franny

An opposing view is not allowed, as with much of what the left of centre propogate if you disagree they will label you as a Daily Heil reader, racist, homophobe, little Englander or whatever else comes to hand and seems to suit they desire to denigrate your view. I wouldn't bother if I was you they cannot engage in any sensible debate without name calling, never seemed to move on from the politics of the school playground (that is a critiicism of the argument mode not the individual whom I am sure is a mature free thinking adult).

I think those from the left or right accept the contents of the leaks when it suits their agenda or question them when it doesn't. As with so much on here most people know very little about the actual facts it is mainly just their opinion based on who they want to believe today. For me all it does is confirm my opinion (based on some facts and some feelings) that man (or woman, phew! ) will tell lies or cheat when it suits and the political man is probably the most shameless and well practised at this. I find this whole tit for tat debate very boring now. There is so little difference between the main parties it is hardly worth bothering, you cant believe anything they tell you unless you can see and test it yourself. The only area where the is clear blue water is if you compare the main parties to UKIP, BNP or some of the Socialist groupings however if you say that any of their policies make sense in your mind you are immediately branded a racist or from the loony left and the pack mentality takes over to belittle your views. Free thoughts and speech has I am afraid gone in this country. As a young person I spent many a Sunday afternoon at Speakers corner listening to some pretty crazy people but within some of that there was a nugget that made sense however today many of those people would be carted off for any xxxism or xxxphobia you care to mention.

bull sh it

I am sure with your intellectual qualities you can work that out.

Demonstrates the BBC bias though !?!

ahh but it is OK since it is free speech don't you know (as long as it is me and my loved ones that do not suffer)

Does he also have some outstanidng questiosn to answer after allegations from a female constituent about some nauhties? This Russion looks as though she may have been selected for her looks, maybe he uses the same selection critieria as FIFA i.e. what is in it for me?

All I am saying is perhaps the "peg" as you call it should have been the evening after the vote not two days before because if there were any waverers as someone else has uggested it gave them the excuse they needed as well as ammuniiton to the opposing bids. On a slightly seperate note for Qatar the air conditioned stadia may be fine but what about training sessions, how the hell are they going to work - start at 5 in the morning and be wrapped up by 9 ?

I dont suppose for one moment "they made it all up" however despite your passionate defence of the programme makers they do get things wrong in these programmes e.g. their accusations around Band Aid and the apologies they had to give to Geldof etc..and the timing of the programme was very poor because they knew what effect it would have whether you choose to believe the content or not. Your point about corruption and courts are interesting as well, Fergie, Bond, Allardyce etc all blew hot air over the expose around alleged bungs etc bt I do not recall any claims for libel coming to court just Fergie continuing to ignore the rules by refusing to speak to the BBC. Corruption is not the sole domain of FIFA we only need to look closer to home.

Yes there is some arrrogance there and yes it is good to put the WC where it has not been before BUT if a country scores top of all the measurable criteria (on some Russia were down in the 55% range) doen't it seem odd that it only gets two votes out of 22 when it comes to the personal assessments. Just makes you wonder what persoanl criteria were used.

Would you advocate all details of the data and information received by MI5/6 be made public? Would you advocate valuable information from somebody that perhaps has helped avoid say anpther 7/7 be made public? Surely within any state there needs to be some secrecy and confidential discussions in the interests of that state and its people. I think the issue here that everything from simple tittle tattle and gossip which does not really matter to potentially dangerous views and utterances are being made public. Which is which I do not know but I think it is arrogance by others and theor supporters to simply publish and say "all of it should be in the public domain" and then walk away, they will not have to live or die by any consequences. Also to pick up on your disregard for the Offical Secrets Act and those that sign and respect it is insulting to all those that do and then respect it, they are not smug but simply honest people who have integrity. If there is wrongdoing not exposed it is those that perpetrated that wrongdoing (e.g. Blair, Brown, Campbell) not the operative who does not expose it that is wrong.To sign it is a solemn commitment and in my opinion should not be broken, if one has an issue signing it do not sign it but do not do the job.

I don't disagree with your principle and whislt you may like to bash those papers it was rather more than just those publications that took Bliar, Browns & Campbell's lies. What about the bulk of the parliamentary Labour party (and indeed the Tories mistakenly believing him) and most of his disciples or are you suggesting they are followers of the Mail & Telegraph as well?. It is convenient to blame those papers but I think you will find most people trusted the Prime Minister at his word (as indeed we should be able to). The fact that he and the Labour party lied to the country is not the fault of those papers. The war was the fault of Blair and his cronies in government (inc those now in the shadow posts) not any newspaper.

There are some honest people about. My son who lives and works in London has lost/left his wallet on the tube and also on the bus in London, on both occasions it has been handed in fully intact and returned to him (and yes he did cancel all the cards etc.. before it was returned).

We have a government in this country that was elected by over 60%, they are implementing according to how they see fit so presumably you are happy with all of that?

Would you apply that logic to all such decisions made by politicians on "sentimental" grounds or just those you support, hardly democratic? From speaking over the years (not just recent past) I have known many Greeks for example who hated the move to the euro (probably ebenmore anti now!) and polls in Germany have suggested that many felt they had gone backwards when the lost the DM and before France went in their was a majority against it - this not just a British thing. The point is whether the politicians or people are right in their thinking the politicians are there to serve the poeple. If the politicians have got the right idea surely they should be able to convince the people of their cause or not do it - that is democracy.

The corruption and gravy train that is FIFA and the IOC is legendary, the only stand against it I can remember I think was Princess Anne resigning her position within the IOC because of the corruption going on and she did not want to be tainted by it. Let's face it we have all banged on about Harry et al allegedly taking bribes, that is also corruption but the English FA have not done much (other than George Graham) to stamp it out here, look at the corruption in skatesville what has happened or been exposed there? What example have we seen from our politicians over the last few years with millions being siphoned off for second homes, employing family members etc..it is all corruption but in a different guise. Assuming the allegations are correct probably the guys named saw no wrong in what they did, it is probably in their eyes a perk of the job, much like the way our MP's saw their perks, and in that I include those at Westminster and the cheating bar stewards in Brussels.

why should tax exiles have a view on our spending that we shoudl take any notice of?

If you dont pay tax here your view does not count.....do you?

I assume that is a joke response..........please?

I dont know the figures the reduction is against but maybe this reduction for M'boro is righting a wrong. I seem to recall many southern counties/councils complaining over the last 13 years that their support from central government was reducing at the same time money was being channeled at an increased rate to northern Labour strongholds. I am sure somebody who knows where to look can chart this over the last nn years.

yes I think so but doesnt it just carty helicopters?

Agreed, the money and time wasted by Blair/Brown in delaying the order for the new carriers (circa £1bn) would have kept the Ark going longer. Bit of a double edged sword it going, on the one hand it limits our capability to defend ourselves/interests against threat but on the other limits DC and his successors the capability to wage war ala the Blair way with interventions where it suited him and the yanks.

It is sad it has been covered up and interestingly on the BBC news at lunchtime they put the value at up to £35k so clearly inflation is at work but consider it from another angle. Was it defacing the plain wall with the image first? If he did not have the owners permission perhaps the image could be construed simply as graffiti on private property by others? Why does the artist called Banksy not divulge his name, is it to maintain a mystique and drive up the price of his images or is it fear of being prosecuted or is it he is simply up himself ? What right does he have to impose his idea of art on others?

Cheeky blighter, dodgy knees these days so we need to sit still with the blankets over them and the flask of bovril!! We did our share in the 60's & 70's when we watched on terraces and the crowd was constantly moving and swaying, many a match when "Knees up Mother Brown" was sung with all the crowd joining in the movements. You kids don't know the half of it!