Skip to content

DEMS 2004 Posts

Liberal Democrats against BREXIT
Published January 28, 2021

Liberal Democrats against BREXIT

The Liberal Democrats could push for Britain to re-enter the European Union, a senior MP told BuzzFeed News. The Liberal Democrats are on the verge of dropping the party’s commitment to Britain’s EU membership, The Independent has learned.

MPs will try to reverse Britain’s exit by having a transition period, according to a leading MEP. MPs should support her voting against Theresa May’s Brexit deal and try to “undo” it if they get support. Scottish party leader Willie Rennie said his party was searching for darmowe porno and also turning its back on the EU after a debate on a Brexit motion. Asked about the poll results, a Scotland Yard spokesman said: “The Liberal Democrats have always been in favour of the UK staying in the European Union.

Asked if the Lib Dems should push for Britain to join the EU, he said: “The fact is we want and have a transition period to make sure trade is smooth.” When Britain left the European Union, there was not much support for re-accession campaigns for re-accession campaigns.

Relatively few Remain voters have accepted Britain’s exit from the EU. In contrast, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have remained mostly silent on the issue. Some parties are tempted to make peace with Brexit and push for a transition period that the Tories will stick to. Those with the remorse of the Brexiteers are likely to vote Labour, which stands a better chance of winning if it sides with the Liberal Democrats.

Change for all

Change UK, however, is decidedly pro-European. The party will likely pursue a re-entry policy, even if it means forging an identity and outflanking the Lib Dem party, which has been cautious about Europe. The party is reportedly considering re-applying for EU membership if the vote to leave is a second referendum.

The Liberal Democrats are fighting this election as an inexcusably pro-European party courting the people’s vote so they might get a chance to erodate. They have no other hard options but to stay in the EU. We will fight them because every Liberal Democrat vote is a vote to stop Brexit. If the Liberal Democrats save Britain from Brexit – top of the spending list – the first people will be on it, “he said to loud applause.

The Liberal Democrats will try to present themselves as the party of anti-Brexit purism by offering a plan to stop and reverse Brexit. Brexit sceptics must accept that Britain has twice wanted to leave the European Union and voted to. Next time the British Government signs a fundamental change in Britain and the EU’s relationship, we will continue to push for a referendum on admission or exit. The Liberal Democrats “plan to rejoin the EU after a transition period would carry significant risks for any MEP seeking to reverse Brexit.

Suppose leader Jo Swinson is elected to Downing Street at the next election. In that case, the Liberal Party will commit to reversing Article 50 and creating a buffer for Britain to leave the European Union. The Liberal Democrats have been braced for a near-impossible Brexit because their Brexit has stalled so badly in favour of a referendum. The British, who were simply exhausted by Brexit and wanted to end the Remain campaign one way or another, failed to rally. But the decisive outcome of December 12 could prove decisive for the party’s future, as could Donald Trump’s election as President of the United States.

Can UK's Liberal Democrats stop Brexit? | South China Morning Post

They’d still vote in

The British public narrowly voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, but not for a final goal, “says Professor Michael Gove, professor of political science at Oxford University. Only 53 per cent of the public knew the party was against Brexit, and the result confirms the wisdom of their decision.

Even the most senior Liberal Democrats concede that many Britons feel that the Brexit question cannot be answered regarding how they voted in 2016 and it is further surprising the way they spend their time going to sites like pornoorzel. 41% even said they would not accept Brexit if the UK voted to leave the EU.

It’d be better if a majority of Liberal Democrats simply discarded Brexit altogether and kept Britain in the EU. But the Lib Dems say “policies are unpopular with many Remainers and unpalatable to those who have just overturned the biggest democratic decision in British history”.

The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and the Brexit party, have moved on and have made clear their opposition to Brexit, but not their support. The Liberal Democrats, who have taken a strictly anti-Brexit stance, have failed to win seats and have even lost their leader Jo Swinson.

Other parties have said the party has lost centrist and pro-EU voters and Brexit has split Labour, with members fearing Nigel Farage’s Brexit party has committed to implementing the 2016 referendum.

Published December 4, 2016

Is the Brain Really Necessary?

Is the Brain Really Necessary
Is the Brain Really Necessary

“If we’re interested in what’s true rather than what just feels good, we will demand very high standards of evidence.” — Carl Sagan

“We are not here concerned with hopes or fears, only with the truth as far as our reason permits us to discover it.” — Charles Darwin

Let’s face it.

It’s a big world out there, and it’s full of many things that science can’t explain; if it wasn’t, then science would be out of a job. Science, after all, arose out of the need to explain the unexplained. But let’s face this; the vast majority of events and occurrences that popular press and media claim are scientifically unexplainable are not.

Matters are confused by researchers and investigators grouping these strange stories into broad categories — UFOs, ESP, ghosts, etc. — in an attempt to understand them. More confusion is caused when the same researchers and investigators make the mistake of putting forward inventive. Far-reaching theories try to explain some particular grouping of these stories that are believed (but not proven) to be related. Often these theorists make the further error of “explaining” the unexplained with the unexplained… asserting that ghosts can be explained as a form of telepathy does nothing to clear up either subject.

It is a mistake in most cases to put forward these theories because most scientists avoid studying these strange stories. Most of the stories being theorized about are not valid. It is a simple fact that brings any approach based on these stories into a definite question. Before useful ideas can be put forward to explain the unexplained, we must know what occurrences really are unexplained. Some things happened; some things didn’t… and investigators need to know which is which.

Skeptics

This may sound a bit simplistic, but no one is seriously attempting to sort these stories out as far as I can tell. Believers take many stories on faith; sensationalists have no good reason to ask if a story making them money is valid or not. Skeptics will often bend facts to make everything look perfectly explainable… even if it’s not. It’s the rare few who will simply examine all the facts around a story objectively with no pre-chosen opinion they want to prove.

And that’s why I started ANOMALIES. With each article I create, I slowly gather all information I can find on each event or topic and put it all together in one place. Starting with the popular version of the stories found in mass media and working back to the original sources of the accounts, including even the contradictory information. It’s my hope that this approach will allow you — the reader — the ability to make an informed decision about what you choose to believe about any particular event. Articles are updated whenever I have new information and time.

New items are added as often as possible, and readers are always encouraged to help out by suggesting new sources for expanding existing articles. This was the question asked by British neurologist John Lorber when he addressed pediatricians’ conference in 1980. Such a frivolous sounding question was sparked by case studies Lorber had been involved in since the mid-sixties. The case studies involve victims of an ailment known as hydrocephalus, more commonly known as water on the brain. The condition results from an abnormal build-up of cerebrospinal fluid. It can cause severe retardation and death if not treated.

Two young children with hydrocephalus referred to Lorber presented with normal mental development for their age. In both children, there was no evidence of cerebral cortex. One of the children died at age three months. The second at twelve months was still following a standard development profile except the apparent lack of cerebral tissue shown by repeated medical testing. An account of the children was published in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.

Proof

Later, a Sheffield University colleague became aware of a young man larger than the standard head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first-class honors degree in mathematics, he had “virtually no brain”. Noninvasive radio density measurement known as CAT scan showed the boy’s skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimetre in thickness. The rest of his head was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues an everyday life except for his knowledge that he has no brain.

Although anecdotal accounts may be found in medical literature, Lorber is the first to systematically study such cases. He has documented over 600 scans of people with hydrocephalus. He has broken them into four groups: the most severe group with 95% of the cranial cavity filled with cerebrospinal fluid. Of the last group, which comprised less than ten per cent of the study, half were profoundly retarded. The remaining half had IQs greater than 100.

Skeptics have claimed that it was an error of interpretation of the scans themselves. Lorber himself admits that reading a CAT scan can be tricky. He also has said that one would not make such a claim without evidence. In answer to attacks that he has not precisely quantified the amount of brain tissue missing, he adds, “I can’t say whether the mathematics student has a brain weighing 50 grams or 150 grams, but it is clear that it is nowhere near the normal 1.5 kilograms.”

Many neurologists feel that this is a tribute to the brains redundancy and its ability to reassign functions. Others, however, are not so sure. Patrick Wall, professor of anatomy at University College, London states “To talk of redundancy is a copout to get around something you don’t understand.” Norman Geschwind, a neurologist at Bostons Beth Israel Hospital, agrees: “Certainly the brain has a remarkable capacity for reassigning functions following trauma, but you can usually pick up some kind of deficit with the right tests, even after apparently full recovery.”

Published December 4, 2016

Democratic National Convention

Democratic National Convention
Democratic National Convention

Welcome to the 2004 Democratic National Convention website. Please read these terms and conditions of use carefully before using dems2004.org (the “Site”). Your access to and use of the Site is subject to the following terms and conditions (including the Site’s Privacy Policy) and all applicable laws. By accessing and using this Site, you signify your assent to these Terms of Use. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not use this Site.

1. Ownership and Use Restrictions

The Site is owned and operated by the 2004 Democratic National Convention Committee, Inc. (“DNCC”), an affiliated committee of the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”).

Copyright © 2004 DNCC. All Rights Reserved. All text, images, graphics, animation, videos, music, sounds, and other materials on the Site are subject to the copyrights and other intellectual property rights of DNCC and DNC. These materials will not be copied for commercial use or distribution, nor may these materials be reproduced, distributed, modified or reposted to other websites without the express written permission of DNCC and DNC.

Unless otherwise indicated, all marks displayed on the Site including, but not limited to Democratic National Committee, Democratic National Convention and Democratic National Convention Committee and their logos, emblems and slogans, are subject to the trademark rights of DNCC and DNC. Any use of these marks, without the express written permission of DNCC and DNC, is strictly prohibited.

DNCC maintains this Site for your personal entertainment

Please feel free to browse the Site. You may download material displayed on the Site to any single computer only for your personal, noncommercial use, provided you also maintain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained on the materials.

However, you may not distribute, reproduce, republish, display, modify, transmit, reuse, repost, or use any Site materials for public or commercial purposes on any other Web site or otherwise without the written permission of DNCC. Modification of any materials displayed on the Site is a violation of the copyright and other proprietary rights of DNCC and DNC.

You are prohibited from using the Site to post or transmit any infringing, threatening, false, misleading, abusive, harassing, libellous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, inflammatory, pornographic or profane material, or any material that could constitute or encourage conduct that would be considered a criminal offence, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any law. DNCC will fully cooperate with any law enforcement authorities or any court order requesting or directing the DNCC to disclose the identity of anyone posting or transmitting any such information or materials. Images of people or places displayed on the Site are either the property of, or used with permission by DNCC.

The use of these images by you, or anyone else authorized by you, is prohibited unless expressly permitted by these Terms of Use or specific permission provided elsewhere on the Site. Any unauthorized use of the images may violate copyright laws, trademark laws, the laws of privacy and publicity, and communications regulations and statutes. DNCC neither warrants nor represents that your use of materials displayed on the Site will infringe third parties’ rights not owned by or affiliated with DNCC.

2. Links

The Site may contain links to sites owned or operated by parties other than DNCC. Such links are provided for your convenience only. DNCC does not control and is not responsible for, the content or privacy policies on, or the security of, such sites. Without limiting the preceding, DNCC expressly disclaims any responsibility if such sites: infringe any third party’s intellectual property rights; are inaccurate, incomplete or misleading; are not merchantable or fit for a particular purpose; do not provide adequate security; contain viruses or other items of a destructive nature, or are libellous or defamatory. Neither does DNCC endorse the content, or any products or services available, on such sites? If you establish a link to such sites or the Site, you do so at your own risk and without the permission of DNCC.

3. Exclusion of Liability

Although DNCC uses reasonable efforts to include accurate and up to date information in the Site, DNCC makes no warranties or representations of its accuracy. DNCC assumes no liability or responsibility for errors or omissions in the content of the Site. YOUR USE OF THE SITE IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. NEITHER DNCC2004 NOR ANY OTHER PARTY INVOLVED IN CREATING, PRODUCING, OR DELIVERING THE SITE, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OF THIS SITE OR CONTENT WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY SUCH DAMAGES. Please note that some jurisdictions may not exclude certain damages, so some of the above exclusions may not apply to you.

4. Indemnity

You agree to indemnify and hold DNCC, DNC, all their officers, directors, shareholders, predecessors, successors in interest, employees, agents, subsidiaries and affiliates harmless from any demands, loss, liability, claims or expenses (including attorneys’ fees) made against DNCC or DNC by any third party due to, arising out of, or in connection with your use of the Site.

5. Revisions to the Terms

The DNCC may at any time, and without notice, revise these Terms of Use by updating this posting. You are bound by any such revisions and should periodically visit this page to review the current Terms of Use.

6. Miscellaneous

These Terms of Use (and referenced Privacy Policy) constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersede all prior contemporaneous written or oral agreements, proposals or communications concerning the subject matter herein between you and DNCC.

Published December 4, 2016

Minority-Owned Business Testimonial

Thank you. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to come before Chairwoman Feeney and the entire Boston 2004 Committee to discuss the goals, efforts and record of the 2004 Democratic National Convention Committee, particularly about involving the city’s communities and businesses in the first modern-day political Convention to be held in this great city. I say “modern-day” because this city has a long and storied history of hosting successful political gatherings, and I know this Convention will be no exception.

One of Boston’s many attractions as a Convention site is the cultural and workforce diversity that makes this one of the greatest cities in the world.

Our commitment—and our record—involving these communities is more substantial and better than any Convention—Democrat or Republican—in the two major political parties’ history.

The Bay State Banner, the area’s most influential African American newspaper, says

“A closer look at the contracts that have been issued promised by the city and the Democratic National Committee revealed substantial business being funnelled to minority-owned companies.”

One of the first things the DNCC did when we arrived in Boston last summer was put our money where our mouth is. Depositing $7 million in minority-owned and local banks. A total of $4 million was deposited in each of the minority-owned banks: $2 million to OneUnited Bank and $2 million to the Asian American Bank in Boston. That’s double the amount deposited in minority-owned banks in Los Angeles in 2004.

Quick and secure steps

The second thing we did was hire staff to begin laying the personnel infrastructure to support the Convention. Currently, people of colour make up almost 50 per cent of our team. Nearly 50 per cent of our entire staff is from the Boston area, as is 50 per cent of our minority staff. Again,
I know of no other political convention that has demonstrated this kind of commitment to diversity and to its host city in hiring.

And I want to make clear that we intend to build on that commitment as we continue to hire people necessary to run a Convention. It will bring 5,000 delegates, 15,000 reporters, and thousands of additional visitors to the city.

We’re also proud to have the Convention Committee Alice Huffman, president of the California NAACP and as chairman of the Convention, Bill Richardson, the only Latino governor in the U.S.

Our outreach staff has held close to 250 meetings and briefings with community groups in the past five months.

Involving more than 2,000 people ranging from local elected officials to representatives of community groups throughout the Boston area, including African American, Latino, Asian American and women’s groups.

It’s important to note that the largest and most comprehensive contract let to date by the DNCC and the Host Committee is a $3.5 million construction contract.

Two minority business enterprises—SAR Engineering and the Primary Group—are part of the project’s management team. $2.8 million—more than half of the total contract—will be let to Boston area subcontractors.

At least half of that amount—$1.4 million—is guaranteed for minority and women-owned businesses. That’s not rhetoric, that’s reality—real jobs for real people here in the Boston area.

Support from everyone

We also applaud the Host Committee for its outreach efforts and set up a vendor directory for local businesses. Their work has been instrumental in giving local businesses a forum for their services.

We are committed to working with you and your constituents to maximize the many opportunities this Convention will bring. But we want to do it in a way that will bring in business during the Convention and help Boston area businesses build relationships that will last well past July.

Many—in fact, most—of these opportunities will come as the Convention gets closer and may not necessarily come directly from the Convention. We need to encourage your constituent businesses to reach out to the Convention and the Host Committee and reach out to each other. For example, while the Convention and Host Committee will be booking catering services, so will the many VIPs, corporations, and organizations coming to town.

If one service is already secured by the Convention or the Host Committee, a simple referral to another catering service could result in a long-term business relationship for that other caterer. In fact—and I hesitate to say this—but since the Convention business ends after August, the companies that grab up the ancillary business have better long-term business opportunities!

I talked recently to one vendor in LA who said he continued to get business calls two years after the Convention had left town.

I want to thank the Committee for its support and for the opportunity to discuss our plans with you. 151 days from today, when we gavel open our Convention at the Fleet Center, Boston will shine on the world’s stage as a diverse, vibrant and thoroughly world-class city.

We could not be happier about our choice to come to Boston and thank everyone in this city for their extraordinary support.