UK Politics

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by Mari

Oy! Let's keep it decent. No need to go name calling. >_<

But I do wonder why you call Iraq a success, Hector? What do you base that on?

Hehe, I was about to say 'He started it..'

Basically I've had a couple of hundred discussions about the failures and (lack of) merits of the current administration, and we've come to 2008, and the lack of humility it displays, the continued seriously poor performance it keeps exhibiting, tells me we've come to the breaking point. I.e., there have been so, so many instances where the current admininistration could set things only slightly right, and then it goes ahead, full steam, and blows it, yet again, and again, and again. The latest example being only a few days old, with Bush' childish ranting in Jerusalem. It's frankly pathetic.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

The idea that the international media coverage of Bush has been bashing, unuanced and one-sided is simply wrong.

Generalized statement containing an assertion not proved.

There have been numerous instances where Bush has received media coverage that has put him in a favourable light. The best example that comes to mind is in the aftermath of 9/11.

Again, a most unique situation for a president in terms of favorability.

I am myself a shining example of the overall nuanced coverage of Bush for the last 8 years, having been largely optimistic on his behalf in 2000 and a few weeks into the War in Afghanistan. But it has been the incredibly, fantastic long run of failures by the Bush Administration that has caused media coverage to shift over on his failures.

Unprovable and highly doubtful, considering the over-zealous use of adjectives in all your posts. Much more likely is that you are an Obama operative posing as a Frenchman.

The Economist, one of the most respectable newspapers in the world, long gave Bush the benefit of the doubt, but over the course of his presidency it is of course impossible to ignore the sheer stupidity that the man shows.
It's just breathtaking.

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

There's a good reason why Bush is seen as incompetent. The reason? Because he IS incompetent.

OMG, that is so zen! *swoon*

I just listed a number of points that underline his total domestic failure, and there are so many important benchmarks that didn't make that list, including his domestic surveillance controversy, and his spending rate (which is just mind-blowing, especially for a conservative)

Of which you are obviously not one. So why do you care about spending? Conservatives do care about that, btw.

He is by all measures the worst president ever. That is not some biased, unuanced view, but a view held by so, so, so, so many people with the know.

Well that settles it all right!

Look pal, you want to accuse me of being over-the-top because I used 'dumbocrats'? Take a look at your adjective throwing. "So so so many people in the know" is a lame reason for Bush's purported stupidity.

(Imagine Rex, BJ, Gaffer being "in the know")

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

See that'd be comforting if it were true. It would in fact mean that he isn't completely incompetent. Alas..

So you've got the part where you say Bush is stupid down pat. Are there any more lines in your play?

But Bush' domestic achievements is even more abysmal than his record abroad. Why? Because he has no achievements domestically.

Two words: The economy.

Let's see, G.W. Bush has turned a national surplus into a mind-shattering deficit and practically ruined the U.S. Treasury.
Never have as many American filed private bankrupcy as during Bush's reign.
[/quote]

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

The latest example being only a few days old, with Bush' childish ranting in Jerusalem. It's frankly pathetic.

Read it:

Originally Posted by Predisent Bush's Speech to the Knesset

2:55 P.M. (Local) THE PRESIDENT: President Peres and Mr. Prime Minister, Madam Speaker, thank very much for hosting this special session. President Beinish, Leader of the Opposition Netanyahu, Ministers, members of the Knesset, distinguished guests: Shalom. Laura and I are thrilled to be back in Israel. We have been deeply moved by the celebrations of the past two days. And this afternoon, I am honored to stand before one of the world's great democratic assemblies and convey the wishes of the American people with these words: Yom Ha'atzmaut Sameach. (Applause.)

It is a rare privilege for the American President to speak to the Knesset. (Laughter.) Although the Prime Minister told me there is something even rarer -- to have just one person in this chamber speaking at a time. (Laughter.) My only regret is that one of Israel's greatest leaders is not here to share this moment. He is a warrior for the ages, a man of peace, a friend. The prayers of the American people are with Ariel Sharon. (Applause.)

We gather to mark a momentous occasion. Sixty years ago in Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel's independence, founded on the "natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate." What followed was more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David -- a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael.

Eleven minutes later, on the orders of President Harry Truman, the United States was proud to be the first nation to recognize Israel's independence. And on this landmark anniversary, America is proud to be Israel's closest ally and best friend in the world.

The alliance between our governments is unbreakable, yet the source of our friendship runs deeper than any treaty. It is grounded in the shared spirit of our people, the bonds of the Book, the ties of the soul. When William Bradford stepped off the Mayflower in 1620, he quoted the words of Jeremiah: "Come let us declare in Zion the word of God." The founders of my country saw a new promised land and bestowed upon their towns names like Bethlehem and New Canaan. And in time, many Americans became passionate advocates for a Jewish state.

Centuries of suffering and sacrifice would pass before the dream was fulfilled. The Jewish people endured the agony of the pogroms, the tragedy of the Great War, and the horror of the Holocaust -- what Elie Wiesel called "the kingdom of the night." Soulless men took away lives and broke apart families. Yet they could not take away the spirit of the Jewish people, and they could not break the promise of God. (Applause.) When news of Israel's freedom finally arrived, Golda Meir, a fearless woman raised in Wisconsin, could summon only tears. She later said: "For two thousand years we have waited for our deliverance. Now that it is here it is so great and wonderful that it surpasses human words."

The joy of independence was tempered by the outbreak of battle, a struggle that has continued for six decades. Yet in spite of the violence, in defiance of the threats, Israel has built a thriving democracy in the heart of the Holy Land. You have welcomed immigrants from the four corners of the Earth. You have forged a free and modern society based on the love of liberty, a passion for justice, and a respect for human dignity. You have worked tirelessly for peace. You have fought valiantly for freedom.

My country's admiration for Israel does not end there. When Americans look at Israel, we see a pioneer spirit that worked an agricultural miracle and now leads a high-tech revolution. We see world-class universities and a global leader in business and innovation and the arts. We see a resource more valuable than oil or gold: the talent and determination of a free people who refuse to let any obstacle stand in the way of their destiny.

I have been fortunate to see the character of Israel up close. I have touched the Western Wall, seen the sun reflected in the Sea of Galilee, I have prayed at Yad Vashem. And earlier today, I visited Masada, an inspiring monument to courage and sacrifice. At this historic site, Israeli soldiers swear an oath: "Masada shall never fall again." Citizens of Israel: Masada shall never fall again, and America will be at your side.

This anniversary is a time to reflect on the past. It's also an opportunity to look to the future. As we go forward, our alliance will be guided by clear principles -- shared convictions rooted in moral clarity and unswayed by popularity polls or the shifting opinions of international elites.

We believe in the matchless value of every man, woman, and child. So we insist that the people of Israel have the right to a decent, normal, and peaceful life, just like the citizens of every other nation. (Applause.)

We believe that democracy is the only way to ensure human rights. So we consider it a source of shame that the United Nations routinely passes more human rights resolutions against the freest democracy in the Middle East than any other nation in the world. (Applause.)

We believe that religious liberty is fundamental to a civilized society. So we condemn anti-Semitism in all forms -- whether by those who openly question Israel's right to exist, or by others who quietly excuse them.

We believe that free people should strive and sacrifice for peace. So we applaud the courageous choices Israeli's leaders have made. We also believe that nations have a right to defend themselves and that no nation should ever be forced to negotiate with killers pledged to its destruction. (Applause.)

We believe that targeting innocent lives to achieve political objectives is always and everywhere wrong. So we stand together against terror and extremism, and we will never let down our guard or lose our resolve. (Applause.)

The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies.

This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.

And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the "elimination" of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant "Death to Israel, Death to America!" That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that "the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties." And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It's natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Applause.)

Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you. (Applause.)

America stands with you in breaking up terrorist networks and denying the extremists sanctuary. America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapons would be an unforgivable betrayal for future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. (Applause.)

Ultimately, to prevail in this struggle, we must offer an alternative to the ideology of the extremists by extending our vision of justice and tolerance and freedom and hope. These values are the self-evident right of all people, of all religions, in all the world because they are a gift from the Almighty God. Securing these rights is also the surest way to secure peace. Leaders who are accountable to their people will not pursue endless confrontation and bloodshed. Young people with a place in their society and a voice in their future are less likely to search for meaning in radicalism. Societies where citizens can express their conscience and worship their God will not export violence, they will be partners in peace.

The fundamental insight, that freedom yields peace, is the great lesson of the 20th century. Now our task is to apply it to the 21st. Nowhere is this work more urgent than here in the Middle East. We must stand with the reformers working to break the old patterns of tyranny and despair. We must give voice to millions of ordinary people who dream of a better life in a free society. We must confront the moral relativism that views all forms of government as equally acceptable and thereby consigns whole societies to slavery. Above all, we must have faith in our values and ourselves and confidently pursue the expansion of liberty as the path to a peaceful future.

That future will be a dramatic departure from the Middle East of today. So as we mark 60 years from Israel's founding, let us try to envision the region 60 years from now. This vision is not going to arrive easily or overnight; it will encounter violent resistance. But if we and future Presidents and future Knessets maintain our resolve and have faith in our ideals, here is the Middle East that we can see:

Israel will be celebrating the 120th anniversary as one of the world's great democracies, a secure and flourishing homeland for the Jewish people. The Palestinian people will have the homeland they have long dreamed of and deserved -- a democratic state that is governed by law, and respects human rights, and rejects terror. From Cairo to Riyadh to Baghdad and Beirut, people will live in free and independent societies, where a desire for peace is reinforced by ties of diplomacy and tourism and trade. Iran and Syria will be peaceful nations, with today's oppression a distant memory and where people are free to speak their minds and develop their God-given talents. Al Qaeda and Hezbollah and Hamas will be defeated, as Muslims across the region recognize the emptiness of the terrorists' vision and the injustice of their cause.

Overall, the Middle East will be characterized by a new period of tolerance and integration. And this doesn't mean that Israel and its neighbors will be best of friends. But when leaders across the region answer to their people, they will focus their energies on schools and jobs, not on rocket attacks and suicide bombings. With this change, Israel will open a new hopeful chapter in which its people can live a normal life, and the dream of Herzl and the founders of 1948 can be fully and finally realized.

This is a bold vision, and some will say it can never be achieved. But think about what we have witnessed in our own time. When Europe was destroying itself through total war and genocide, it was difficult to envision a continent that six decades later would be free and at peace. When Japanese pilots were flying suicide missions into American battleships, it seemed impossible that six decades later Japan would be a democracy, a lynchpin of security in Asia, and one of America's closest friends. And when waves of refugees arrived here in the desert with nothing, surrounded by hostile armies, it was almost unimaginable that Israel would grow into one of the freest and most successful nations on the earth.

Yet each one of these transformations took place. And a future of transformation is possible in the Middle East, so long as a new generation of leaders has the courage to defeat the enemies of freedom, to make the hard choices necessary for peace, and stand firm on the solid rock of universal values.

Sixty years ago, on the eve of Israel's independence, the last British soldiers departing Jerusalem stopped at a building in the Jewish quarter of the Old City. An officer knocked on the door and met a senior rabbi. The officer presented him with a short iron bar -- the key to the Zion Gate -- and said it was the first time in 18 centuries that a key to the gates of Jerusalem had belonged to a Jew. His hands trembling, the rabbi offered a prayer of thanksgiving to God, "Who had granted us life and permitted us to reach this day." Then he turned to the officer, and uttered the words Jews had awaited for so long: "I accept this key in the name of my people."

Over the past six decades, the Jewish people have established a state that would make that humble rabbi proud. You have raised a modern society in the Promised Land, a light unto the nations that preserves the legacy of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. And you have built a mighty democracy that will endure forever and can always count on the United States of America to be at your side. God bless. (Applause.)

END

[Coffeehouse]

That less than mediocre way of arguing won't get you anywhere.

For all the comments you make about my comments (we could go on forever couldn't we?), the bottom-line is that when we start discussing the issues you really are confronted with a serious credibility problem.

So let's discuss Iraq since you call it a success.
Let's discuss Afghanistan, as you also call it a success.

Where do you want to begin? 2001? 2002? Present?

*And we can also discuss that speech if you like*

[Tessar]

Hey guys, just a reminder to please stay civil.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Mari

Oy! Let's keep it decent. No need to go name calling. >_<

But I do wonder why you call Iraq a success, Hector? What do you base that on?

1) On the fact that the people of Iraq (incl. prominent imams and other clerics) have turned away from Al Qaeda and condemned them.

2) Violence is down dramatically, Al Qaeda in Iraq is now miniscule.

3) The Maliki government has asserted itself as being capable to take on the Mahdi Army in Basra and has forced the hand of Mophead Al-Sadr.

4) the government is making progress in domestic matters

I know none of you know this because good news from Iraq isn't news for the major media outlets on TV...but it has been acknowledged by the NYT and the WaPo among others.

It's not over by yet, but we're definitely on top. Not tentatively like last year, but really in good shape.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

1) On the fact that the people of Iraq (incl. prominent imams and other clerics) have turned away from Al Qaeda and condemned them.

2) Violence is down dramatically, Al Qaeda in Iraq is now miniscule.

3) The Maliki government has asserted itself as being capable to take on the Mahdi Army in Basra and has forced the hand of Mophead Al-Sadr.

4) the government is making progress in domestic matters

I know none of you know this because good news from Iraq isn't news for the major media outlets on TV...but it has been acknowledged by the NYT and the WaPo among others.

It's not over by yet, but we're definitely on top. Not tentatively like last year, but really in good shape.

I will respond to these 4 points in a moment. Need a cup of coffee first. This will be entertaining

And of course I find it fascinating that you (And I quote you) "know none of you know this because good news from Iraq isn't news for the major media outlets on TV"

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

That less than mediocre way of arguing won't get you anywhere.

For all the comments you make about my comments (we could go on forever couldn't we?), the bottom-line is that when we start discussing the issues you really are confronted with a serious credibility problem.

So let's discuss Iraq since you call it a success.
Let's discuss Afghanistan, as you also call it a success.

Where do you want to begin? 2001? 2002? Present?

*And we can also discuss that speech if you like*

That's cute of you to frame it that way. I didn't start the credibility stuff...you're the one who is throwing adjectives like a man in a sinking rowboat. You never once presented a single real arguement, only your list of grievances. Why should I respond like an encylopedia when you haven't been substantial yourself?

Let's talk Iraq.

1. First, two graphs that compare how much violence has gone down from 2006 to 2007:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive.../01/019573.php

Now, 2007 was still violent, and here we are in 2008 in even better shape not only in regards to violence levels, but in progress by the Iraqi government.

2. From the AP, this story about governmental workings in Iraq. Notice especially this bit:

But al-Hashemi and other Sunni leaders apparently have been swayed by al-Maliki's crackdown against Shiite militias that began late last month and focused on the feared Mahdi Army of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Al-Maliki also has threatened to politically isolate al-Sadr if the Mahdi Army is not disbanded.

source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

I will respond to these 4 points in a moment. Need a cup of coffee first. This will be entertaining

It will indeed. I can't wait to read the Huffington Pothole again for the 1000th time today...

And of course I find it fascinating that you (And I quote you) "know none of you know this because good news from Iraq isn't news for the major media outlets on TV"

Right. On TV the goods news from Iraq is usually skipped. I read print-version news in various forms.

[Coffeehouse]

Let's be clear about the question at hand.
You've been asked why you define Iraq as a success, and you've answered in 4 points.

But the inescapable truth is that however much it would be alot 'nicer' to define success in new, 2008 terms, the reality is that the benchmarks for success were set not today, but in 2002 and 2003. That's the way the world works my friend.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

1) On the fact that the people of Iraq (incl. prominent imams and other clerics) have turned away from Al Qaeda and condemned them.

This assertion is very telling in that it shows just how bad things have gotten.

The United States of America (along with mainly the UK) invaded Iraq in March 2003 on the pretense that Saddam Hussein's Baathist Iraq had WMD's and that he was likely to use them in the near future.
In addition to this, the Bush Administration argued that the following were also goals:
- Freeing the Iraqi people from a tyrant.
- Spreading democracy in the Middle East.

Thus, we have three important benchmarks to see success in Iraq.
1. The WMD's must be found, and must be shown to have been available for use.
2. The tyranny in Iraq must be removed.
3. Democracy must spread as an effect of the invasion of Iraq.

Today in 2008 we see:
1. No WMD's, not today, not yesterday, not 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 years ago.
2. The people of Iraq were freed from Saddam Hussein, but as so many news stories from Iraq, and interviews with Iraqis in Iraq show, the tyranny of Saddam Hussein has been replaced with a multiple of new tyranny's.
Tyranny of fear, Tyranny of Al Qaeda, Tyranny of suicide bombings, Tyranny of house-to-house inspections by U.S. forces, Tyranny of Freedom of Movement, Tyranny of Deprivation of the Basic Necessities of a Society: Lack of water, Lack of electricity, Lack of food, etc.
3. The last one is a no-brainer. Democracy is in the Middle East is as futile as ever. Lebanon, Palestine, Iran, Egypt, Syria, etc, etc.

But let's return to your point.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

1) On the fact that the people of Iraq (incl. prominent imams and other clerics) have turned away from Al Qaeda and condemned them.

This quote is of course very telling. You have basically come to the point where you are defining, right here and now, that success is the Iraqi people turning away from Al Qaeda and condemning them.
That is truly remarkable. The Iraqi people had nothing in common with Al Qaeda before the invasion. None of the suicide bombers in 9/11 were Iraqis. The fundamentalist Islamic views of Al Qaeda and its violent ways of death were non-existant in Iraq, and then 5 years on after the invasion, you are characterizing it as a success that they are turning away from it.

Point 2:

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

2) Violence is down dramatically, Al Qaeda in Iraq is now miniscule.

The second point you make is that violence is down dramatically in Iraq. This is a very vague assertion, and I'd like it if you explained to me what you define as an acceptable amount of violence to be occurring in Iraq for you to get a good night's sleep.
Also please identify an acceptable level of Al Qaeda activity in Iraq.

Point 3:

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

3) The Maliki government has asserted itself as being capable to take on the Mahdi Army in Basra and has forced the hand of Mophead Al-Sadr.

You define the 3rd point of success in Iraq that the current government of Iraq proper (bar the Kurdish government, let's not forget them!) fights a non-governmental force in Basra, and settles for a cease-fire, whilst being completely unable to oust Moqtada (that's his name, not Mophead) Al-Sadr politically from the very same government.
So here we have a governmental force and a non-governmental force fighting in a country where there is a 3rd force, the occupiers. This is happening 5 years after all major combat operations are over.
So I'm asking you, what is the acceptable level of conflict between the government and non-governmental forces in Iraq? Are you seriously suggesting that the current level of violence in Iraq is a success?

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

4) the government is making progress in domestic matters

That is too vague for me to answer.
What exactly is progress in domestic matters? What does that encompass?
What successes can you name for the Iraqi people?
I hope of course the answer you give takes into consideration the basic human rights promoted in the United Nations Human Rights Charter.

[Mari]

In reaction to the first link: http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

I did a statistical analysis on violence in Iraq when I was in Japan

[Curufin]

That 51 % of the American people decided to vote for Bush rather than Kerry in the re-election still suprises me to this day. But there are numerous reasons why he was re-elected, and it was as much Kerry's failure to launch an effective campaign on Bush's failures as it was the immense grassroot work the Republicans managed to get together in 2004.

I've learned to never underestimate the stupidity of the American people...

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by Curufin

I've learned to never underestimate the stupidity of the American people...

Hehe that's a bit harsh isn't it

Hector, it's been more than half an hour now, and here in Norway the time is 11.48 pm so I'll have to call it a night, but please go ahead and post your answer and I'll read it in the morning.

[Curufin]

LOL, I'm American, I've earned the right to be harsh about my own people.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Mari

In reaction to the first link: http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

I did a statistical analysis on violence in Iraq when I was in Japan

Iraq Body Count is a vast underestimate.

Did you come across the study published in the Lancet in 2004 (and followed up in 2006)?

Here, the researchers surveyed Iraqis to estimate the overall death rate and calculate the additional mortality caused by the war. They estimated that 98,000 people died as a result of the war in the first 12 months after invasion. The 2006 update estimated over 600,000 additional deaths to June 2006.

But hey, as long as the curve is going downwards that's a success, right?

[The Gaffer]

News not making the record? If only it were true. Our media decided they were bored with Labour's one-party state so they bigged up the Tories' revamped (policy-free) image. Now the Labour government is running round with its pants down, in spite of a pretty strong record and we have clowns like Boris Johnson holding high office.

And I don't agree with the focus just being on the negatives. I think that our media really try to treat Bush with the respect that being the President of US deserves. However, it's an uphill struggle, even for Murdoch rags.

I've followed US politics (from afar, admittedly) since the 1970s and I can't remember a worse president by pretty much any measure (unless you count faith-based, fact-averse politics as a positive).

The only positive thing I can find to say about him is that he increased the amount of US aid to Africa. OK, some of it was tied to faith-based programmes, and some was handed straight to the favoured faith groups entrusted to deliver them, but still.

[Mari]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Iraq Body Count is a vast underestimate.

Did you come across the study published in the Lancet in 2004 (and followed up in 2006)?

There are many studies out there and not all of them very reliable. The one I used for my presentation was more radical but also more complex with more data and different graphs. Problem was: it was from an anti-war humanist organization, so it can be easily discredited as overestimating.

This one may be more moderate, but it's still horrifying if you ask me.

[hectorberlioz]

Coffeehouse, my reply is in the Iraq thread.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Coffeehouse, my reply is in the Iraq thread.

Alright thanx. I'll respond there later in the morning.

And to this thread:

UK Politics, you are free

[The Gaffer]

FREE AT LAST! FREE AT LAST!

Free to vote on embryology and fertility regulation, in a free vote no less:

- Creation of "hybrid" human-animal embryos was approved:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7407589.stm
- An attempt to prevent the creation of "saviour siblings" was defeated:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7409264.stm

- Reduction of abortion limit from 24 to 20 weeks, voting today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7409696.stm