Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

That wasn't the only thing they shared.

The lunatics are taking the asylum

It's virtually all about the city and looking after chums.

Nothing about CAP, fisheries, migration.




David Cameron's four key demands to remain in the EU revealed

David Cameron and his Cabinet allies name their price for Britain to stay part of Europe



#Forcing Brussels to make “an explicit statement” that Britain will be kept out of any move towards a European superstate. This will require an exemption for the UK from the EU’s founding principle of “ever closer union”.


#An “explicit statement” that the euro is not the official currency of the EU, making clear that Europe is a “multi-currency” union. Ministers want this declaration in order to protect the status of the pound sterling as a legitimate currency that will always exist.


#A new “red card” system to bring power back from Brussels to Britain. This would give groups of national parliaments the power to stop unwanted directives being handed down and to scrap existing EU laws.


#A new structure for the EU itself. The block of 28 nations must be reorganised to prevent the nine countries that are not in the eurozone being dominated by the 19 member states that are, with particular protections for the City of London.



The rest of the guff is here, plus there is something about secret stuff.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11924603/David-Camerons-four-key-demands-to-remain-in-the-EU-revealed.html

Manuel,

If you are sober read the following "opinion" of Will Hutton. May help you to think again.

The world economic order is collapsing and this time there seems no way out

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/11/world-order-collapse-refugees-emerging-economies-china-slowdown-recession

riveting gloom-mongering .... mind you, i shall not be disappointed if we see a sudden market correction, but i think you may

one thing's for sure, the collective and egalitarian ideals of communism have proved to be even more short-lived and illusory that capitalism, so i guess nothing left for you other than to see out your last remaining days in a cave in the andes .... at least every day will then be very real indeed

Are you sure?

Queen's advisers strip Jeremy Corbyn of 'Right Honourable' title after Privy Council snub

Exclusive: Mr Corbyn was described on Parliament’s website as “Right Honourable”, which denotes membership of the centuries-old Privy Council, until late last week

10:00PM BST 11 Oct 2015

The Queen’s advisers told Parliament to strip Jeremy Corbyn of his “Right Honourable” status after Number 10 wrongly implied the Labour leader had joined the Privy Council, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Mr Corbyn was described on Parliament’s website as “Right Honourable”, which denotes membership of the centuries-old Privy Council, until late last week.

The Labour leader was also described as a “Right Honourable friend” by Prime Minister David Cameron when they faced each other in the Commons last month, days after he was voted in as Labour leader.

However, after Mr Corbyn failed to attend the first meeting of the Privy Council since the summer holidays with the Queen last Thursday, the “Rt Hon” title was removed from Mr Corbyn’s page on Parliament’s website.

The Daily Telegraph understands that this was done under the orders of the Privy Council, the group of advisers which carry out the Queen’s wishes.

Photographs show that Mr Corbyn was on holiday near Ben Nevis in Scotland when his spokesman said he had been invited to attend a Privy Council meeting with the Queen last Thursday.

Mr Corbyn, a known republican, said last month he was not previously aware that joining the Privy Council meant he had to kneel before the Queen and kiss her hand.

The Cabinet Office confirmed on Sunday that Mr Corbyn is not a member of the Privy Council. He now cannot become one until the next meeting is held, probably next month.

It means that the Labour leader cannot be briefed on security matters until then, which will complicate efforts by ministers to use intelligence to persuade Mr Corbyn on backing British involvement in military action over Syria.

Jacqui Smith, a former Labour shadow Home secretary, has described how she was able to brief her Conservative opposite number about four terror attacks in her first few days in office “on Privy Council terms”.

David Rogers, a leading expert on the Privy Council, said the confusion was caused by a statement on the Cabinet Office’s website on September 14 that Mr Corbyn had been appointed to the Council.

The statement said: “The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of Jeremy Corbyn MP as a member of the Privy Council.”

Mr Rogers, author of “By Royal Appointment: Tales of the Privy Council”, published by Biteback Publishing, said: “Number 10 had confused a recommendation to appoint with an actual appointment” and added that Downing Street “probably hadn’t cleared their statements with the Privy Council Office”.

The Privy Council had stepped in to ask Parliament to correct its website and remove Mr Corbyn's title, he said. This was confirmed by sources in Parliament.

Mr Rogers said: “Anything stemming from the Monarchy, Buckingham Palace or Privy Council is always in the politest possible terms but nobody doubts [they meant]: ‘Get it off’.

The Labour leader will have to send a Privy Counsellor in his shadow Cabinet team – such as foreign affairs spokesman Hilary Benn – for briefings, such any on British drone strikes in Syria

In contrast Mr Cameron was named as a member of the Privy Council at a meeting on 14 December 2005, eight days after he was made Conservative leader.

Mr Cameron did not attend a Privy Council meeting and therefore was not sworn in for a further three months, but unlike Mr Corbyn he was appointed in his absence.

Mr Cameron was then referred to as “Right Honourable” in Commons by Prime Minister Tony Blair in the weeks before he was sworn as a Privy Counsellor in March 2005.

Gisela Stuart and Angus Robertson, two other MPs who were recommended to be members of the Privy Council at the same time as Mr Corbyn, were formally appointed at last week’s meeting.

Sir Nicholas Soames, a member of the Privy Council ,said Mr Corbyn was being “unbelievably selfish and bad mannered” over his treatment of the invitation to join the centuries-old body.

He said: “If he is going to be the Leader of the Opposition and be taken seriously he has to take the job seriously and treating a privy counsellorship in this way is appalling."

A Number 10 source said: “The Prime Minister was merely treating him with the same respect as he would any leader of the Official Opposition” when the pair debated in the House of Commons last month.

A Privy Council spokesman said: “Jeremy Corbyn is not yet a member of the Privy Council therefore he is yet to have the Right Honourable title.”

Mr Corbyn's spokesman said that the Labour leader - who is a known republican - wanted to take up the position on the Privy Council.

A Labour source source blamed an "administrative error". A spokesman Mr Corbyn said last week: “Although Jeremy was unavailable for today’s meeting, he has confirmed he will be joining the Privy Council. As the Prime Minister and others did, it is far from unusual to miss the first meeting due to other commitments.”

What a load of old boll........!


Get the Pig's head back!

You can't help but pity some of these desperate "Con" artist posters can you.

Whilst the two stoogies miss the plot completely!

I am sorry for the desperate lefties.

Haystack,

I'm not. Let them reap what they've sown

fred - i would accept that much "wealth", "worth" and "value" is pretty illusory, but i assuredly do not buy into a sackcloth and ashes scenario .... however, it clearly suits your mentality and persona, so i suggest you take full advantage, adding some self-flagellation while you're about to gain the greatest pleasure and satisfaction

Report: No Treaty Change, No Border Control In Government’s Demands For EU


by Nick Hallett11 Oct 2015768

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/11/report-no-treaty-change-free-movement-stays-in-governments-demands-for-eu/


waste of space dave



After months of waiting, the British government has finally revealed its main demands in its attempt to renegotiate the country’s European Union (EU) membership, and eurosceptics are unlikely to be happy.

The Sunday Telegraph states that the government has four key requirements. They are:

An “explicit statement” that Britain will not be part of a European superstate.

An “explicit statement” that the currencies other than the euro are welcome in the EU, and that the euro is not its official currency.

A “red card” system that would give groups of national parliaments the right to repeal existing EU law.

A “new structure” for the EU to prevent the nine non-eurozone members from being dominated by the others.

Tory and Foreign Office officials believe this list is the best deal they can likely achieve, however many will be disappointed.

There is no mention, for example, of curbing EU free movement rules at a time when immigration is a major concern for voters. There are not even any legally binding treaty changes, something many eurosceptics believe essential to deliver any meaningful, lasting reform.

Although Britain is not part of the Schengen area, where border checks are completely eliminated, citizens of other EU states have a right to travel to and work in the UK without visa restrictions. This has led to a massive rise in immigration from poorer, Eastern European states.

The weak demands will likely boost the “leave” campaign, who can now say that Britain will never be able to negotiate true reform while it remains in the EU.

Former Conservative cabinet minister Owen Paterson also took to the airwaves to criticise the four requirements, accusing the government of not going far enough and saying most of what they want will happen anyway:

He told Sky News this morning: “The EU is leaving us, they are going to move towards an integrated country… where you shift money around from the parts that can make money to the parts that sadly can’t. We are going to be left outside with something called associate status.

“That is being rebranded [by these demands] as some exciting new position but it’s absolute rubbish, it’s not. It’s rather worse than where we are at the moment.

“What I want to have is a complete new relationship with our European neighbours based on trade and friendly cooperation but above all making our own laws in our own parliament, and that sadly does not appear to be what our negotiators on behalf of the UK are looking for.”

Downing Street is now backtracking but not denying the story outright. A spokesman said the Sunday Telegraph story is “based on speculation” and there will be discussions on benefit reform. There was still no mention of treaty change or free movement, however.

Manuel.

I think out of choice I would prefer to be a communist than accept the fascist and neo-con morality of the present tory party. Especially, with the direction in which the “to-days” tory party mobster are presently attempting to travel. Of course, trying and relying on taking the little Englanders and its sycophantic camp followers with it and paid for by donors from outside its own boundaries.

Mind, if the price seems right under a good “modern” capitalism grab it, which appears to be advocated by you and the most inept camp followers. (Try looking at the last economic crash and watching the repeat and compare.)

What Will Hutton is advocating, is a review and moderation of economic policies, which are being blindly followed for by a political “gang” which is more intent on maintaining power, than the long-term good of a country and its contents.

Increasing the “wealth” of all in society, generally would increase the wealth and health of a society as a whole.

-=-=-=-=


Again, I would prefer not to deny my own and family history (good and bad), but hope I have continued to learn from it.

=-=-=-=-==

But, what is is like to be thought of as a neo-fascist?