Verbal

They are, but they're prone to the weird logical fallacy that any suggestion that the object of their worship is imaginary means they are too.

Scrooge was right. Sod Christmas.

Oh dear. That rather proves my point.

What should we discuss then Turkish darling? Needlework? Or how some posters on here aren't the knuckle-headed, racist-but-don't-call-me-that, schoolyard bullies that you clearly aspire to be?

What a master debater you are!

"...and excessive pedantry." Sorry, left that bit off.

No, but I did google it and found this: "The common signs of it are profuse sweating, fear of dying, shortness of breath, fast heartbeat, nausea, vomiting, loneliness, dizziness, inability to think clearly, mouth dryness, and being aloof from the situation."

That's a bit of a turn up. I thought you'd say yes, as our resident bibliophobe.

These 'ancient peoples' are, on the one hand, Palestinians (or more legally precisely Israeli Arabs, since they are Israeli citizens) whose documented legal rights to their homes in East Jerusalem for example failed to protect them from the evict-and-demolish squads, and on the other hand, Russians, Americans and other emigres. The violent evictions in East Jerusalem have been going on for decades, in a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing. East Jerusalem is a microcosm for the systematic dispossession that has been going on since 1948 that was 'necessary' for the emigres arriving in such waves after the second world war. That there is a deep-rooted injustice at the heart of the 'Palestinian Question' is not disputed by any other than rabid Zionists. The rights and wrongs of the campaigns against each other is a separate matter, though just as tragic. (As someone who's been into Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan, the price that ordinary people have paid for this is horrendous.) So, yes, I agree with you: this is totally different to the Falklands.

I'd love to see this - Farago offering to trade his 0 seats for a senior government position - presumably for the aviation portfolio.

I do apologise. I would like to see Mark Reckless leading the Party. Apart from having a stupid name, he has a real talent to lead the Party where it deserves to go.

Aidan Burley. He'd be a good choice.

"A good Tory PM' ought to be the standard dictionary definition of an oxymoron...or some part of that term.

He's the 'sort of bloke' who appeals to the ludicrously over-represented forelock-tugging wannabe Tory grandees on this site, but 'universal appeal' is laughable.

Would this be the same Boris Johnson who had to be lectured by his own staff to bother turning up as Mayor occasionally and getting involved in decisions rather than mooning about wasted chances to make it big on the national stage? As Londoners know too well, he's a voluble waste of space whose only good idea (actually not his) is the Boris bike.

As the realities become clearer those numbers will change. Cameron's veto did not prevent powers shifting from London to Brussels. The proposal from Germany was merely that euro-zone member countries - of which Britain is not one - would more tightly co-ordinate their budgets. Nor was Britain seeking an opt-out for EU regulation on financial services, but merely a unanimous vote on certain financial-services issues. He also sought to prevent the transaction tax being used by Frankfurt to remove euro-transacted business from the Square Mile. Dave did NOT seek to block a financial transaction tax as such, nor was he seeking weaker EU regulation of the banks. Nor, above all, was he seeking to weaken repatriate any powers from Brussels to London. Above all, he was trying very hard, beneath the pizzazz, to be as circumspect as possible, given that the stability of the euro-zone is essential to British bankers, who, at the end of June this year, hold about £3/4 of a trillion in Euro-denominated sovereign debt. The only tangible gain made by Dave was on behalf of the French, who didn't want Germany's budgetary controls anyway. Sarkozy was off the hook with voters in France thanks to Cameron. And that really is about it. So you can ignore all the breast beating by euro-sceptics. This government and this Dave-led Tory Party, is having nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of withdrawal from the EU.

That brings back memories. Whatever happened to tommac?

Not so fast Tory boy. Labour and Lib Dem voters still far outnumber Tories, even while Dave is on a very temporary high. An electoral majority for the swivel-eyed Bullingdon clique is still far over the horizon.

A completely inappropriate comment. As a senior member of the liberal elite I have special privileges. And I'm only trying to help. Dave's set the course for the destruction of the coalition and the stripping of the City of billions of euros of business, so Post-Dave Britain is nearer than you think. I hope and expect that Frank Sweeney can count on your vote.

Well that's your choice and your problem that I'm a 'target for vitriol' - this a discussion forum not an excuse for the socially inadequate to spunk 'vitriol'. I just wish you could resist blubbering, foaming-at-the-mouth digressions into personal abuse and stay on topic. If not, fine. I'll just have to skip over your posts. Somehow I don't think I'll be missing much.

Just can't resist can you. Pity about the spelling though. How about debating the issues rather than using every opportunity for childish ad hominem pokes.

If you read that carefully you should be worried. How badly do you want to get into bed with Greeks (nation-wise)?

Left or right, Sweden is and has been for ages a very well run welfare state with still high rates of taxation compared to the UK.

You distribute your sarcasm so liberally and aimlessly it's hard to know who you're directing it at. I'm just reporting a fact, not commenting on it.

Neither is in the eurozone, so once Britain split, it was bound to be difficult to keep them onside.