91热爆

Dear Newsnight

I see the Americans have got what they wanted

billions will now flow to America to pay for this over specified deterrent, with the decisions taken far too early (I wonder why)

I also query why we need to send the deterrent thousands of miles from our shores right into the teeth of a possible enemy? This ramps up the whole cost and put the whole deterrent at risk, it seems daft too me. Perhaps our subs never actually venture out of home waters and perhaps spend their time endlessly sailing around the Orkney islands or sitting for months at a time at the bottom of the Firth of Clyde? If this is the case the vote tonight is for money to pay for some other weapon system. What is it?

perhaps there鈥檚 only one as a friend suggested and they keep changing the name plate (just joking with this one)

billions to flow to the US nuclear industry for reactors

our forces sent to fight Americas wars

it all seems a little strange to me.
i read that Mr Blair went to America in 1986 against nuclear weapons and when he flew back a few weeks later he had turned into a supporter of the nuclear deterrent. If he can change his mind so quickly then perhaps he can do so again, and delay the decision or go perhaps for a scaled down version under our control this time, which would do the same job for less.

mmmmmmmmmm

and worst of all the pirates have taken over the Blue Peter ship, that鈥檚 pushing it a bit,

what will it take to put the back bone back into this weak country and use our votes at least to make the politicians put the national interest before their own?

"We now have the ability to destroy the world. It is, I regret to say, natural human behaviour that, when we have the ability to do something, sooner or later we try it out. That will happen, I believe, before climate change has had time to do it for us."

- CHAIR OF DEFENCE SELECT COMMITTEE JAMES ARBUTHNOT

It is this issue, along with others, that has let me into dissolution regarding Britain's politics. After seeing New Labour rise (and perhaps fall) through my life, I am now of voting age. I'm about to turn 19 in April and I find the idea of a general election frightening because there is no political party that I could vote for. I always viewed our situation as 'voting for the lesser of two evils' but it is this situation that has my generation underperforming at the polls.

How can anyone possibly justify keeping (let alone updating) trident?

We have said we would do our utmost to rid our country of nuclear weapons and we are now expected to turn all that around and carry on building our 'defence'. When will we reach the laughable heights of the US? Why does Mr. Blair think there is so much international contempt for the United States? Why can't we lead the way to disarmament?

Imagine an old Mexican Standoff. Just like in the Movies. All the characters with guns held at each other - if one person doesn't put a gun down, there is zero chance of survival. If every country is sat there with their fingers twitchy on the trigger, what chance does anyone have?

The topic of defining 'Britain-ness' had been floating about for a while now. Cultural identity is lacking in our society. I was born in this country, raised in this country, educated, lived, and worked for this country. Do I feel part of it? Not anymore.

I am delighted that MPs have voted for the replacement of the Trident system which has proved to be a very effective deterrent for many years. I think that it is quite right that the decision has been taken now and planning begins for the replacent which is needed by 2024 when Trident reaches the end of its life expectancy. It is all very well to say the expected 拢15-20 billion cost of replacement could be better spent on education or the NHS or both. No good having a good education system or NHS if it cannot be defended. I am disappointed that some MPs voted against the replacement for Trident and happen to think that they are prepared to place this country in great danger from attack by known and unknown enemies if we are not adequately defended. I will sleep easier in my bed tonight knowing that Trident will be replaced by another updated modern system.

I think it's time Kirsty was farmed out to greener pastures. She's starting to resemble her spoof on "Dead Ringers". That interview over Trident was dreadful. She got her facts catastrophically wrong at one point and just turned round and pretended it hadn't happened. Come on Kirsty pay attention to your briefing notes!

Bio economic discrimination works where nuclear deterrent does not... nuclear deterrence did not stop any terrorist activities or recruitment of antagonists against our nation..it did not actually stop leadership of Cuba or Russia or Vietnam or Iraq or Iran...

Biological discrimination works,,, eg severe sickness of extreme holocaustic ayatollahs and their supporters works when they lose their voices and physical potencies...

When the Yassar Arafat the PLO leader got weak and he died and his politics moved on... no nuclear weapons were needed....

Who cares if our politics are differently understood...we can't even appreciate each others...

Extreme deterrence failed with Korea as it fails in the street the risk escalates into an arms race and a war of words and intimidations...

Deterrence and coerce are failed philosophies only the desire to do business negotiably keeps us safe...that is necessarily base on progressing understanding and communication...

Bizarrely people expect us to love them more than ourselves because they have phallic totems that can destroy us??!!

Your - and others' - coverage of the nuclear deterrence has failed to note three points:

1. Independence? Its use depends on American consent so it's use is not an independent choice - would the USA ask our permission before firing any missles? The French do not have this problem and can genuinely boast an independent force.

2. what has been approved is the reliable and versatile nuclear submarine delivery system - not the warheads which need not be nuclear.

Weapons development has offered an option of conventional weapons aboard these submarines. Using current technology and currently tested multiple warheads an adequate defence can be mustered without the doomsday decisions so beloIved of, for example, President Kennedy in his Cuban debacle.

Hairtrigger politics means unstable politics.

3. Another point that was not embraced is the three-line whip imposed on his Tory party by Mr Cameron. Tony Blair did - to his credit - allow a free vote with the government party.

How can such a horrendously critical vote - recall the Cuba Crisis - be left to whipping? Conscience is the only governing factor on this doomsday decision.

Otherwise, a good programme...

Kirsty Wark's performance is abysmal. Another example of the celtic cacophany that plagues TV but moreover the mumbled slurred sentences. Has she a drink problem?

TRIDENT a TRIvialisation DENaturalisation Totem...

Armies conquered lands for great landlords and helped establish nations and colonial trade...they more than paid for themselves...

How does 拢20billion of annihilation opportunity win back 拢20 billion + of tradables???

Its good to see parliament working properly without the tyranny of party line and in the overall national interest. Perhaps this type of vote should operate on most controversial subjects, the only problem is that it can't be used for issues like those related to climate change as all the politicians have had their brains permanently washed by the same flawed propaganda. Contrary to the belief of some commentators here, I expect that most of the 拢20 Bn will be spent here in the UK, thus providing sustainable well paid long term jobs the economy needs It will almost certainly guarantee the future of 3500 jobs in Barrow in Furness for the next 20 years along with many others in the UK, which at a billion pounds a year probably works out cheaper than paying more people the dole.

To get a real economic boost Barrow badly needs to see the construction of a Morecambe bay barrage, which could generate more than a conventional power station of carbon free electricity and put Barrow back where it belongs as an integral part of north Lancashire. The savings in CO2 emissions of all transport currently trailing round two sides of the of the bay triangle is probably worthwhile on its own without the potential carbon free electric. However I expect that the anti-nuclear eco-fascists will squeal about the impact on birds etc so it will take twice as long and cost twice as much as it needs to. Its pretty obvious that many politicians rate the welfare of animals greater than that of the people, but if you can't trust Blue Peter, how can you trust the future of Britain's defence without the nuclear deterrent.

Last night's Blue Peter story, and

sadly sums up our cynical zeitgeist. If that doesn't suffice, perhaps some comments on the first episode of the 91热爆's "The Trap" at the end of this other paper's blog might?

Maybe Newsnight at some future date could use the ETS announcement referenced in Newsnight blog comment 49:

/blogs/newsnight/2007/03/monday_12_march_2007.html

to invite politicians and knowledgeable talking heads to enlighten us as to how our government's (allegedly evidence driven) policies serve to protect us from the potentially dire consequences of perhaps the most politically incorrect (if not self-censored), slow burning, human, problem of all time - namely high heritabilty (h2) of cognitive ability, coupled with demonstrable dysgenic fertility?

Perhaps the "experts" could be asked to explain how, in the longer term, current policies (such as open borders and the evidence bereft assertion that education is a palliative or worse still, a panacea), are not just more populist window-dressing, but downright misleading and dishonest and more likely to exacerbate this "driver" by taking the brakes off even further at the wrong end of the ability distribution?

I refer to the newsnight story regarding alleged transnational corruption and the OECD. Peter Marshall is really drumming this story out. Marshall was seen the other day talking to French and USA competitors of BAE systems - they were obviously making much of alleged corruption because they lost the business, they didn't offer enough perks - unlike the British negotiators and now they have sour grapes. How dare the USA say anything about corrupt weapons dealing - they are the MOST corrupt
(one word.. contra)
Marshall is intent on making mischief by trying to bring Britain and BAE systems into disrepute - with the aid of the current crop of lilly livered 91热爆 journalists - all seeking revenge on this Government. The other day Marshall had a pop at the Fraud Chief but despite his efforts didn't get anything substantial. Is Marshall all tip and no iceberg? Why does he continue to jeopardise thousands of British jobs in the weapons industry - for a personal moral crusade - Who's bovvered about how we got the business.. Marshall?

Wednesday, 14 March was a big night for Newsnight. We had Trident, House of Lords reform and Blue Peter.

Blue Peter: Given the previous controversy about Kirsty Wark's relations as a journalist with the First Minister of the Scottish Parliament, my sympathy was with Mr Deverell. However, he was not asked to say why it took from Nov 06 to Mar 07 to find out the mistake and admit it. Nor was the complainant asked who put her up to posting the details on a website to force the disclosure. She knew in November 06 and did not complain.

H of L Reform: A pleasure to see the ennobled former H of C Speaker still being called Betty Boothroyd and equally forthright in her views. David Miliband needs more Parliamentary experience before he can become PM I gather. Shame though that she supports the retention of privilege through no change in the form of the upper house. The whole point is that it needs more power, as the H of C has effectively become presidential with no control from the Monarch. Elect them all I say.

Trident: Whether or not we need it, the shame is it costs so much. It is not clear we need it now in its present form. Who gets most out of having it? The UK or the US? Is the symbiotic cost shared according to the symbiotic imperialism? Or are we paying for the US to punch above its moral justification?

Finally, I am sorry to agree that Kirsty Wark has become something short of Newsnight's greatest asset. Bring in Bridget Kendall I suggest.

Newsnight 14 March 2007: The OECD feels very upset about the way the UK handled the investigation into alleged bribery by a UK company in obtaining a defence supply contract from a foreign power. Regrettably the UK terminated the investigation before the facts were publicly tested in court so we cannot know whether the OECD has a real grievance or not. But we suspect they might have grounds for concern.

We should upset the OECD at our peril. Our relations with it do not stop at anti-corruption measures. We have OECD double tax treaties with all other OECD member countries. These allow UK businesses to operate internationally with credit by all OECD regimes for the taxes paid in all other OECD regimes. If one of our counterparties broke one of these agreements our export trade would die.

What is more, you might not realise how it puts your pension at risk. If you work in the UK for a company that is owned in an OECD member state, the company can give the Pension Protection Fund a guarantee as Type A capital for your pension scheme. Suppose it was necessary to call one in and the counterparty defaulted? Do not underestimate the risk. A guarantee might have been given by a company in the OECD that felt it lost business because of someone else's bribery.

It's clean up time for Tony Blair and a repair job on our OECD relationships. Eat all the dirt it takes Tony. Your legacy could depend on it.

Blue Peter latest.

In connection with the 'editorial error' that duped children investigators are believed to be now looking to question a mysterious childrens tv employee who goes under the name of 'Mr D. Arthur Vader'.

No Toilets in Norfolk?

The local tourist board used to promote the region as 'Norfolk 'n' Good'. Clearly, bored humourists once lived in the Tourist Board Office.

Note how the Governments (Labour Party) 'Ethical Foreign Policy on Arms sales' bites the dust when they are caught out.
Also didn't the Director of the SFO state that it was he who suspended the investigation, when in fact Tony Blair clearly stated it was he who stopped it.

Did the poor/sad Director get a message from a friend regarding Dr. David Kelly.

The OECD will rightly deal with the Former UK as they would any-other Banana republic.
And as I understand it, the USA is also investigating.

TONY FELLOWS - The end justifies the means does it?
This was not the comments and accusation aimed at a Conservative Government in the selling arms and crowd control prods - was it?
Funnily enough - The 91热爆 did have a field day back then, didn't YOU KIRSTY, another champagne socialist.
By definition - Hypocrites!

George@6
Kirsty is hot stuff ! I fantasize about her being Mrs Robinson guess who plays the Dustin Hoffman part? WooooHoooooo!

I must confess to being slightly baffled by the piece on Holt.Why can't the village simply put up some of the coin operated makeshift public loos so familiar to us in London? Are the council's hands tied in some way that Ken Livingston's are not? I have often been "caught short" on London's streets and these have made our capital considerably more hospitable( even if somewhat panic- inducing when the door jams).

It is actually quite difficult to find a public loo even in London-where is a loo when you need one? The odds are probably more in favour of finding a seller of The Big Issue.I tend to resort to looking for a pub,but it is no joke trying to push your way through the crowds of drunken hooligans who feel free to spill their stale beer on you from sheer malice.