´óÏó´«Ã½

Not much

Comments

1. At 10:29 AM on 29 Aug 2006, Christopher wrote:

   Why start now?

   Hope you had a good one over the bank holiday weekend.

2. At 10:31 AM on 29 Aug 2006, Charles Hatton wrote:

   You'd think I'd be able to think of a comment to that ...

3. At 10:40 AM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

   Are there really no comments here ??

   I'll have to be first then, though I've nothing to say either !!

   
   Tim.C

4. At 11:26 AM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

   Me too. Mmm.

5. At 11:33 AM on 29 Aug 2006, anne wrote:

   yes, well you've had over an hour so when are you going to start writing it?

6. At 11:41 AM on 29 Aug 2006, Stephen, Leader of STROP wrote:

   Stand by your beds. A serious contribution. Sorry Eddie, but as you said nothing, I thought I would send a cat pigeon-wards:

   Terrorism.

   Why does it seem such a terrible question to ask "Why do they feel the need to do this?"? It seems to me that every terrorist/freedom fighter has a cause, and there is something about this cause that makes people act in an extreme way to get their point across.

   There is an accepted belief that to address the concerns of a terror organisation is to "Give in to terror". This is, to an extent, perfectly true. We should never give in to the demands of hijackers or kidnappers as that validates those actions as a way of getting what you want.

   My question (yes there is one) is how do we look at the issues the terror organisations raise without giving carte blanche to every organisation to use violence to change the world to their ends?

7. At 12:32 PM on 29 Aug 2006, anne wrote:

   good question Stephen. Surely we SHOULD address the issues and that is NOT giving into terrorism, it is merely an attempt to understand the concerns behind the terror and then maybe try to do something about it. Surely if the issues were looked at and addressed then people would not need to resort to violence and terror to catch the attention of the world.

   I worry that we are shown the world through a distorted lens merely because America sets much of the agenda. To take an example, while I would not be terribly happy at the thought of an Iran with nuclear weapons, by what right do the people who already have them take it upon themselves to say that other people can't have them?

   I also worry that we shall be mired for years in Iraq and Afghanistan by the clever use of the 'dying in vain' argument. This is the one that runs 'if we pull out then all our soldiers who have already lost their lives in that particular theatre of war will have 'died in vain'.' While there is another argument that says all casualties in these debacles have died in vain almost by definition, what it really does is just entrench us ever deeper since the argument becomes circualr and young men and women go on dying, - although presumably that's OK so long as they aren't 'dying in vain'.
   

8. At 12:40 PM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

   Well, as most people seem to be using this blog as a forum, odd things are happening.

   It's quite common that people play 'games' on forums - so lets try a world exclusive will only work here PM Blog Game!!!

   (Don't get excited it's not that good)

   Because people are using this like a forum, weird things are happening with respect to the time lag on posts appearing etc. - sometimes with later posts appearing before earlier posts, but still displaying in the correct order.

   So lets tey this.

   When you post a comment, put in the comment what number the comment should be - the last one I can see is Number 6 from Stephon, STROP Leader, so this should be Number 7.

   Rules:

   1) Put the proper number ie the last post you can see plus 1 (don't try and second guess it)

   2) Don't just post to play this game - or Lissa will kill me for trashing the blog. Only play this game on comments you were posting anyway.

   3) If you want to keep score, give yourself 1 penalty point for each number you are wrong by (ie if this comes up as 8, when it should be 7 I get 1 point)

   4) Lowest score is best.

   This will not work on any other forum or blog - it is unique to the PM blog.

   Let's see what happens.

   Tim.C

   PS I've spent quite a while typing this in, so there's a good chance it won't be 7 by now !!

   PPS The was originally a serious point to this idea, but true to form for this blog, I went to far and made it silly !!

9. At 12:59 PM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

   Nice to have you back Mr Ed. Good to know you get a break. Am seriously worried for Jenny Murray who doesn't seem to have taken a holiday yet.
   Missed you last week whilst sojourning in the rain in Cornwall. PM clashed with the all important early evening activity of crabbing. The only news that registered was the two-day running story about obesity - particularly striking because whenever we ate out we were presented with super-mega US-sized portions, of which only half could be sensibly eaten. A lot of food went to waste...though perhaps it being Cornwall, it was all recycled in some way?

10. At 01:01 PM on 29 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Lucky Eddie, three days off. Some of us might have had to work over the weekend, bank holiday or not. These show-biz types!! I'll bet Ed sat around drinking Chardonnay or some other fashionable drink all weekend. As for those of us who had to work and settle for a box of generic white plonk from Tesco, well, that is what we have to settle for. OK, I didn't have to work, but was just putting forth a proposition, but I'll bet some other poor sucker had to. Now, Edwardio, write something. Only five hours to PM.

11. At 01:08 PM on 29 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Sue,
    Is Mr. Ed a distant relative of Francis the talking mule?

12. At 01:19 PM on 29 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    You would think, after three days off, you would have, something to write, about,

13. At 01:30 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Rufus A Bairzarce wrote:

    Prospective post 10

    For anyone who hasn't noticed, there's another page of blog.

    P.T.O.
    

14. At 01:36 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Excellent idea Tim C. see DPM (good grief another bi-blogual day and I really have too much work to do already).

    Yes, to a much more positive world attitude towards addressing the needs of those who feel that they are so unlikely ever to be heard that they resort to terrorism/blackmail/aggression in an attempt to be noticed, regardless of the consequences. The point is that we have to be confident that not only could all be given their chance to speak, but that they would subsequently be given a fair hearing and an unmanipulated reply. Discuss.

    SB10 but there was an interruption.

15. At 01:40 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    I think that what Stephen & Anne have said is a symptom of the way that those in power manage the frames of reference to any issue. Consider the following:

    1: Iran. The US, UK, and others are raising hell about the possibility that Iran may in the future have the ability to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Why is nothing said about the obligations to all NPT signatory countries to actively try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons that are currently held? Why wasn't this point asked of the PM and the PM-in-waiting when they openly suggest that Trident should be replaced with a new generation of nuclear weapons?

    2. Israel/Lebanon/Palestine. Who decides which UN resolutions are to be vigorously enforced and others less so? Israel bitterly complained that resolution 1559 was not being complied with. Why was no mention made to other resolutions about the middle east, such as 242? Why was no pressure put on all sides to comply to that?

    Still enough depressing stuff. This should (hah!) be post 10 by Tim's game rules. I bet it won't be, though!

16. At 01:42 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    SB14
    Fan of the comma are you David?

    I bet it's easier not to gain penalty points, if you keep your posts short?

17. At 01:52 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Hey andycra10, so the secret is? Liked your site but couldn't work out how to leave a comment (techno-dinosaur at work).

    Re work, I must get back to some - no lots.

    SB18.

18. At 02:24 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    SB13

    Yup there were definitely some more on here earlier. Makes Tim's Game well nigh impossible?

19. At 02:35 PM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

    Hey Val,

    See our secret location for another secret message!

    Leaving a message on my website is impossible, so you are not a techno-donkey.

    I didn't want heavings of spam and naughty words on it, and can't do a full-time-moderation-Lissa-styley, so its email or nowt.

    But thanks for your kind words on this moderated forum/blog/messageboard. Hmm that gives me an idea .... :)

    SB18 too.

20. At 05:02 PM on 29 Aug 2006, wrote:

    Well, welcome back anyway!

21. At 05:04 PM on 29 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Valery,
    Just taking Eds lead.

22. At 07:26 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Ah - so Ed is Our Leader, Not Stephen? Where you lead, I shall, follow,

    Nope still can't think of a Deputy - oops wrong Blog.

23. At 11:42 PM on 29 Aug 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Should be 23.

    Just joining in.

24. At 08:24 AM on 30 Aug 2006, paul wrote:

    In reply to Stephen, leader of STROP (#6)

    i agree, a discussion of the causes of terrorism would be useful...However, to do so can now be construed as promoting terrorism and under the new anti-terrorism that is a crime.

    For example if you were aske to explain why someone becomes a suicide bomber, you would be committing an offence under the new laws in the UK.
    the more i read about the changing situation in the UK the happier i am that i spend most of my life outside it.

    incidentally how about this for news. I live in Abu Dhabi (no that is not the news) but this weekend we are changing it. yes that's right we are moving the weekend from thursday and friday to friday and saturday! this means that as today is effectively friday (ie the last day of the working week) i am off now for a 3 day weekend!! ha ha.

    apparently it is to do with bringing the uae closer to the west, since lots of business happens with the west. Not to bring the uae in to parity with the israeli weekend. OOPS if any of my uae collegues are reading this they might just get upset as this is a mostly muslim country!
    off for a long weekend now:
    paul

25. At 11:14 AM on 30 Aug 2006, wrote:

    25. David, Mr Ed was a talking horse. Very very clever and a bit of a hero.

26. At 12:06 PM on 30 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Sue,
    And Francis was a, er, um, talking mule. I'm old enough to remember Francis and Mr. Ed, but Francis came first. Mr. Ed was a TV copy.

27. At 01:17 PM on 30 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Just like Eric then?
    SB26

    Trying to gain some bonus points here because it seems if you post on the previous day's blog, you've less competition, and more chance of......oh never mind. I'd better check the view from the window again.

28. At 07:33 PM on 31 Aug 2006, wrote:

    David, fortunately I'm not old enough to remember either. And Eddie isn't called Francis.
    SB28