Otta

Saffron Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But May publically criticised Brown on elections (or lack thereof), which makes her officially a hypocrite, no? Politician in doing the opposite of what they said 9 years ago shocker.

This is all very positive fox. You alright?

We live close by and had a look around it a couple of years ago when we moved. We were shown around the nursery and early years, and we were really impressed, particularly with their records and SEN provision. We didn't go for it in the end, as decided to keep our daughter where she was already settled in to reception. But I thought it was impressive. Pretty strict though, and suspect they'd be picky about stuff like uniform, which I personally couldn't care less about.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rumour is that Owen Smith will declare today ????. > He seems a bit better (although that's not hard > right now). All that does is divide any anti Corbyn votes and ensure Jezza wins (he'll win anyway). *bob* has it spot on I reckon.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > red devil Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > So we'll have a PM that hasn't been elected > either > > by the Tory membership or the country as a > whole. > > Brilliant!... > > Same happened with Gordon Brown. It did. At that time Blair wanted to offload what was seen as a poisoned chalice. Compared to the state of the country right now, that poisoned chalice looks like a strawberry milkshake complete with ice cream. May has said that what with Brexit negotiations to worry about, a GE would not be a good idea just now. But having not been voted for even by her party, I can't see how we can not have one within the year.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Me too. It should be fun. Hopefully Sam will have > gone.....to England. Apparently he's being interviewed this week. Goodo.

You'd be a bit miffed if having spent your life serving God as a nun, your spirit didn't make it to Heaven but instead had to wander around a cemetery.

Anyway, great to see Leadsom fall on her sword, silly cow.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have never voted labour as to me its full of Tories. You've never voted Labour? Reading your posts I thought you were a fully paid up member.

Agreed. But that could have been partially down to him wanting to sniff it all out before committing long term.

Pleased to read that Klopp has signed a 6 year deal to stay with Liverpool. It gives the impression that the club are really looking to build... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36745294

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Surely there are good arguments for and against > BTL. It's not about hate. > > That's true, but the ridiculous levels of hate > aimed at landlords is pretty unpleasant. Usually > by people who have no idea of the details, > finances and risks of renting out houses, but feel > they can trot out tired, misinformed cliches like > 'paying off their mortgage', 'greedy landlords', > 'free house' and 'causing the housing crisis'. I know lots of landlords, all perfectly decent people. But my last landlord was a bastard. They'd pretend to befriend vulnerable poeple then buy their houses at reduced cost. Basically as with most things, there are good guys and there are bastards.

I discovered Arlo Guthrie via my daughter

Surely there are good arguments for and against BTL. It's not about hate.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have no love of T Blair - never voted for him, > never trusted him, never really rated him other > than as a pure politician, and that's not a > quality I admire, to say the least. But almost > everything that has been said about him since the > Iraq war is complete nonsense. Everybody will take > exactly what they want from this report and > ignore/dismiss the rest. what a waste of time and > money. I more or less agree with you about Blair. But I don't think the report was a waste, the families responses seem to suggest that they're happy with it.

Blair's initial statement "The report should lay to rest allegations of bad faith, lies or deceit. Whether people agree or disagree with my decision to take military action against Saddam Hussein; I took it in good faith and in what I believed to be the best interests of the country. I note that the report finds clearly: ? That there was no falsification or improper use of Intelligence (para 876 vol 4) ? No deception of Cabinet (para 953 vol 5) ? No secret commitment to war whether at Crawford Texas in April 2002 or elsewhere (para 572 onwards vol 1) The inquiry does not make a finding on the legal basis for military action but finds that the Attorney General had concluded there was such a lawful basis by 13th March 2003 (para 933 vol 5) However the report does make real and material criticisms of preparation, planning, process and of the relationship with the United States. These are serious criticisms and they require serious answers. I will respond in detail to them later this afternoon. I will take full responsibility for any mistakes without exception or excuse. I will at the same time say why, nonetheless, I believe that it was better to remove Saddam Hussein and why I do not believe this is the cause of the terrorism we see today whether in the Middle East or elsewhere in the world. Above all I will pay tribute to our Armed Forces. I will express my profound regret at the loss of life and the grief it has caused the families, and I will set out the lessons I believe future leaders can learn from my experience.?

Well a lot of it yes, but not the lack of planning for the aftermath, which is arguably the biggest issue of all.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's painful Perfect summary.

According to reports, this is not a whitewash at all, but quite damning. But the fact is we all knew all this by 2005.

For anyone with a lot of time on their hands, full report available here http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/ I'd recommend just searching for "blair" for the good bits. Wonder if Cambell gets a mention.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is there a PMQs this afternoon? Apparently there is.

Is there a PMQs this afternoon?

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not supporting Blair either btw > > But I'm not loosing focus on 'we need to have a > plan' here and now. Chilcot is currently (with the > greatest respect) a distraction This^^^ rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My guess (we'll soon see), is that Blair believed > Saddam posed a general (if not imminent) threat > and it was clear to him that Bush was going in > regardless. On balance, he took the view that we > were better to back the US than stand on the > sidelines and that he might be able to get bush to > be alittle more consensual - look to obtain a > second security council resolution. In the end it > all ran away from him and he found it impossible > to back out. I think he was pretty cavalier about > things and suffered a good deal of self deception > / confirmation bias. I don't think he 'lied' as > such. Certainly looked for evidence to justify (as > much to himself) the road he was already committed > to. It's all very sad, but I don't think he's a > war criminal. And this^^^

At a glance summary from BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36721645

"We are quite clear about our position on Syria and how you achieve peace" Really?