I would have thought jurno's would be well crawling over reclassification like that?
Secrets ain't any more

[superjohnmcginlay]

One for Hobo.

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 003042527/

[Montreal Wanderer]

Point of historical order. No-one freed us from the Nazis. You have to be enslaved to be freed.

Carry on.

What about if he was on about the channel islands?

Interesting corollary.

Though no attempt was made to recapture by force before German surrender, and there wasn't (as far as I know) any attempt at armed resistance.

Not only no resistance but active collaboration I fear. The papers that should have become public under the thirty year rule in 1975 were reclassified as fifty years. Then in 1995 they were reclassified to, I think, 100 years. I'm afraid there may be a sad and embarrassing tale there.

interesting. do you have a source for this, monty?

Sorry, missed this earlier. The collaboration tended to centre around the identification and deportation of Jews, and the usual fraternization of women. Members of the Islands police forces help round up and deport Jews, yet kept their positions after the war and some were decorated. See Walter Laqueur, Holocaust Encyclopedia (New haven: Yale University Press, 2001. There was significant profiteering from the removal of the Jews. In 1946 the House of Commons were informed there were only a dozen genuine cases of collaboration but it was decided not to prosecute. The problem is that because the papers of wartime activity and post-war investigations have been kept secret (apparently in order not to embarrass important people or their children) there is a tendency to develop conspiracy theories. That is why I say there may be a sad tale, not that there is such a tale, as it cannot be asserted as fact without the documentation.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Well done, BA. Michael O'Leary (Ryanair boss) said that they didn't have the balls to take on the union, but he was wrong, it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Walsh.html

[Hoboh]

Just listened to a discussion by the legal eagles about what would happen if their party won the next election on radio four.
Guess what the 'tory geezer said? there was no way they would pull out of the European convention on human rights merely introduce a "British bill of rights" to run along with it!!!!

UKIP just gained another vote! stupid weasels what's next? Carry on Herr Brown?

I give up, I really give up! I vote for lawmakers to make laws for the UK not the bloody Frenchies and their mates to do it!


Forgot to add when pressed about this "British Bill" he couldn't tell them what was in it and how it it differ from the shambles we have now BECAUSE HE HAD NOT EVEN WRITTEN IT!

[thebish]

Just listened to a discussion by the legal eagles about what would happen if their party won the next election on radio four.
Guess what the 'tory geezer said there was no way they would pull out of the European convention on human rights merely introduce a "British bill of rights" to run along with it!!!!

UKIP just gained another vote! stupid weasels what's next? Carry on Herr Brown?

I give up, I really give up! I vote for lawmakers to make laws for the UK not the bloody Frenchies and their mates to do it!

musteline idiots!!! (see monty - there is always opportunity for enriched language!)

[Hoboh]

Just listened to a discussion by the legal eagles about what would happen if their party won the next election on radio four.
Guess what the 'tory geezer said there was no way they would pull out of the European convention on human rights merely introduce a "British bill of rights" to run along with it!!!!

UKIP just gained another vote! stupid weasels what's next? Carry on Herr Brown?

I give up, I really give up! I vote for lawmakers to make laws for the UK not the bloody Frenchies and their mates to do it!

musteline idiots!!! (see monty - there is always opportunity for enriched language!)

Fur's Fur

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Just listened to a discussion by the legal eagles about what would happen if their party won the next election on radio four.
Guess what the 'tory geezer said? there was no way they would pull out of the European convention on human rights merely introduce a "British bill of rights" to run along with it!!!!

UKIP just gained another vote! stupid weasels what's next? Carry on Herr Brown?

I give up, I really give up! I vote for lawmakers to make laws for the UK not the bloody Frenchies and their mates to do it!

I sympathize with the sentiment in the last sentence of that which I have quoted, but I would suggest your aim is a little bit off if you're firing at the ECHR.

I mean, we actually acceded to it back in 1951, and its drafting was overseen by a Brit, David Maxwell Fyfe.

[Lord Kangana]

Aye, I'd much prefer faceless British beauracrats to those Johnny foreigner types. I believe the buzzword of the week is childish. Which is coincidentally just what UKIP is.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Aye, I'd much prefer faceless British beauracrats to those Johnny foreigner types. I believe the buzzword of the week is childish. Which is coincidentally just what UKIP is.

Not sure he was that faceless at the time actually... not that it was all that important a point anyway.

And, with respect, what are you on about?! I shall be more careful about which words I use twice in a week in future...

[Worthy4England]

Aye, I'd much prefer faceless British beauracrats to those Johnny foreigner types. I believe the buzzword of the week is childish. Which is coincidentally just what UKIP is.

Not sure he was that faceless at the time actually... not that it was all that important a point anyway.

And, with respect, what are you on about?! I shall be more careful about which words I use twice in a week in future...

I suspect the broad point is that someone is going to make laws (stupid or otherwise). Someone is going to make tax legislation, someone is going to look to protect the poor, someone is going to look to say "every man for themselves". The location of them is fairly unimportant.

We need them to be in the UK, otherwise they don't understand our problems? Maybe. I wan't them in the North of England rather than the South, they don't understand our problems in the South...Maybe we go one further and allow Counties to make their own laws - like in the US?

It's all piss and wind.

[William the White]

Well done, BA. Michael O'Leary (Ryanair boss) said that they didn't have the balls to take on the union, but he was wrong, it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Walsh.html

Why?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Well done, BA. Michael O'Leary (Ryanair boss) said that they didn't have the balls to take on the union, but he was wrong, it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Walsh.html

Why?

Sorry, you're asking why I'm supportive of the action being taken?

Well, it's making losses and is paying its staff more than its rivals - it needs to cut costs to survive, and I'm congratulating its board for having the both the appetite and now, it appears, the wherewithal for the necessary fight. BA's only option, surely, is to face down the unions now and win?

[William the White]

Well done, BA. Michael O'Leary (Ryanair boss) said that they didn't have the balls to take on the union, but he was wrong, it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Walsh.html

Why?

Sorry, you're asking why I'm supportive of the action being taken?

Well, it's making losses and is paying its staff more than its rivals - it needs to cut costs to survive, and I'm congratulating its board for having the both the appetite and now, it appears, the wherewithal for the necessary fight. BA's only option, surely, is to face down the unions now and win?

You can see no alternative that doesn't involve the impoverishment and sacking of the workers?

Have you tried? Or are market forces the alpha and omega?

How will you explain this to the people facing losing their jobs?

Could you give us a hint of the speech of explanation you'll make to these real people? I'd be interested to hear it.

I want more Tories like you, eager to fight the class war, all over the land. Here's the truth. Say it loud as you can, please.

[Lord Kangana]

I can only assume that a man who oversaw the T5 fiasco and who cut his teeth in the financial sector would put himself first in line for these cuts. So in that sense, I'm with mummy.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

You can see no alternative that doesn't involve the impoverishment and sacking of the workers?

Have you tried? Or are market forces the alpha and omega?

How will you explain this to the people facing losing their jobs?

Could you give us a hint of the speech of explanation you'll make to these real people? I'd be interested to hear it.

I want more Tories like you, eager to fight the class war, all over the land. Here's the truth. Say it loud as you can, please.

It's turkeys voting for Christmas again, William. There is no surer way of making sure people lose their jobs than by ensuring that BA remains uncompetitive and ensuring that it is less attractive to consumers as an airline that is constantly under threat of strike action.

Two questions:

1. Why is it that BA's workers are entitled to better pay and conditions than the employees of its rivals (are those employees 'impoverished'?)?

2. Is it desirable that these superior conditions are achieved through blackmail and commercial terrorism?

What's it got to do with a class war? I'm not exercised by 'class' at all - that's an entirely leftist enthusiasm.

[Hoboh]

You can see no alternative that doesn't involve the impoverishment and sacking of the workers?

Have you tried? Or are market forces the alpha and omega?

How will you explain this to the people facing losing their jobs?

Could you give us a hint of the speech of explanation you'll make to these real people? I'd be interested to hear it.

I want more Tories like you, eager to fight the class war, all over the land. Here's the truth. Say it loud as you can, please.

It's turkeys voting for Christmas again, William. There is no surer way of making sure people lose their jobs than by ensuring that BA remains uncompetitive and ensuring that it is less attractive to consumers as an airline that is constantly under threat of strike action.

Two questions:

1. Why is it that BA's workers are entitled to better pay and conditions than the employees of its rivals (are those employees 'impoverished'?)?

Because the management in the past have paid them that, when they wanted to recruit who they believed were the best staff, on the flip side workers never take into account you get it in good times lose it in bad times, something I don't think any employees would except.

2. Is it desirable that these superior conditions are achieved through blackmail and commercial terrorism?

In a mobile society striking merely hands a huge leg up to your competitors and with all the choice about its a method of suicide bombing.

What's it got to do with a class war? I'm not exercised by 'class' at all - that's an entirely leftist enthusiasm.

For those of you locked in the class war how many times has a "Socialist" Labour government used the powers and tools of the state to suppress and enforce its views, until we start to think the "them" are the Indians, Chinese etc who we are letting flood our markets with cheap goods, stealing our jobs, banking foreign currency, living in a Victorian "us and them will just accelerate this county's decline.

[superjohnmcginlay]

Well done, BA. Michael O'Leary (Ryanair boss) said that they didn't have the balls to take on the union, but he was wrong, it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Walsh.html

Why?

Sorry, you're asking why I'm supportive of the action being taken?

Well, it's making losses and is paying its staff more than its rivals - it needs to cut costs to survive, and I'm congratulating its board for having the both the appetite and now, it appears, the wherewithal for the necessary fight. BA's only option, surely, is to face down the unions now and win?

You can see no alternative that doesn't involve the impoverishment and sacking of the workers?

Have you tried? Or are market forces the alpha and omega?

How will you explain this to the people facing losing their jobs?

Could you give us a hint of the speech of explanation you'll make to these real people? I'd be interested to hear it.

I want more Tories like you, eager to fight the class war, all over the land. Here's the truth. Say it loud as you can, please.