I'm no admirer of the bloke but his exit tonight was pure dignity.

I commented earlier to the missus that it is the most sincere and genuine 'performance' I have seen from him.

Very gracious and not at all the man we have all been conditioned to despise.

I found it interesting that he thanked Mandleson and referred to him as the Rock Labour is built on. What are the odds of Mandy running some scam where the Lib-Tory coalition is doomed to fall flat and a Blairite Labour leader manipulated by Mandy being our next PM by this time next year?

Ah, did he say rock? must get my ears syringed.

It was class yeah.

As I say, whenever he wasn't grumpy, he did have the ability to show some true personality.

If if he'd showed it a lot more, than maybe he would have been a better PM.

But it's a sad night tonight: RIP New Labour 1997 - 2010.

I was watching on Sky News and I must say I enjoyed his resignation speech outside Downing Street and cracked a bottle of Bollinger open to celebrate. I must admit though that I'm not yet over enthushed regarding the TLC (Tory Liberal Coalition).

Why like? And how does it effect you in any way?

Labour died on this day(May12th) 1994 when the best PM Britain (John Smith) never had died.

The Con-Lib coalition having it first full day in charge just makes it worse.

And your "hero" (Mandelson) would never be in the position he's in today, if Smith hadn't suffered that heart attack.

I am thinking more on the lines of ConDem Party meself

Surely that's a good thing, isn't it - I mean he would never have been a government minister and MP for Hartlepool all those years.

Don't forget he is 'Pools' Club President.

I've grown up, sorry, I GREW up under New Labour.

Never in my wildest dreams would I thought I'd see a Conservative government back in power, let alone David Cameron as Prime Minister.

I'd also never thought that I would see in my lifetime a Lib Dem as Deputy Prime Minisiter, let alone Nick "The other guy of politics" Clegg, now Nick "The underdog of politics" Clegg.

You need to get out more.

Hope that helps.

No if he had never been MP for Hartlepool, never been a government minister, never been Pools club president, I would have been far happier.

Having to resign twice says it all, Smith Knew him for what he was, and that good enough for me apart from my own opinion of him.

He supported both Blair and Brown when Smith was Labour leader, he edged his bets, knowing one or the other would take over some day, the fact it happened a long time earlier than it should of, just made him decide which side of the fence to go on sooner than he thought he would have to.

The man DISGRACED the town twice.

So NO,it doesn't make it a good thing and to even suggest that the death of someone makes something else a good thing shows you in a bad way.

Absolutely disgraceful statement from you.

I agree that Brown's dignity shone through last night.
Since last Friday morning he has tackled everything unselfishly.
He gave the other parties every help and assistance in order to facilitate a new government. He gave up the leadership of the Labour party, taking full responsibility for his party's loss of electoral mandate.
His party also showed dignity and loyalty to the people who voted for them by refusing to water down the manifesto which generated those votes.
Whereas the other two parties couldn't wait to dance to each other's tune.
In the interests of the country they said.
In their desperation for power more like.

Here we have the leader of the party who came third getting the second in command position. If anything happens to Cameron, Clegg is boss man. Yet the Tories bleat on about Brown not being elected as PM. Of course everything is right when it suits, especially if you are a politician desperate for power.

I wonder how long it will be before we get the " the task is bigger than we thought" excuse, when things start going pear shaped.

My forecast................two years, absolute maximum.

Like Mr Ripper, this unholy alliance doesn't fill me with enthusiasm either.

I predict an election In October 2010. Shortly after the Tories hold there conference so Cameron announce it then. So it be October 21st/28th.

FFS lets rewrite history. Some of you lot go on like Labour have done a great job and are out by accident. The country has been destroyed under their watch. I'd rather see Cameron and Clegg have a go than more of the same shite.

Yes again a Labour goverment leaves a bankrupt country to its successors.

True.

Very true.

Just don't try and convince the reds as you'll end up

No it didn't die when Smith died, all this claptrap about him being the 'best PM that never was' is just that, claptrap

Madelson was in position BEFORE Smith was leader and was the driving force behind the Labour party and made them electable again

If Mandelson is so crap, why do the Labour Party need him so much?

The Tories would give their left bollock to have a bloke like him running the show, FACT!

Anyway, why are you crying?, I'm sure you said you would vote Tory in a previous post

Because thats preferable to being led by the village idiot.

They love it

I would hate and I mean really hate too try and re-write some political history, such as the 'blues' trying to stop the formation of the NHS and the minimum wage


I also will laugh like fuck when interest rates go backup to about 10%

hth and TIA

The answer is obvious.
The "Ruperts" make all the decisions for them and, in return, they are expected to obey implicitly without question, ending every sentence by touching their forelock.

In establishment terms the first son gets the estate, the second son goes into the army and the third son goes into the church.
In any event all three have cushy numbers apart from the second maybe, as now and again some other bod takes a pot shot at them.

I read that recently in a magazine.

I don't think it was the beano................well Cameron and Clegg weren't mentioned, so it can't have been.

Cameron reads using his finger

hth

[/quote] Anyway, why are you crying?, I'm sure you said you would vote Tory in a previous post[/quote]

Never voted Tory in my life and never will

Knowledge gained from your extensive military service no doubt.

My uncle, cousins and their spouses have all served in the military, in N.I, the Falklands, Bosnia, Gulf I&II and 'Stan

To be fair, I wasn't there for any of their stints, but I'm sure from what they have told me, they do have to obey orders without question, otherwise what would be the point?

I don't think they have to touch forelocks though

There are very very few orders in a battle and ever fewer given by 'Ruperts'.

So again how does this affect you in any way, you dont pay tax and rent, you dont have any dependants and assume that you dont use the NHS a lot.

Who ever is in charge changes you life not one little bit.

I voted in this election for the Lib Dems. They are now in government.

If you don't think that this hasn't affected me, you're very much mistaken.

In view of what Mr Compo said, would you care to elaborate?

I haven't had any military service, but that doesn't mean I don't know what goes on.

For example there are thousands of examples of atrocities carried out by men in uniforms. Now you tell me....do they do these things because they want to or are they conditioned / under orders to do them.
I'll give you a clue...................they nearly always use the excuse " I was only doing what I was told" when presenting their defence.

I agree with the Lib Dems on their housing policy. We should be renovating more derelict houses, not building new ones and destroying the environment by doing it.

Where?

In Hartlepool for example (have you ever been?) a lot of the empty and derelict houses are two up two down terraces with no gardens. The reason that they're empty is because a lot of people don't want this kind of housing now, so instead they're being knocked down and replaced with new garden houses which people want to live in (e.g. Duke Street area).

So I take it that you're against that idea and would rather spend money doing up the houses that people don't want in order that they can be empty again in a couple of years time?

I'm afraid it means exactly that.




I would suggest that the sort of people who commit atrocities are the sort of people who would commit atrocities in civilian life. The only difference is that they are given a situation where their character will out.
I know of plenty of atrocities commited by British forces, some relatively recently. I don't accept for a second that they were doing this because it was what was ordered.

Well, as I say, what you want depends on the place that you live.

Personally, I wouldn't mind one of those homes, just to get on the ladder.

Fact is POK, many of the old houses cannot be done up and they don't meet HSE regs and various others and are too costly

The new social housing schemes in Hartlepool are second to none and aren't managed by shitty arses slum landlords so the tenants aren't pikey bastards

Concurring with Mr A.

Why can't they be done up?

Depending on your definition of "can't", I'd say that as a starter for 10 they can't be done up to be something which people want, i.e. houses with gardens, parking spaces etc. due to their original design.

Secondly there is a cost issue. It's actually cheaper to knock them down and build new if you're looking at whole life costing and sustainability issues, not to mention the environmental benefits of new build properties (heating, lighting etc.).

ok fair enough, just wondered. I have no knowledge of these things so I thought I'd ask an estimator like yourself.

How is it destroying the environment its more cost effective, they are also improving the visual environment as them houses around Duke / Mayfair street in the town (I mention these as others have) were a hell hole.

So other than the housing policy what then? I think the Lib Dems have sold out one of their biggest items of the Manifesto - Trident. Granted they are doing away with the I.D cards etc

I ask again what else do you like about the Lib Dems and how will they affect you?

It's called compromise and as far as I can see, the two parties are working together properly. At least give them a chance, the old confrontational style has failed time after time irrespective of the colour of your rosette.

Give over it means exactly that.
My father and his brothers were in a war that lasted nearly six years. In my youth I worked with people who were in the same conflict, including people who worked on the infamous Burma railway line. My Grandad was in the Boer war.
All my information on the Armed Forces, atrocities and warfare in a conflict that lasted more than five minutes comes from contact with these people........hundreds of them.
So why shouldn't I know or are you saying that they made it up.

If you are trying to tell me that atrocities are never ordered then it is you who is in need of eye opening. What about atrocities ordered against the Jews by the German Command, or against the Allies by the Japanese command, or recently in what was once Yugoslavia. Who ordered the atrocity in Tianamen Square..........the students union.
I don't need to have been tramping around parade grounds in response to some loud mouthed prat to have knowledge of the Military.

I have never been down a coal mine either but I have a fair knowledge of what goes on.

I/We were not talking about the Germans, the Japs or any other country.

Also I'm not talking about parade grounds, I'm on about front line combat soldiering and unless you've experienced it you cannot possibly have the foggiest idea about it. Your brother & father might well but my point is that you don't.

My accusation was atrocities carried out by men in uniform because they were conditioned/ordered to do it.
Read back.
That includes men in uniforms full stop. So, as the Germans, Japs et al have men in uniforms then they are included.
I never said I was experienced in front line soldiering, nor am I restricting my comments to front line soldiering.

I'm getting dizzy from all these moving goalposts.

Well stop moving them then.
I specifically said men in uniform..................read it.
Why is it that anybody who hasn't been in the army automatically gets put under the " you haven't done it so you no nowt about it banner" by you.
There are billions of words written on the subject, there are countless people you can talk to about it. And yet the only "expert" is yourself or someone like you.
Very narrow minded philosophy if I may say so.

Because being in an active combat situation is extremely specific. Yes there are billions of words written on it but non of them give you the experience. It's as realistic as a bloke trying to understand the experience of giving birth.

Well considering the amount of male gynos there are I think you've just shot yerself in ze foot mate.
If we were talking specifically about active combat and the experience of that specifically then you know more about that than me.............no argument.
However my point is that men in uniform are conditioned/ordered to do things, including commit atrocities, by their superiors. That conditioning usually started on the parade ground, although they may have changed that. The whole thing is/was geared to getting men to respond to an order without thinking of the consequences.
The evidence of that is great and you don't have to be a serving soldier to know about it, talk about it or pass opinion on it.
And before we gravitate to childbirth, just remember who introduced it when you are getting the goalposts out again.