Jump to content

mike Meehan

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by mike Meehan

  1. Or preferably a new party to form a government which puts the interests of the nation first.
  2. A valuable commodity in business and/or trade is a good name - it works with the tradesman, the corner shop, to large national concerns, to multi nationals and in manner of speaking a modern country is also a business because it needs to trade. Those who are careless of their good name lose business - other people and other nations want to deal with somebody they can trust, somebody who is ethical and this will develop confidence. Although I realise your comment is aimed at SS and his strong beliefs in Scotland it also picks up on the point of UK plc. It would not be in our interests to develop, or intensify a reputation of 'Perfidious Albion' - we should be showing the world that we can be trusted and that they can have confidence in us. Unfortunately the shenanigans associated with this brexit are showing the world that we are in fact Perfidious Albion and we will have to work hard to regain the trust and confidence we had when we really were fighting to save the world some 75 years ago. If our poor soldiers, sailors and airmen who gave their lives could see what was happening now they must be turning in their graves.
  3. Sadly, it is true - we were originally invited to join the fledgling Common Market during the course of its setting up in the 50's and took part in the original conferences in relation to this but when asked to partake, we declined. At the time we still had a fair bit of the Empire and a reasonable export industry with heavy engineering and the manufacture of aircraft, of which the Hawker Hunter fighter was a world leader, left. At that time the UK was foremost in aircraft manufacture, though we soon lost it. The Comet, the first jet airliner in the world came to a horrible end because the effects of constant pressurisation and depressurisation in connection with metal fatigue weren't fully understood at the time and square windows instead of round ones made that worse. We forged on and developed the TSR2 fighter, which was the most advanced of the time but Harold Wilson pulled the plug on that and went to the US to buy off the shelf. Although we had some success after with the Harrier, it was the start of the decline in our industries - the Japanese developed new shipbuilding techniques which were more efficient than our aged pre war system and we lost the edge on that, motor cars, motor cycles followed which started a general down trade in manufacturing. It was at this time that we should have taken more notice of what others were doing, learned, adapted and re-invested to bring ourselves up to date but we didn't - there was still the old belief that British was best, which was not, as the markets showed, necessarily the case. Once these industries declined the necessary design teams were scattered to the four winds, their expertise with it and once lost, they were lost and difficult to rebuild. Meanwhile the Common Market started showing fruit and expanding but De Gaulle vetoed our attempts to join, so we joined EFTA instead. The Empire was in the process of disappearing, our manufacturing industry was disappearing and the trade with EFTA and the now Commonwealth was insufficient, so circa 1970 Ted Heath made a further application to join the Common Market which we did in 1973, to ratify it in 1975 after a referendum. Yes, there was an uproar from parts of the Commonwealth, New Zealand exported huge amounts of lamb and there were the exports to us from other the remainder of the Commonwealth but if we were to retain a reasonable level of prosperity we had little choice, as it was we were borrowing off the IMF to remain afloat and the gap between our exports and imports was no longer sustainable. As it was our former partners in the Commonwealth forged new relationships in their local regions and after some pain started to flourish again. Our fortunes picked up but we didn't really gain in manufacturing until the Japanese came over, attracted by the fact that we were then in the Common Market which meant that expanded the potential customer base. They brought with them new manufacturing processes which streamlined production and made their products competitive and it worked though such industry never recovered the height of its former hey day and we went from being mainly a manufacturer to mainly a service provider. In am a strong believer in eggs and baskets and suggest that for real success a healthy mix of manufacture, finance and services, high tech products is needed, together with pharma and chemical products and in order to retain the edge there must be investment in research and development. For many things in this modern world, a normal middle sized country such as ours does not have the resources for this - costs have to be shared, then developed on an economy of size system. With Europe pooling its resources in such a manner it would have the potential to become rich as the USA has done but with the added advantage of being more people friendly to its less fortunate. As it is the EU is still yet in the process of development, which can be complicated at times but it could get there and become greater than the sum of its constituent parts. There is still a great deal of work to be done, especially in the area of the disparate economies but it can be done which is currently being shown by Ireland and Spain who not so long ago were the recipients of large bail outs. However, some are wanting the UK to go it alone, I doubt very much that we have the necessary resources in today's globalised and regionalised modern world, so we will get left behind. If we leave the EU we will need to tag onto another entity and I can only see that as being the USA, which I would see as a very unequal relationship. Yes we did betray the Commonwealth but the mother country was getting old and needed to be put into a home and the Commonwealth just did not have the resources to support that, so the answer was for the mother country to become re-vitalised through joining with its close neighbours. Having done that, do we really want to renege on our neighbours and it we do, will anybody ever trust us again?
  4. I will remind you again in case you have forgotten - it was the decision of HM Gov to decide to leave the EU, not the other way round but the UK brexit team are going in with the attitude that it is the EU which have to do the running - they don't have to do anything other than try to protect the interests of the other 27. You speak of dirty tricks: 1) We have gone into the referendum countless times but it was full of dirty tricks by the leavers. 2) The referendum was advisory and not mandatory, so its result should have gone to parliament for a decision, but instead Theresa May stood outside No 10, saying Brexit means brexit, not allowing the proper opportunity for it to be debated properly. The reason why she did this was obvious to me - she saw it as a potential 17.2 million voters who would help keep her and her party in power. This was without a proper mandate because she was never vot5ed into that office by her party or the country 0- she was simply the last horse standing. 3) She attempted to try and get executive powers for the handling of brexit rather than our legislative body parliament have a proper debate and decision - an order which went on appeal to the Supreme Court had to be obtained to stop her. It went to parliament, however a free vote was not allowed as it should have been - Mrs May continued to coerce, bully and whip other MPs into submission - Corbyn got involved because he had his own axe to grind was guilty of similar tactics. 4) Not so much a dirty trick but stupid - article 50 was triggered without even the basis of an outline plan, effectively in theory giving us just two years to complete. 5) Another misjudged one - although the tories already had a majority this was good enough for her - she decided to go to the country in an attempt to increase this to gain both the power and a mandate - it fell flat with her losing her overall majority. 6) She still remained in office even without the majority or an effective mandate on the grounds that her p[arty still had the most seats. 7) She set about re-organising the committees in such a way that her party had a majority - it became quite clear when Davis first of all didn't have papers, ten he had them, then he didn't have them, then he had them again. A complaint was put forward in respect of trying to misleads parliament and it went before one those committees to decide. Guess what it was a committee with a conservative majority and they found he had not tried to mislead parliament when it appeared quite obvious to most of the country that he had. 8/ Realising that she had lost her majority she went on bended knee to the DUP and a promise of a £billion of our tax payer's money as a bribe for them to shore up her voting in parliament, thus giving the conservative government a direct interest in the overseeing of the GFE when it should remain as one of the three impartial overseers of this agreement. At the same time a nurse asked Mrs May for a pay rise and was told that money did not grow on trees. 9) Since then there has been various other ducking and diving in connection with the EU negotiations - the right wing press who work very closely with the government in a you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours arrangement, have tried to belittle, drown out, silence, ridicule and insult people, including judges, lords and anybody else who had the audacity to oppose the brexit policy which appeared to have been brought down from Mount Sinai engraved on tablets of stone. 10) Initially she had promised the Scots a meaningful part in the negotiations but reneged on that. In short she has been trying every way she can to try and thwart any opposition to her plans by using the maxim that the result justified the means. However she is not making a good job of it - by degrees she is having to back track. I have never been so appalled in all my life I have been and still am by the antics of this matter to date and it is not because our side lost - if the leave side had won it fair and square we on our side would have accepted it. What has upset the remainers so much as that your side cheated in the referendum and you have continued to cheat ever since. I have spent most of my adult life fighting injustice and when we see what are supposed to be pillars of society indulging in such injustice I fight back hard. Perhaps if karma works out the way we are told it sometimes does the leavers will have a shock and I'll give them the same amount of sympathy which they have extended to me and the other remainers which will be zilch. On the other hand those leavers who recant will have the hand of friendship offered to them. Anecdotes on the smoking deck of a cruise liner don't really count for very much, especially on the scanty information you have given. Though you are quite right that when it comes to business it is a dog eat dog world, that's what I am constantly trying to warn you of when it comes to brexit.
  5. Not only do we trade with the EU, we trade with the rest of the world through the EU - ever since I can remember our trade balance has always been in the red as far as goods are concerned but what we used to call invisible exports, now finance and services made up the difference. There was a time when we were a great manufacturing country but we let that go, mostly through poor management, strike action and inept governments who often could not see any further that the end of their nose intent on short term gain and letting the future look after itself. We are still beset with some of these problems, the class war is still up and running and upper management are more concerned with feathering their own nests. Because of the shambolic manner this brexit has been handled by the government and others there is little chance that brexit will ever be a success - it will be a return to the period of early 70's - power cuts, rubbish not being collected, three day week an having to go cap in hand to the IMF, because the once good reputation we had is now being frittered away to satisfy the egos and the bank balances of mostly third rate politicians and so called captains of industry. You say there are people queuing up to do business with us - it is because they see the opportunity of eating us up for breakfast, only you don't see it through your rose coloured spectacles. At least with the EU we were holding our own and things were improving little by little. https://tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/gdp-growth In the link there is a table showing the recent performance in GDP of 20 countries. The highest is the USA at 2.2, India, China Turkey and Mexico are above 1.0, the remainder are below that with Japan, Indonesia and Russia being in negative territory with the UK languishing in 17th place at 0.1. The figures are percentages. No doubt there is a Trump factor in the USA figures but his methods don't bode to well for keeping anthropogenic global warming under control. It would be a grave error not to appreciate that things will change during the next 30 years, they will. Speaking of that, this will become an increasing problem as well as the global population expected to reach 95.billion in just over 30 years time. Increasing desertification, continuing political unrest, the continuing pressure for many to relocate north are not likely to make life any easier in the coming years. For our own security and otherwise we need to be in a larger bloc - we will be too small to tackle them on our own and these are not scare stories, they are based on up to date scientific research and I dare say that in time your children and grandchilden will not be thanking you for your brexit stance.
  6. Yes WP, see my earlier post on this subject about immigration - within the EU regs were the means to control this a lot more than we did - it was our own government's failing to do this and as a result the figures were higher than what they should have been. The tory government is using the result of the referendum as a means of keeping themselves in power and enriching themselves and their chums into the bargain, whilst Mr & Mrs Joe Public are the fall guys - when are you ever going to realise that? The leavers keep talking about a corrupt EU, they will have to go some to catch up with a corrupt Whitehall. As has been reported a number of times already the nett number of EU nationals in our country are falling, less are coming and more are leaving, so as a result of that the main reason why people voted leave is not longer there, problem solved. That being the case, why are we still going head first in self destruction mode?
  7. Kent you should really stop and think before writing such rubbish - your hatred of the EU is as clear as a bell and apart from you don't like 'em and you are an avid follower of urban myth you have not produced anything which gives a coherent reason for your views. On the other hand I would argue that it is the leavers who are the traitors by trying to leave our friends I the lurch. Zombies indeed, they are the devotees of the urban myth and lies which have been spread around - if you check on the remain posts on this site it becomes apparent that the remainers know pretty well what they are talking about and usually back up what they say with evidence.
  8. All this time and money wasted Nick trying to put lipstick on a pig, when we have so many domestic problems - NHS, Crime rate, particularly violent going through the roof, the necessity for food banks - the situation is more akin to a third world country than what is supposed to be one of the richer countries in the world. They should put a stop to following this will o' the wisp and instead concentrate on these domestic problems which really are getting urgent - at the rate we are going we are going top a 100 or more young lives being lost through gang violence, this year. Each day you pick up the paper there is a report of some atrocious crime being committed. Just seen a article written by one of my ex -colleagues, not violent this time but in a close down by the south coast the thieves developed a system of keying into the security code of a car key in the house, making a copy on a duplicate, unlocking the car and stealing any valuables inside. There were about 4 cars done on the same night - the police were informed and they were told that nothing could be done - my ex- colleague started his own enquiries and found that at one of the houses there were good quality likenesses of the villains captured - he notified the police and still they could not do anything, the excuse being the lack of money and resources. OK, so it is low level on the list of priorities but if left unchecked they escalate and small time villains become big time villains with the end result of the public suffering even more. From a little acorn a bloody great oak tree grows. Toe rags are strange breed and may appear thick but when it comes to being able to get away with things they are quicker than Usain Bolt. The lack of police activity only encourages them - the victims don't necessarily report the cime, thinking that it would be a waste of time, meanwhile in reality the crime figures soar but the stats show no appreciable increase, so when it comes round to increasing the budget the police and the public are shot in the foot. However this is unlikely to affect Theresa May and other senior ministers because they have an armed police guard 24/7.
  9. That's about as stupid as triggering article 50, thereby setting a time limit without the faintest idea of what you are going to do. It looks as though they are doing this to pacify the head bangers on the right who don't really give a damn so long as their hate complex with the EU is satisfied.
  10. It comes to something when the bully claims he is being bullied - well he should know.
  11. https://uk.yahoo.com/news/whether-brexit-goes-ahead-not-101437128.html I did not rate him as a chancellor or a prime minister, particularly when he sold all that gold to the Germans at bargain basement knockdown prices but take the view that although some make errors, I can't think of anybody who didn't, even Maggie Thatcher and Winnie Churchill, you have to listen or read what they say. In this article Gordon Brown is right - during the tenure of Theresa May as Home Secretary and Prime Minister we have never used the safeguards built in the EU designed to prevent welfare tourism, whereas Gordan Brown starts that they were used to good effect in other parts of the EU and this corroborates with what I have read elsewhere. It was Mrs May's responsibility to control immigration when she was Home Secretary but she never took advantage of the rules built into the EU regulations, so the question is why didn't she, especially when David Cameron was putting her under pressure to do so - instead she resorted to getting students, some of whom where bona fide and earning money for our universities - the Home Office resorted to deporting some of the Windrush people who came here legally and at the time were British citizens in fact taking the easy options to enable some progress in the figures. It comes as being against the grain when our government had within its grasp the means to exercise such control but were irresponsible in not taking them, allowing the leave side in the referendum to make a big issue on the subject, quite sufficient with such a narrow margin to say the result from one side to the other. If Mrs May were to be honest with herself she must realise that she was to blame for these shortcomings rather that the EU but instead of recognising these she has continued to blame the EU for what, at least in part she was to blame, then continue to consistently draw her red line in respect of FOM, putting at risk the remainder of the four conditions ranks of cynical hypocrisy. She has shown herself to be lacking in the normal ethical standards which are expected from the rest of us in her attitude that the end justifies the means. It does not - it not as though these incidents can be brushed under the carpet, they cannot and the whole world, some of whom she is intent on arranging business deals with, knows. Integrity is extremely important in these matters and prospective partners or clients must be in a position where they feel they can trust us and would you buy a used car off this woman? The end result was that the referendum was won through lies, misrepresentations and false promises together with the ineptitude of our own government. Now brexit has taken on a life of its own with nobody having a clue as to how they can bring it under control or plans for the future. No wonder so many of the remainers are so bitter about events with the country having been put in this position though what could be described as utter irresponsibility, cynicism and ineptitude on the part of the government.
  12. To use a term of man of colour can be a little ambiguous inasmuch as we refer also to colourful characters, who are colourful in a sense which would not encourage people to invite them home for tea with mother and the vicar. As a lad the various 'N' words were quite common and in fact were words for black in other languages, or derivations of those words. We also had 'gollywogs' ooops, in those days and nobody thought anything about it. I just wonder, is it that the PC brigade thought up their innocuous terms because they took it on themselves to think somebody might have been offended by some of the old fashioned terms without asking them, or did they have genuine evidence which indicated that the terms were indeed offensive? It certainly appeared the former way when they started editing, 'Baa baa black sheep' - I've never known a black sheep take offence at being called such. The written language can be inexact at times I as much as it is more difficult to display the nuances which may be intended and when such attempts are made, they can be misunderstood. In my view words only really become offensive when spoke with malice intended, otherwise they are just words - sticks and stones...…. On the other hand the so called politically correct people can be so offensive when they try to pick up people on their terms which can work out being more offensive than what was said originally - something to do with a holier than thou attitude. I prefer to be considerate and courteous rather than politically correct - it is much more honest.
  13. As one honky to another, I will continue to broaden the boundaries of my experience, though I will continue to order my steak 'bien cuite' in France, though I have tried the extreme versions, steak tartare, a pointe, l'escargots and once became violently ill after eating the plat de jour paella at 9m after a day of 34C. But love those kebabs with chille sauce. Not everything suits our Anglo/Hibernian/Nordic constitutions but as I said, don't knock 'til you have tried it, within reason, naturally - I am not inclined to go as far as Jeremy Thorpe did. My method of learning to ice skate was to push myself away from that wall, which all the others were clinging desperately onto, out into the middle of the rink.
  14. Might it just be that our government is affected by cerebral inertia, meaning that once they have decided on a particular policy all the evidence in the world will not detract them from their declared course, or is it that their eyed and ears have an extremely efficient filtering system that these things never get through? Strange really, most people I know learn through experience and are open to modifying their plans as necessary even to the extent of dropping them altogether if it turns out that the original plan was flawed.
  15. 'cultural misappropriation' I don't know what that means either Pete but how about 'cultural appropriation' - what a great idea - to be able to appropriate it, you must learn about it and in learning about it, it broadens your mind, expands your horizons and increases your experiences so that you can understand more about the world and its peoples. That sounds like a good way to keep xenophobia and bigotry at bay. I would suggest that the term, 'cultural misappropriation' was coined by the straight laced bigoted xenophobic people to whom anything outside their normal experiences of life was an abomination simply because they do not understand - aagh! Vivre les differences - variety is the spice of life, don't knock it 'til you've tried it and all that.
  16. F or an orange president, might I suggest a white anglo saxon egotistic protestant intent on building walls with bigoted views, otherwise known as an ASEPIBB.
  17. The original race? and to think they had all those immigrants come into their country, take it over and relegate them to second class citizens. There's something wrong somewhere, especially when Donald Trump wants to build a wall to keep out those from south of the border, some of whom will be from the original race. Probably something about the winner writing history, that doesn't mean that it is true.
  18. It is in fact inverse racism. Part of it was because senior officers had forgotten the oath when they first joined, that was to serve without fear or favour and began to cultivate politicians in favour, as it now turns out, of their worthless careers - the rank and file of the lads and lasses at the sharp end were just as appalled as everybody else - apart from anything else as a serving police officer it is not an easy thing to live down. Add to that Hillsborough and the South Yorks Police have suffered badly from mismanagement.
  19. By all means dream about it Mark, it doesn't mean to say it will happen - if I had my way there would be no brexit at all and cannot understand people for wanting it.
  20. Couldn't agree more the people running those investigations were out of order - what upsets me is that not everybody was like that, me for a start. I think it would have been better prosecuting those responsible and giving them a bit of bird, their lives would have been none to pleasant inside because even villains do not like a bent copper. It would have served as a salutary warning to anybody else considering that route and left the existing police powers more or less intact, so the good ones would be able to continue doing their job. The thing is that even when I was still training, I formulated the idea that I may be posted to an area for the whole of my career and I thought seriously about it, as I do with a good may things and I decided I wanted to build a reputation which was honest, fair but also not standing for any nonsense. I must admit that I did come across the occasional colleague who tended to be economic with the truth but I decide that nothing could be worse than lying in the box, not only would you know about yourself, but chummy would also and that would go a long way towards undoing the good work I had tried to build up - if chummy decided to tell lies that was down to him, they usually got found out, but it meant I could continue to hold my head high. This is also one of the reasons why I get so het up about this brexit malarkey - people who we should trust seem to think nothing of lying through their teeth. That your honour is the plea for the defence
  21. Don't be silly Kent, we have our own fraudsters, one I know of one who gets a good living out of being an MEP qualifying for an eye watering pension. The point is that fraudsters are everywhere and where they think there is a few bob to be made they will do it and are probably much more prominent in some of the African states from whence numerous scam E-Mails emanate - please let me use your bank etc for depositing huge sums of cash from which you will get a cut etc. All what you have posted merely indicates that fraudsters are having a go at the EU and the investigators are working at bringing them to book. As a matter of interest I think that the cost of fraud to the UK of £193 billion a year is also worth thinking about: https://www.experian.co.uk/blogs/latest-thinking/identity-and-fraud/fraud-costs-uk-economy-193-billion-year-equating-6000-lost-per-second-every-day/ So are you going to say now that the sooner the UK falls the better and that everyone here is totally corrupt - I know some are, we've seen a lot of that over the last 2 to 3 years. I should add also that every time you buy insurance for your car, you are getting ripped by fraudsters - the insurance companies have to charge extra to keep the Motor Insurers' Bureau which pays out in respect of claims from uninsured third parties, a great number of whom are responsible for staging accidents. As well as the claimants involved in this there are the tame doctors for the fictitious injury reports and tame lawyers responsible for processing the claims. It is a racket costing millions; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11044315
  22. I was commenting on what he actually said, which if you read it properly, made some sense but it appears that your reaction to this is to dig up dirt - unless he is specifically forbidden from speaking on matters of a political nature, then why shouldn't he? I somehow suspect that if what he said was beneficial to brexit cause, your posts would have been completely different.
  23. CM ever since about 1975 there has been a continual erosion of the effectiveness of the police by the politicians, by the courts and sometimes some of their own senior officers trying to curry favour with the politicians. A good portion of my service was done during the days when the uniform did command authority and with most of the officers te law was administered by the use of common sense and also a sense of fairness and justice. They got to know their areas and the villains on their patch and were able to use this to keep on top of crime and make the streets relatively safe. I said most of the officers because now and again we did have some who let down the whole side through trying to take short cuts. This result in legislation which affected the whole service, not just the individuals responsible and as a result PACE, the Crown Prosecution Service and Police Commissioners (most of whom have an affiliation to a political party when the service is supposed to be apolitical. As far as enhancing the efficiency of the service is concerned, it has had the opposite effect. I still speak to police officers even though I have been retire a long time but compared with pre 1975 the morale is virtually rock bottom. To me it is a crying shame especially when you consider the advances in forensic science, CCTV and ANPR the bad 'uns should really have nowhere to run but the increase in rules and regulations about what the police can and cannot do, what evidence is admissible and inadmissible have had the effect of smothering a lot of initiative, an essential tool for doing the job, and shackling the police in their every day work. My view is that the police are paid to do a job and become expert in their field, not only should they be allowed to do it, they should have the support of the community, the courts and the politicians in doing so and where the odd individuals fall by the wayside, concentrate on getting that person out, rather than penalising the whole service with blanket legislation. It may surprise you to know that we don't like those people either, their activities impinge on everybody and makes there job harder. The lads and lasses of today are still doing a damned good job, despite being shackled the way they are. Also reflect on those who have been killed or seriously injured during the course of their duty both in the UK and abroad, because we are all one family with the common interest of serving the public - there have been a number in recent times. The problem is that when considering new law, the real experts of policing, those who actually have the responsibility for keeping our streets safe, are not asked - they will ask lawyers, who have a vested interest continuing to earn money from their trade and they have to have the little loopholes through which they can get people off in order to make a name for themselves and attract more business, the academics without first hand practical experience and most of all the politicians responsible for enacting the law who don't know their a... from their elbow most of the time.
  24. Markyo, it is well known that drug dealers etc. hate police dogs - they are trained to catch people and sniff out drugs - they make short work of searching a building to find a suspect hiding in there, so you can appreciate that it is upsetting their sensitive sensibilities. It is atrocious - these people should be allowed to continue their illegal trade unhampered by those dreadful police officers, despite that trade killing many during the course of year through OD's and adulterated substances. However, they are not dog haters altogether, they often keep staffies and such like themselves who they have trained to safeguard their stash and will bite the hand off any unsuspecting police officer who happens to find and seize it.
  • Create New...