Awol

The policies quoted were from UKIP and the BNP - the same for both - you may think that is civil, level headed I beg to differ. I'm with you Ian, we need more illegal immigration not less, especially criminals.

That has nothing to do with Libertarian, that is just transfering power from one place back to another place and has absolutely nothing to do with Libertarianism. If as UKIP want power was transferred back to the UK can you imagine what Brown and Co would have got up to with our personal freedoms? It really doesn't bare thinking about Sorry I didn't make that very clear, I consider any effort to increase UK voters influence over our own affairs to be libertarian, in contrast to Labour's attempt to give it away. As to what Gordon would do with it, two things: First he ain't going to be around and second, I think a wholesale constitutional reform process is coming to the UK parliament, and Cameron (who is going to win) has already committed to decentralising the power of the PM that Blair and Brown have grabbed and consolidated over the last decade. But before anyone starts screwing around with the constitution any further they need a mandate for reform from the public. General Election please.

UKIP are far more libertarian than Labour though Bicks. They want to recover our decision and law making abilities to an institution that is solely answerable to the UK electorate, rather than push more of or sovereign rights away to unaccountable eurocrats. For a single issue mob it's a good issue to pick.

Stop pulling my leg.

Fair enough but I think calling someone who's posting history doesn't support the accusation of being 'racist scum' is as reactionary as the original vote. Let's be honest, it's the Euro elections and if you are ever going to make a protest vote, this is the right time. Like I said, not my bag personally, I went for the (slightly) less loony UKIP but for the same reasons.

unfortunately im not into this green bollocks, when i get by a bus in a few years time i wont be smiling in the knowledge that i didnt use carrier bags, so i ended up going for BNP makes me feel all dirty but i thought out of all of them they sent a bigger messgae that this government is pretty **** up hopefully if they, the green party or UKIP can trounce the lib dems (face it tories will win, labour 2nd) then people will actually take notice that we need change I wouldn't have done it myself but your reasoning is perfectly logical. I certainly wouldn't call you racist scum for exercising your democratic rights. I don't think Labour wil be coming second though mate, could be as low as fourth (if we are lucky).

Mostly young, educated and idealistic, the natural constituency of lefty type parties. I reckon it's the reality/idealism interface that generally moves people to the right of politics, hence older voters often being more inclined towards 'right wing' parties. Not a hard and fast rule obviously (MJ, Drat etc) but often older lefties have deep seated reasons for being committed to socialism, such as a life in academia or maybe having met a miner once :winkold:

I've said before that the reliability of evidence gained from torture is, at best, dubious. Torture? I thought most MP's paid for that kind of 'interrogation'.. On a more serious note we won't know until they get the chance to give it a go. I'd hope we can get through at least 12 months of politics (not bollitics) before the corruption kicks in and normal service resumes. If you've got nothing nice to say..etc

If Jacqui Smith has read this then things start to make more sense...

Darren, I work with the Tory PPC for North Warwickshire and a more honest and down to earth bloke you couldn't wish to meet (I have questioned why he's going into bollitics btw!). He is absolutely 100% certain that the Tories will bin the whole project in office. I raised the same question to him about the reliability of manifesto promises and he said that having observed the serial lying of the government over manifesto promises the Tories weren't about to make the same mistake. Short of putting 'Dave's' nuts in a vice then asking him personally I don't think you can get a more honest answer.

Waterboarding, starting with GINGERlad. A wife???! Come on...

I do find it quite funny that after the McBride affair this is still being trotted out!!

^ Chris Grayling the Shadow Home Sec stated categorically on R4 this morning that if they get in ID cards are history regardless of how far the process has gone. It will be a key manifesto commitment along with a referendum on the Euro Constitution. Are the Lib Dems committed to repealing this authoritarian shite too?

They both look pretty grotty to be honest.

Continuing in the vein of travelling the world to be humiliated by foreign leaders, Gordon gets another lecture on debt, this time from Poland. Brown left red-faced by debt lecture from Polish Prime Minister First Chile and now the mighty Poland. It's getting quite embarassing!

Unless there is a way to legislate away human nature I'd say the best we can hope for is the moderation of greed.

So you'd rather have your friends die in a meaningless war? All of the fallen died in a meaningless war for a phoney cause. That doesn't devalue their personal sacrifice and bravery, but kidding yourself it wasn't meaningless in order to rationalise why they died leaves the door open for it to happen again - 'it' being the deployment of troops into harms way for no good reason.

Brumerican, Telic 1? What unit mate?

With the formal hand over of military command in Southern Iraq from the UK to the US today, and full withdrawal by the end of May I wanted to ask a simple question. Was it worth all of the lives and treasure expended by the UK, yes or no? FWIW I'm in the no camp for the reason that we should not go to war unless it is in our national interest, which Iraq clearly was not. Thoughts?

Highly entertaining but not to be taken seriously.

Good question, I think he believed unending economic growth really was achievable, hence 'no more boom and bust'. That fundamental incromprehension of our economic system (combined with the evidence of the current situation) should disabuse people of the notion that he is the man to fix it. I agree with both of you here. The fact is that politicians, by their very nature, both borrow and spend all they possibly can in order to 'buy' the next election thus further feathering their own beds. If we believe and accept that the old left/right economic arguments are largely defunct, we are going to need some new ideas for a financially stable and ecologically sound future, which does not rely on never ending growth. Won't be easy. One wonders what people are actually prepared to give up? Getting OT here but you're exactly right, and because this fundamental point is being willfully ignored by those responsible for answering it, well, lets see what happens in London this week and how big the ground swell of 'anti' actually is. That will be an interesting gauge of how the public feel imo. The power and vested interests tied up in the current (collective suicide) system are so great that the implications of what would be necessary to overturn them - effectively overturning the rule of the State - are mind boggling, but that's the only logical way of fundamentally changing the future. Carpe Diem?

Good question, I think he believed unending economic growth really was achievable, hence 'no more boom and bust'. That fundamental incromprehension of our economic system (combined with the evidence of the current situation) should disabuse people of the notion that he is the man to fix it.

so you keep saying but have yet to offer anything to support this ..deflection attempt or do you have some form of material to backup your claim ? Tony - read the f'ing blog. Read some of his other comments - I aint one of your lackeys No you are making vile accusations and when called out over them resort to ^ because you cannot substantiate them. Telling indeed.

and again the prosecution rests - obsession with physical appearance :?: Desperate stuff this Ian.

So what if it was looked at by many - I watched it, it does not mean that I hung off every word that Hannan said. Again if Hannan is your champion then fine, his views are odious and his racist tones are there for all to see. If you think that man is the answer then again fine, says a lot about you and your thinking, again IMO The second time you have accused him of racism, if it's so clear to see would you be kind enough to point it out to the rest of us, otherwise it just smacks of deflection. I was under the impression that the majority view was rather important come election time and had a direct bearing on the prospects of politicians and governments. BBC World is hardly the primary BBC vehicle for informing the British public is it. Edit: Last thing, if you didn't interpret criticism of Brown as a personal attack on you these discussions might be a tad more civilised. Just a thought.