Xircal

9 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I hadn't realised the decision wasn't expected until next year!

 

Stupid really, as of course such an important decision would take some time  (embarrassed emoticon).

This report from Reuters seems to suggest the bill the government would introduce should they lose the Supreme Court hearing is sufficient to proceed with triggering Article 50 at the end of March. http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-breakingviews-idUKKBN13U20Y

According to the LBC video clip in this Independent report, she'll lose the appeal: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-leaked-document-reveals-still-no-plan-article-50-a7417931.html

22 hours ago, Anthony5 said:

 

Since the article you linked to is 5 months old, it should be known by now if he actually received and accepted donations from foreign governments.

 

Did he?

 

How is the complaint going? Was it accepted?

I wouldn't know: I don't have access to his bank account.

But the same can be said about HRC supposedly accepting foreign donations. Who has absolute proof that she did?

15 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

Some free advice:  kudos for your ability to wiki up "civilian control of the military", but such obvious depth of understanding notwithstanding, keep the day job and leave political science to the grown-ups

Speak for yourself.

18 hours ago, NeverSure said:

 

She doesn't need a pardon. She's innocent of any wrongdoing. That's what the Democrats tell me. 

 

Of course the new AG might decide that Hillary had criminally violated the Emoluments Clause which prohibits officials from accepting those hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign governments such as the $25 million from Saudi Arabia. That's a serious crime.

 

I'll just wait and let it play out.

 

Cheers.

 

It's no different to what Trump was doing when he was on the campaign trail: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/29/trump-campaign-donations-foreign-politicians

On 12/1/2016 at 11:06 AM, ilostmypassword said:

Actually, Trump has been saying that it won't all be a wall, but a fence in many places.  Of course, there is still his promise to make Mexico pay for it. Maybe it will end by being just a chain link fence and Trump will lend Mexico the money to finance it?

I hate to think what the interest rate will be if he does.

On 12/1/2016 at 5:38 PM, Thakkar said:

 

Meanwhile, HRC hasn't even been *charged* with a crime, let alone convicted. Not even after numerous investigations by several separate and independent bodies, some of which were openly *determined* to find reasons to lay actual charges.

Maybe Obama can preempt that by pardoning Clinton: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/would-obama-pardon-clinton-231120

15 hours ago, yellowboat said:

It will be difficult for the less than nimble minds in Washington to come to grips with the fact that the president elected owes nobody anythings.  Love him or hate him he will probably cast protocol aside if he feels it just gets in the way.

 

He probably wants Taiwan to shoulder the burden of their own defense. 

Taiwan already buys all its military hardware from the US: http://qz.com/576293/taiwan-is-buying-1-8-billion-in-military-hardware-from-the-us-and-china-is-not-happy/

According the the Independent though, the call didn't just take place out of the blue and had already been pre-arranged by both teams: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-taiwan-conflict-china-a7453411.html

But like you already mentioned, Trump doesn't seem to be bothered about diplomatic protocol so expect more fireworks along the way once he gets into office.

Same thing happened back in July, 2014: https://jingdaily.com/southeast-asia-enters-damage-control-mode-to-win-back-chinese-tourists/

5 hours ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

yea execute assad like husain so syria can be the paradise that iraq now is. america is doing most of the bombing and killing most of the civilians. how they can tell whos bombs are whos is beyond me.

The Russian air campaign comprises primarily of carpet bombing from 35,000ft while the US confines itself to surgical strikes. The US has special forces on the ground using lasers to assist aircraft to precisely hit targets thereby limiting damage to civilians. 

Russia on the other hand doesn't care who they kill and if civilians are among the dead, they won't lose any sleep over it.

14 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

What total BS.  George Washington and a number of other presidents were former military officers, most recently - and famously - Eisenhower who was a careerist; did THAT compromise the idea of "civilian control over the armed forces"?  Can't begin to count the number of former cabinet secretaries, members of the House & Senate, ambassadors, and other government executive service...   It's a GOOD thing!   The man knows the business, and Washington could use many more like him.   Mattis is no longer active; he's retired.  I.e., a civilian.   This is one of the most ridiculous claims against the man I've heard (next to heartburn over the nom de guerre thing, which is beyond laughable).

 

I guess this is the depth and level of insight we can expect to be hounding Trump FNO.  'Good to know it's nothing to be taken seriously. 

You quote a number former military men who later became president. That's fair enough, but that's not what this topic is about. It about the appointment of Defense Secretary i.e. the person tasked with overseeing control of the military. In that respect, Mattis's background is one of a former military officer rather that of a civilian.

But he may well prove to be the right man for the job if Trump continues to cosy up to Putin like he's been doing. I can't imagine Mattis being concilliatory towards the Kremlin somehow.

12 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

As a 20 year Marine veteran myself, "Mad Dog" is a Marine's Marine, and his men would follow him into hell just to slap the devil in the face. 

 

That's as maybe, but does he fit into the role of a civilian tasked with control of the military? That implies restraint which doesn't sound like one of his qualities.

12 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

Oh get over it.  Geez.  It's not his name, oh great military sensei:  the military is and always has been chock full of callsigns, aliases, etc.   I actually used to fly with a guy whose callsign actually was exactly that. 

 

Just great......another mindless backbiter sharing their deep military insight. 

But as mentioned in the OP, the position is designed to ensure civilian control over the armed forces. Mattis doesn't fit that bill: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38056197

16 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Bernie Sanders:   “Trump has endangered the jobs of workers who were previously safe in the United States. Why? Because he has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives.”

Here's another one of Bernie's tweets published on BBC News concerning his team: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38168382

It looks like the swamp is about to be expanded rather than drained.

6 hours ago, petermik said:

 

"cast aside the EU parasites" are the beaurocrats employed by the EU in Brussels dictating what is best for the UK,nothing to do with people already residing here

In what way is the EU dictating what is best for Britain?

On 12/1/2016 at 4:34 PM, Grouse said:

 

No Mayday no Pan Pan!

According to reports I've read, the pilot didn't want to declare a fuel emergency because that would have damaged the airline's reputation as a renowned soccer team carrier.

If it hadn't been for Viva Columbia flight FC8170 which had declared an emergency due to a suspected fuel leak and had been given priority landing rights, the LaMia flight might have made it. But having been instructed to maintain a holding pattern together with  atrocious weather conditions that night with low cloud cover and torrential rain, it regretably sealed their fate. 

This is the ATC recording in Spanish with English subtitles.

3 hours ago, petermik said:

3M people waiting for UK citizenship? seems crazy to me when those favouring remaining are predicting economic meltdown if we do (hopefully) cast aside the EU parasites.

Maybe they secretly know where their bread is buttered best 

Why do you refer to them as parasites? If they're working and contributing to the economy, paying taxes etc., they can hardly be considerd to be parasitic. 

13 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

David Davis has indicated that they may have to consider accepting the free movement of people if they get the trade deal.  It has also been mooted today that the UK may still have to pay into the EU after Brexit.  Progress at last!

 

Source is the BBC news which is on now.  The quotes have come straight from the MP's mouths so this isn't BBC trying to stir the pot.  In reality of course nothing is being announced as such, they are just pre-empting the negotiations

That won't go down well with the electorate who voted Leave. They want to curb immigration.

If the UK is going to allow free movement and pay into the EU budget, it might as well stay in the EU.

5 hours ago, Expatwannabee said:

The big issue is are the other 27 EU countries going to give the right to live and work for UK passport holders in their countries. They seem reluctant to say but appear to think that we should. (Or is it just some of our politicians who feel we should give assurances even if no one else does. ) Having said that I accept it is unsettling for all those in this situation but with fair play all round there should not be a problem.

PM May needs to get off her backside and trigger Article 50. Once that happens, the question of residency rights for both UK citizens residing in EU countries and vice-versa can be negotiated.

The same aircraft, registration number HS-TEJ was involved in another incident in June this year when the left hand engine shutdown in flight: https://www.aeroinside.com/item/7708/thai-a333-at-chiang-mai-on-jun-11th-2016-engine-shut-down-in-flight

The aircraft was also involved in another incident in October 2014 when severe turbulence caused injuries to one of the passengers: https://www.aeroinside.com/item/4872/thai-a333-at-bangkok-on-oct-5th-2014-turbulence-injures-one

The pilot flying the aircraft was also the owner of the airline according the following news report: http://www.marca.com/en/football/international-football/2016/11/29/583d93c8268e3ebc338b461b.html

The flight was also due to pickup passengers - and possibly aviation fuel? - in Sao Paulo but was prevented from doing so by legal impediments.

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not ignoring anything. Unfortunately, other than being Chicken Little, they aren't telling us as to HOW to reverse it.

However, pronouncing doom if we don't "do something", without giving any solutions that are politically acceptable, is only a good thing if one wants to be on the gravy train indefinitely and jet around the world to conferences in exotic places.

I don't think global warming can be reversed, just reduced: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

8 hours ago, webfact said:

The exact cause of the plane crash has not officially been determined.

Looking at the picture of the crashed plane my guess is that it ran out of fuel. The evidence for that is the lack of scorch marks both on the wreckage and to the surrounding terrain.

According to JacDec, the distance from the departure airport to Medelin exceeds the maximum distance the aircraft, an Avro RJ85 is rated for. http://www.jacdec.de/2016/11/29/2016-11-28-lamia-avro-rj-85-crashed-near-medellin-with-81-on-board/

Here's what the land masses would look like if Antarctica melted and the oceans rose by a predicted 195 feet / 60 metres: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/09/rising-seas/if-ice-melted-map