Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Geoffrey Cox won’t resign, and Boris Johnson won’t make him – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541
    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    I'm not sure about the 1820s one either. They had to import English lawyers and English judges, i think, as the Scots ones couldn't understand this treason business. I've never got my head around it - I see a newish book is out so might try that.
    The Scots executed Thomas Aikenhead for having defective opinions on the Trinity in 1697, 14 years before the birth of David Hume.

    Oh, quite so. But don't forget the Unitarian church in England had to call itself 'Presbyterian' till after the Napoleonic wars were over, for fear of accusations of treason.
    No executions for heresy in England since 1612. Yes, lots of restrictions etc - especially on Catholics.

  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966
    A lot from Desire. But not the outstanding song on there.
    Which is, of course, Isis.
    A magical realist fable in song form.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,977
    edited November 2021
    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    People still wear suits?

    Schoolfriend of mine became an eminent surgeon in a major London hospital. He met me after work in a Jeeves style combination, the dark jacket and pinstripe trousers thing. I inquired about it and he said the patients expected it.

    Same for legal eagles I'm afraid ...
    I wear jeans and trainers to work
    As a general rule, juniors should wear outfits appropriate to the next step on the ladder. Dressing too high is a bit presumptuous, and when you are top dog, you can be a bit more experimental.
    My supervisor wears cargo shorts and Superdry tshirts
    Especially when sitting behind Lord Pannick in the Court of Appeal?

  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    And blame the West when they start to burn, I imagine.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    algarkirk said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    People still wear suits?

    Schoolfriend of mine became an eminent surgeon in a major London hospital. He met me after work in a Jeeves style combination, the dark jacket and pinstripe trousers thing. I inquired about it and he said the patients expected it.

    Same for legal eagles I'm afraid ...
    I wear jeans and trainers to work
    As a general rule, juniors should wear outfits appropriate to the next step on the ladder. Dressing too high is a bit presumptuous, and when you are top dog, you can be a bit more experimental.
    My supervisor wears cargo shorts and Superdry tshirts
    Especially when sitting behind Lord Pannick in the Court of Appeal?

    I do mainly non-contentious contract drafting style stuff so no Court of Appeal trips for us
  • Options
    AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,004

    Is it generally accepted that the decline in case numbers was due to half term?

    Shoot me down if you must.

    The case numbers have oscillated since early Summer in line with school holidays. However we have done very well to build immunity in school kids during that time. Personally I think there is some gap filling going on but must be running out of school kids to infect soon. My Y8 daughter's secondary school of over 1200 pupils had about 5 cases last week. Earlier in the term there were 15 in her class alone.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Ah, "sleaze", the gift that keeps on giving, apparently?

    It seems supporters of the Government are now frantically trumpeting the slightest indiscretion or minor breach of the rules by non-Conservative MPs playing the "they're all at it" argument.

    That's missing the fundamental point.

    The current political crisis is nothing to do with "sleaze" - what Owen Paterson did was bad but it wasn't a hanging offence. A 30-day suspension would have been politically embarrassing but that would probably have been the end of it - I suspect the chances of a successful recall petition would have been very low assuming a little contrition on Mr Paterson's part.

    Instead, it seems a combination of a sense of injustice and friends in the right places enabled Mr Paterson's supporters to successfully lobby the Prime Minister into ordering MPs to overrule the decision of the Standards Committee. However you dress that up and it's up there with lipstick on a pig, it looked terrible.

    As John Major so correctly said it smacked of the hubris of a large majority and a sense of being untouchable or unreachable. Courageously, some Conservative MPs refused to be whipped into supporting this asinine notion but too many gave in and it conveyed to the public the sense of a Government and Prime Minister looking as though it could bend or break the rules to favour their friends on the basis, given its parliamentary majority, there would be nothing anyone could do about it.

    I've often said on here the test of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister wouldn't be Brexit or even Coronavirus but the day-to-day business of Government. As the virus eases its grip on both public consciousness and the body politic and normal service returns, we can see how the Government is performing and once again it's not the big things that cause problems but the small things which are allowed to become big things.

    Boris Johnson's hubris has turned what was at worst a little local difficulty into a serious problem for his party. None of this means he can't or won't win the next GE but confidence has been lost and after nearly a dozen years of leading the Government, people may just be starting to ask whether the Conservatives have had their time and whether it's time for a change or at the very least there may be a more profound sense that "good old Boris" is just as bad as all the others.

    Evening all. Just catching up. Post of the day. Thank you, Sir Stodge.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,613

    I have to say the thing that has been missed in all this, is the effort put in by Alok Sharma, President of COP26 to achieve a deal

    Full marks to his determination , negotiating skills, and diplomacy

    Watch out Boris, there is a dark horse on the horizon

    It's his destiny.

    Sharma's Karma
  • Options

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    That was day 1 of law school stuff
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    boulay said:

    IanB2 said:

    boulay said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    He really is a scruffy twunt isn't he.

    When you have to pay your respects to the war dead at 11 but have to get blind drunk under a flyover bridge at 12 https://twitter.com/youwouldknow/status/1459525716735897601/photo/1


    A while back somebody (who would know) that the reason Boris Johnson wears ill fitting suits is that he cannot afford to buy new ones.

    I dismissed that as a joke but now....
    I suspect its more that his weight yo-yos quite a bit and he is somewhat on the chubbier side at the moment. Of course, from personal experience, the first thing you stop doing in such a scenario is button up your jacket.
    Can relate.

    I bet Boris Johnson only buys one pair of trousers when he buys a suit.

    He seems that disorganised.
    As any stylish man about town knows, you should always buy two pairs of trousers and two jackets when you buy a suit….
    lol. That’s just buying two suits. You buy two pairs of trousers for all the time you spend sitting down wearing it, and minimal time lying down.
    That was a joke……. Of course you have two pairs of trousers made (sometimes more if you want belt loops sometimes, braces another or side adjusters depending on the look you are after that day) and can always get a slightly larger pair made for the Christmas client entertaining season just in case the other shrink……

    However there is a logic in having identical jackets - we used to call it the “Italian jacket” (for some unknown reason) where you could leave your reserve suit jacket on your desk chair and bugger off out and people think you are somewhere around the office….
    Can be a risky thing to do. I remember a former colleague who did that. Unfortunately, he had a heart attack on the way back from the pub. Investigations were complicated by the fact that his employers were insistent that he couldn’t be dead as his jacket was still on his chair.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    That was day 1 of law school stuff
    Except when there is an R in it. R v Kray will always be spoken of as it is written.

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,952
    THE OBSERVER: ‘How Johnson pledged help for my business to win my love’ #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1459630135385153547/photo/1
  • Options
    AslanAslan Posts: 1,673
    pigeon said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    And blame the West when they start to burn, I imagine.
    If you look at cumulative emissions, there's still a way to go for China to catch up. And a massive way for India.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    COP26 is an example of a bad deal being better than no deal. India and China are going to ruin their countries and all of ours too.

    COP26 or Talking Shop 26?
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:

    THE OBSERVER: ‘How Johnson pledged help for my business to win my love’ #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1459630135385153547/photo/1

    If Paterson debacle doesn't take him down this tittle tattle certainly will not
  • Options

    Neil Henderson
    @hendopolis
    ·
    1m
    MIRROR: Tory MPs £300k link to China ‘spy’ firm #TomorrowsPapersToday
  • Options
    Aslan said:

    pigeon said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    And blame the West when they start to burn, I imagine.
    If you look at cumulative emissions, there's still a way to go for China to catch up. And a massive way for India.
    That's not true.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    pigeon said:

    stodge said:

    As an aside, rail passenger numbers have stabilised at 62-64% of pre-virus levels during the week while on the Underground, Mondays are quiet (57%) but on other days it's 60-65% of pre-virus. Is this now the new normal - transport companies having to run 100% of services with 65% of passenger numbers?

    For the time being, yes.

    One would expect that the provision of trains would eventually align with actual customer demand, but that may take some years. The operation of the railways has been skewed to the needs of weekday commuters since forever, and so are working practices: a future in which trains may be as busy or busier at weekends will take some getting used to. Institutional inertia is tough to overcome.
    Rail companies may need to learn employment practices from the hospitality industry. Rail unions may not be happy.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    What can he personally achieve? If the other nations would rather cave in than see no deal at all would could Sharma have possibly done? It's not like he can compel them to cave in or not cave in.
    Scott_xP said:

    THE OBSERVER: ‘How Johnson pledged help for my business to win my love’ #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1459630135385153547/photo/1

    Her stringing that story out for years rather blunts its impact compared to the recent standards stuff, since it just begs the question why she drip feeds details.
  • Options
    I am briefly optimistic. Technology will make coal irrelevant very shortly.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    Scott_xP said:

    However, when we go into more detail, the public are ok with MPs taking paid work as:
    Nurses
    Doctors
    Charity workers
    Farmers
    Authors

    They are against MPs taking paid work as:Lawyers
    Newspaper columnists
    Accountants
    Consultants
    Bankers
    Lobbyists https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1459614438118637569/photo/1

    No need to highlight MPs. Nobody with a conscience should want to be on the second list - to which I would add GP surgery receptionists. I would put no win no fee ambulance chasing lawyers and journalists on a special, higher list.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,952

    Nobody with a conscience should want to be on the second list

    But many of the contributors to PB appear on that list...
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,630
    edited November 2021
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Haitian slavery was fascinating (if hideous), It was probably the most brutal, exploitiative, and profitable form of chattel slavery ever devised. In 1790, St. Domingue produced around 70% of the world's sugar, and 30% of the world's coffee. The plantations generated astonishing profits for their owners.

    5/6 of the population were slaves, with the remaining 1/6 made up of Les Blancs, and Les Gens Libres de Colour. The Whites were divided between Les Grand Blancs, the super rich, and Les Petit Blancs, small farmer and traders. The two groups loatheed each other. Les Gens Libre de Colour were in some cases, wealthy slaveowners in their own right. Others sympathised with the slaves.

    For the slaves, life was hell on earth. The slave population was naturally decreasing, and required constant importation of slaves to maintain numbers. Life expectancy on arrival at hte colony was about three years. Systematic terror was required to keep the slaves in their place.

    Come the revolution, Les Blancs were either killed or driven out, along with many Gens Libre de Colour. Plessy's family were among them. Others, however, like Toussaint L'Ouverture, and Petion were leaders of the revolt.
    One of our more ignominious campaigns was during the Napoleon's wars to re institute slavery on St Dominigue. Something around 70% mortality for the nearly 30 000 British troops sent there.

    https://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/saintdomingue/revolt.htm

    The failure of the campaign, and hence first successful slave rebellion is a large part of why slavery was at its end in the British Empire shortly after. The news had spread to other slave colonies, and the military cost too high.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    AlistairM said:

    Is it generally accepted that the decline in case numbers was due to half term?

    Shoot me down if you must.

    The case numbers have oscillated since early Summer in line with school holidays. However we have done very well to build immunity in school kids during that time. Personally I think there is some gap filling going on but must be running out of school kids to infect soon. My Y8 daughter's secondary school of over 1200 pupils had about 5 cases last week. Earlier in the term there were 15 in her class alone.
    algarkirk said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    That was day 1 of law school stuff
    Except when there is an R in it. R v Kray will always be spoken of as it is written.

    R V Kray and Co would be an ideal name for a firm of Criminal Defence Lawyers.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    Scott_xP said:

    Nobody with a conscience should want to be on the second list

    But many of the contributors to PB appear on that list...
    They should be ashamed of themselves. 😎
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,579
    edited November 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    Do NOT believe that is true in the USA. Does anyone know for sure?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    Do NOT believe that is true in the USA.
    They're wrong of course
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,630

    boulay said:

    IanB2 said:

    boulay said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    He really is a scruffy twunt isn't he.

    When you have to pay your respects to the war dead at 11 but have to get blind drunk under a flyover bridge at 12 https://twitter.com/youwouldknow/status/1459525716735897601/photo/1


    A while back somebody (who would know) that the reason Boris Johnson wears ill fitting suits is that he cannot afford to buy new ones.

    I dismissed that as a joke but now....
    I suspect its more that his weight yo-yos quite a bit and he is somewhat on the chubbier side at the moment. Of course, from personal experience, the first thing you stop doing in such a scenario is button up your jacket.
    Can relate.

    I bet Boris Johnson only buys one pair of trousers when he buys a suit.

    He seems that disorganised.
    As any stylish man about town knows, you should always buy two pairs of trousers and two jackets when you buy a suit….
    lol. That’s just buying two suits. You buy two pairs of trousers for all the time you spend sitting down wearing it, and minimal time lying down.
    That was a joke……. Of course you have two pairs of trousers made (sometimes more if you want belt loops sometimes, braces another or side adjusters depending on the look you are after that day) and can always get a slightly larger pair made for the Christmas client entertaining season just in case the other shrink……

    However there is a logic in having identical jackets - we used to call it the “Italian jacket” (for some unknown reason) where you could leave your reserve suit jacket on your desk chair and bugger off out and people think you are somewhere around the office….
    Can be a risky thing to do. I remember a former colleague who did that. Unfortunately, he had a heart attack on the way back from the pub. Investigations were complicated by the fact that his employers were insistent that he couldn’t be dead as his jacket was still on his chair.
    Generally I think being dead tends to stop disciplinary proceedings for skiving. Except for vampires and zombies, obviously.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    IanB2 said:

    boulay said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    He really is a scruffy twunt isn't he.

    When you have to pay your respects to the war dead at 11 but have to get blind drunk under a flyover bridge at 12 https://twitter.com/youwouldknow/status/1459525716735897601/photo/1


    A while back somebody (who would know) that the reason Boris Johnson wears ill fitting suits is that he cannot afford to buy new ones.

    I dismissed that as a joke but now....
    I suspect its more that his weight yo-yos quite a bit and he is somewhat on the chubbier side at the moment. Of course, from personal experience, the first thing you stop doing in such a scenario is button up your jacket.
    Can relate.

    I bet Boris Johnson only buys one pair of trousers when he buys a suit.

    He seems that disorganised.
    As any stylish man about town knows, you should always buy two pairs of trousers and two jackets when you buy a suit….
    lol. That’s just buying two suits. You buy two pairs of trousers for all the time you spend sitting down wearing it, and minimal time lying down.
    That was a joke……. Of course you have two pairs of trousers made (sometimes more if you want belt loops sometimes, braces another or side adjusters depending on the look you are after that day) and can always get a slightly larger pair made for the Christmas client entertaining season just in case the other shrink……

    However there is a logic in having identical jackets - we used to call it the “Italian jacket” (for some unknown reason) where you could leave your reserve suit jacket on your desk chair and bugger off out and people think you are somewhere around the office….
    Can be a risky thing to do. I remember a former colleague who did that. Unfortunately, he had a heart attack on the way back from the pub. Investigations were complicated by the fact that his employers were insistent that he couldn’t be dead as his jacket was still on his chair.
    Generally I think being dead tends to stop disciplinary proceedings for skiving. Except for vampires and zombies, obviously.
    Depends whether HR place practicality above theory. Not all do.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    Despite South Africa’s win today, are we at the point where a Northern Hemisphere team could be reasonably expected to beat a Southern Hemisphere team?
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    Sure, but from their perspective what you are saying is: there's only so much first worldness to go round and we've used up all of it, so tough. Where do you think these guys got the idea of a coal and steel based revolution?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    algarkirk said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    That was day 1 of law school stuff
    Except when there is an R in it. R v Kray will always be spoken of as it is written.

    That would be Crown and Kray would it not?
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,579
    edited November 2021
    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,197

    Despite South Africa’s win today, are we at the point where a Northern Hemisphere team could be reasonably expected to beat a Southern Hemisphere team?

    No. Depends on where, who etc. Certainly a good win for the Irish.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,993

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,613
    Burning fossil fuels is fine.

    As long as we stipulate carbon capture and storage.

    And I don't mean 'carbon capture ready'. That is about as meaningful as saying that Dr Sunil's pad is Rachel Reeves ready'.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,613
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
    Most of these statistics rest on the fact that China is a Big Country.

    However, not one where Dreams stay with you, Like a Lover's Voice fires the mountainside.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,194

    Despite South Africa’s win today, are we at the point where a Northern Hemisphere team could be reasonably expected to beat a Southern Hemisphere team?

    Not if the Northern Hemisphere side in question is Wales... sadly.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,335
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
    Yes, I think it's a reasonable deal as far as it goes, and Sharma does deserve credit for his efforts (and his genuine grief at not getting even further).

    An oddity is that animal agriculture, which contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than the entire transport sector, is not mentioned at all.
  • Options
    IshmaelZ said:

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
    A devastating retort, m'lord.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,199

    Despite South Africa’s win today, are we at the point where a Northern Hemisphere team could be reasonably expected to beat a Southern Hemisphere team?

    Not if the Northern Hemisphere side in question is Wales... sadly.
    Scrappy but ultimately solid England win over Oz, a stirring Irish win over the All Blacks. Scotland beat the Aussies last week (and could have beaten the Boks today with more discipline)

    It does feel like the two hemispheres are much closer in quality than the rankings suggest

    The Boks are marginally but palpably the best team in the world, next I'd have England and the All Blacks equal, then Ireland very close behind. Then Oz? Not sure where France are: hard to tell

  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
    Yes, I think it's a reasonable deal as far as it goes, and Sharma does deserve credit for his efforts (and his genuine grief at not getting even further).

    An oddity is that animal agriculture, which contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than the entire transport sector, is not mentioned at all.
    Putting it crudely, the one thing that nobody is prepared to do is to tell the population of the developed world to adopt horrid vegan diets - let alone lecturing dirt poor nomadic pastoralists about the evil of keeping goats.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Scott_xP said:

    However, when we go into more detail, the public are ok with MPs taking paid work as:
    Nurses
    Doctors
    Charity workers
    Farmers
    Authors

    They are against MPs taking paid work as:Lawyers
    Newspaper columnists
    Accountants
    Consultants
    Bankers
    Lobbyists https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1459614438118637569/photo/1

    No need to highlight MPs. Nobody with a conscience should want to be on the second list - to which I would add GP surgery receptionists. I would put no win no fee ambulance chasing lawyers and journalists on a special, higher list.
    You think people too thick or ill-educated to represent themselves in court should be denied access to justice?

    I'm with you. Serve them right for being poor.
  • Options

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Judge Judy's bailiff always says "All parties to the case of X versus Y, step forward" :)
  • Options

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    Do NOT believe that is true in the USA.
    They're wrong of course
    Because they don't wear (horsehair) wigs?

    (I'll back "Perry Mason" versus "Rumpole of the Bailey" every time!)
  • Options

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Judge Judy's bailiff always says "All parties to the case of X versus Y, step forward" :)
    Case closed.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
    A devastating retort, m'lord.
    objection overruled.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Haitian slavery was fascinating (if hideous), It was probably the most brutal, exploitiative, and profitable form of chattel slavery ever devised. In 1790, St. Domingue produced around 70% of the world's sugar, and 30% of the world's coffee. The plantations generated astonishing profits for their owners.

    5/6 of the population were slaves, with the remaining 1/6 made up of Les Blancs, and Les Gens Libres de Colour. The Whites were divided between Les Grand Blancs, the super rich, and Les Petit Blancs, small farmer and traders. The two groups loatheed each other. Les Gens Libre de Colour were in some cases, wealthy slaveowners in their own right. Others sympathised with the slaves.

    For the slaves, life was hell on earth. The slave population was naturally decreasing, and required constant importation of slaves to maintain numbers. Life expectancy on arrival at hte colony was about three years. Systematic terror was required to keep the slaves in their place.

    Come the revolution, Les Blancs were either killed or driven out, along with many Gens Libre de Colour. Plessy's family were among them. Others, however, like Toussaint L'Ouverture, and Petion were leaders of the revolt.
    One of our more ignominious campaigns was during the Napoleon's wars to re institute slavery on St Dominigue. Something around 70% mortality for the nearly 30 000 British troops sent there.

    https://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/saintdomingue/revolt.htm

    The failure of the campaign, and hence first successful slave rebellion is a large part of why slavery was at its end in the British Empire shortly after. The news had spread to other slave colonies, and the military cost too high.
    I share that view. The heroism and ruthlessness with which the Haitian slaves fought for their freedom had a big impact in first, the introduction of laws to improve the treatment of slaves, then the abolition of the trade, and finally, the abolition of the institution. There was a big revolt in Jamaica in 1831/32 which finally persuaded Parliament that the game was up for the institution.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    edited November 2021

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,993

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
    Most of these statistics rest on the fact that China is a Big Country.

    However, not one where Dreams stay with you, Like a Lover's Voice fires the mountainside.
    Sure. But it's directionally moving in the right direction.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,993

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    In our house we don't let acceptable be the enemy of barely adequate.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,952

    However, not one where Dreams stay with you, Like a Lover's Voice fires the mountainside.

    Stay Alive...
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,579
    edited November 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
    A devastating retort, m'lord.
    objection overruled.
    A much talking judge is an ill-tuned cymbal - Francis Bacon (a legal authority albeit with his own legal issues)

    Addendum - Replevin!
  • Options
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Must admit I had forgotten about Arcuri.

    Must stick in the craw of the likes of Cox... to see Boris Johnson getting away with siphoning public money to his affair.

    Yet still Tory MPs go out to defend him. Phenomenal, practically homicidal loyalty.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
    A devastating retort, m'lord.
    objection overruled.
    A much talking judge is an ill-tuned cymbal - Francis Bacon (a legal authority albeit with his own legal issues)

    Addendum - Replevin!
    ...
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,993
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
    Do we then impose tariffs on countries that do not impose tariffs on countries that use coal?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
    Do we then impose tariffs on countries that do not impose tariffs on countries that use coal?
    Make it part of the agreement.
  • Options
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Addendum - have never heard anyone in US refer to the case of "Plessy AND Ferguson" always as "Plessy versus Ferguson".

    This includes American judges & lawyers from SCOTUS to Night Court.

    EDIT - Sadly cannot recall usage in "The Paper Chase" which I'd consider definitive!

    Yes, but American lawyers are wankers, by and large. All that "objection sustained" tosspottery.
    A devastating retort, m'lord.
    objection overruled.
    A much talking judge is an ill-tuned cymbal - Francis Bacon (a legal authority albeit with his own legal issues)

    Addendum - Replevin!
    ...
    Happened to hear a (rare) reference to "replevin" early is morning, as I was watching an old Hopalong Cassidy movie on TV, where our hero pretends to be a big-time attorney in order to smoke out a criminal gang led by a crooked bush-league lawyer:

    Texas Masquerade (1944) - William 'Hopalong Cassidy' Boyd, Andy Clyde, Jimmy Rogers
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYmKydMWYZ4
  • Options
    jonny83jonny83 Posts: 1,261
    OT but have any PB resident videogamers been playing the new Forza game? Talk about incredible.

    I am only playing it on a Series S on a 1080p TV and it's still absolutely stunning. Must be jaw dropping on a Series X, or a top of the range PC.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited November 2021

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Indeed, a deal without China or India signed up to it would be worthless.

    This deal is not perfect but better than nothing, though I suggest they hold COP29 (the next with a vacant host) in China to put the pressure on the host to get a more substantial deal
  • Options
    CatManCatMan Posts: 2,770

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Fuck the stewards.

    Verstappen gets a €50,000 fine whilst Hamilton is disqualified.

    Racist anti British stewards.

    Disqualification is a bit of an odd one, usually they just gird penalty you for stuff.
    I think they felt without it he wouldn't have been as fast.

    Of course, sometimes they do let people off for breaking the technical regs. Remember Eddie Irvine and Michael Schumacher at Kuala Lumpar in 2000?

    But, there was a legitimate argument that made no difference to the performance. Here, however...

    Plus Hamilton already had a penalty.
    Yes, and of course not all breaches of rules reasonably have the same punishment, we don't chop off hands for both theft and littering. On the face of it touching the car is wrong, but it take deliberate contrary action to breach car set up rules - remember I think it was BAR having a tank inside the tank or something, so they could leave fuel in for the weigh in?
    Er...I didn't know we chopped hands off at all in this country.
    Oh yes we do. It happened as recently as 1579. See R v Stubbe (1579) KB 29/215, m.20.

    Don't tell me the softies have stopped doing it.

    Still sentenced to it in Scotland in the C18 on very rare occasion. But done only as part of a death sentence - chop then hang - in cases of particularly aggravated murder.
    It wasn't sufficient. If they wanted a proper punishment, they should have rendered them totally armless before hanging.
    It did rather add to the suspense of the ceremony.

    In 1820 the UKG had two participants in the Scottish Rising decapitated. But only after they were hanged. Well, obviously.
    Henry V gave a close friend of his a fair trial - two months after he had beheaded him for treason.
    Can't argue with that, we offer pardons to dead people too.
    Governor of the State of Louisiana is getting ready to pardon Homer Plessy, was convicted in 1892 of violating state law segregating train passengers by race.

    Plessy was a man of mixed race and very light-skinned (not uncommon in cosmopolitan New Orleans) who was recruited for a test case versus newly-enacted Louisiana Separate [Railroad] Car Act. His appeal reached the US Supreme Court, resulting in the infamous Plessy v Ferguson "separate but equal" decision that legitimized for the next half century state "Jim Crow" laws discriminating against Blacks in virtually all aspects of life from the cradle to the grave.

    After losing his SCOTUS appeal, Plessy plead guilty and was fined $25; he died in 1925.

    > Keith Plessy, 64, who is descended from a cousin of Homer Plessy, attended the news conference. Later, he told the pardon board that he remembers meeting civil rights icon Rosa Parks, who refused in 1955 to leave a whites-only seat on a bus in Birmingham, Alabama, and kneeling to honor her.

    “She said to me, ‘Get up boy, your name is Plessy — you’ve got work to do,’” . . .

    > Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, the great-great-granddaughter of John Howard Ferguson, the judge who oversaw his case in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, now lead a nonprofit that advocates for civil rights education.

    “We cannot undo the wrongs of the past but we can and should acknowledge them,” Phoebe Ferguson told the pardon board. . . .

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/homer-plessy-key-to-separate-but-equal-on-road-to-pardon-521237
    Paradoxically, Plessy's family had to flee St. Domingue, because they were deemed white by the Haitians.
    Heard an interview given by Keith Plessy and Phoebe Ferguson, where one of them (forget which but doesn't matter) noted that, while back in 1892 it was Plessy VERSUS Ferguson, in 2021 it's Plessy AND Ferguson.
    Um, that's a negative, Sir. Lawyers always have and always will refer to Hadley v Baxendale (as written) as Hadley and Baxendale.
    Do NOT believe that is true in the USA.
    They're wrong of course
    Because they don't wear (horsehair) wigs?

    (I'll back "Perry Mason" versus "Rumpole of the Bailey" every time!)
    Lionel Hutz for me :)
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,630

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I would actually rather Sharma have rejected the last minute changes from India and China. He should not have caved in.

    And the talks collapse
    Then that's what happens. This deal achieves nothing. In 2050 China and India are still going to be burning coal and shitting up the planet.
    Maybe, maybe not.

    China have pledged to reach Net Zero by 2060. If they're to do that, realistically they'll have to have removed coal by 2050, they'd need to be at a comparable point as we'll be by 2040.

    If they're not to do that, then it little matters what's agreed if they're not going to keep their word anyway.
    China is the world's largest electric car (4.5x larger than second place), solar and wind market right now. So it's not like they aren't moving in the right direction.
    Yes, I think it's a reasonable deal as far as it goes, and Sharma does deserve credit for his efforts (and his genuine grief at not getting even further).

    An oddity is that animal agriculture, which contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than the entire transport sector, is not mentioned at all.
    Neither does the military, which contributes 6% of world CO2.

    Small steps, but better than none.
  • Options
    They can't all be Tories.....

    THE HERALD: Revealed: the 20 Scots MPs making up to 23k on the side

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1459627383531745287?s=20
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,335
    pigeon said:



    Putting it crudely, the one thing that nobody is prepared to do is to tell the population of the developed world to adopt horrid vegan diets - let alone lecturing dirt poor nomadic pastoralists about the evil of keeping goats.

    Nobody's suggesting that, though - it's one of those myths. The British National Food Strategy recommends a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years. My organisation favours a greater reduction in the UK, but would happily accept an increase in countries with inadequate diets, and I was discussing it this week with a range of delegates at COP from developing countries. It's just odd to knock ourselves out over electric cars and not address food at all, when the greenhouse gases from farming vastly outweigh every petrol-powered car on the planet.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,630
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
    I think all imports should include an import tax to cover the carbon production. It is the way to level the playing field for domestic producers.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,335
    Are we expecting other polls tonight? Otherwise the ComRes probably was an outlier, and the true picture is a Labour lead of say 2-3.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
    I think all imports should include an import tax to cover the carbon production. It is the way to level the playing field for domestic producers.
    I think that only makes sense if there is a global agreement on it, this was a chance to make it happen with countries who sign up to eliminating coal avoiding tariffs from say 2030 or 2035 and those who don't feeling the full force of uncompetitive exports if they can't get rid of coal for energy.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Scott_xP said:

    THE OBSERVER: ‘How Johnson pledged help for my business to win my love’ #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1459630135385153547/photo/1

    ......and right on cue with the final coup de grace Jennifer Arcuri. A terrible few days for the dwindling dispirited rabble of Leavers. The old saying about what happens when you tether yourself to an incontinent horse is proving accurate. I heard Sir Keir today and he was very good indeed. Just the right mix of suppressed anger and disgust. It looks like Labour could have found themselves a winner

  • Options
    Johnson statement at the conclusion of COP26:

    https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1459650425918050305?s=20
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,067
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,632
    Who invented the word sleaze?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,632
    Leon said:

    I was thinking maybe Vietnam, and then saw this, from an hour ago:

    "AVN News Feed
    @avnblogfeed

    Vietnam’s capital enters lockdown after ‘dangerous’ new COVID variant found"

    Great


    https://twitter.com/avnblogfeed/status/1459505607510310913?s=20

    Vietnam is the country that used to boast about not having had a single death from Covid-19.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,199
    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    China, India etc are never going to move fast enough when they think it’ll be to their disadvantage.

    They have doomed us all

    That's rather dramatic.

    They've moved a lot further than I expected they would, or they'd given any inclination of ever doing so in the past.

    Based on the calculations that the pledges so far will limit temperature rises to 2.4C then that's really a rise of 1.2C only (since 1.2 has already happened).

    More likely though as technology improves, we'll see adopting of clean technologies even faster than what's been agreed today.
    The China and India changes give coal a future as an energy source. That watering down of phase out to phase down completely undermines everything positive that we could have achieved by getting the world to getting rid of coal. What does phase down even mean?
    Surely if the talks had collapsed then you would not have been ridding the world of coal anyway. With China and India insisting on that your choice was simply a deal that helps in other ways but is not perfect or no deal at all which means not just coal but all the other issues also fall.

    As Kerry said, you should not let perfect be the enemy of good.
    Go down the other route and have the nations who sign up to the no coal deal introduce tariffs on countries that don't sign up.
    I think all imports should include an import tax to cover the carbon production. It is the way to level the playing field for domestic producers.
    I think that only makes sense if there is a global agreement on it, this was a chance to make it happen with countries who sign up to eliminating coal avoiding tariffs from say 2030 or 2035 and those who don't feeling the full force of uncompetitive exports if they can't get rid of coal for energy.
    This isn't the last COP. What's been agreed now has been 'banked' and we can go further for the complete elimination of coal in the future. It wouldn't surprise me if an agreement on removing coal is achieved by 2035 at this rate anyway.

    Realistically without China on board, the whole thing becomes pointless. Getting China committing to Net Zero and setting on a pathway there is more significant than anything the UK or almost any other nation can be doing.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    pigeon said:



    Putting it crudely, the one thing that nobody is prepared to do is to tell the population of the developed world to adopt horrid vegan diets - let alone lecturing dirt poor nomadic pastoralists about the evil of keeping goats.

    Nobody's suggesting that, though - it's one of those myths. The British National Food Strategy recommends a 30% reduction in meat consumption over 10 years. My organisation favours a greater reduction in the UK, but would happily accept an increase in countries with inadequate diets, and I was discussing it this week with a range of delegates at COP from developing countries. It's just odd to knock ourselves out over electric cars and not address food at all, when the greenhouse gases from farming vastly outweigh every petrol-powered car on the planet.
    That's fair enough. As I said, I was being crude (and perhaps not entirely serious.)

    From a purely personal point of view, if I developed a bizarre allergy to meat and was told I could never eat it again then I don't think I'd find that hard to adapt to at all: vegetarianism isn't such a stretch. Eggs and dairy are a different matter.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited November 2021
    So still likely less than the governing parties of FF and FG combined
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited November 2021
    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    SF is just the main leftwing party in Ireland now, with FF and FG effectively combined now the main party of the Irish centre right (the days of FF and FG being the main 2 parties in the Republic is over, though ironically both grew out of SF anyway after the Irish War of Independence and Civil War)
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    They're pretty much the only credible opposition party.

    The other parties joined together to lock them out but had to go into government with each other meaning that anyone unhappy with the government is now going to Sinn Fein.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,630
    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    What were outsiders are now the main opposition.

    We may not be far from SF FM in Stormont and in Dublin.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,199
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    What were outsiders are now the main opposition.

    We may not be far from SF FM in Stormont and in Dublin.
    Much as you long for the dissolution of the UK, a Sinner government in Dublin will polarise opinion in Belfast against it
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Andy_JS said:

    Who invented the word sleaze?

    Back-formation from sleazy.
    Sleazy comes from a reputedly thin and low-quality cloth originating from Silesia.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited November 2021
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    What were outsiders are now the main opposition.

    We may not be far from SF FM in Stormont and in Dublin.
    Not if FF and FG combined still have more seats than SF in Dublin and in NI SF is down 1% in a new poll with the DUP up 5% as Unionists start to rally behind Sir Jeffrey Donaldson's party

    https://twitter.com/LucidTalk/status/1459496514930286592?s=20
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    What were outsiders are now the main opposition.

    We may not be far from SF FM in Stormont and in Dublin.
    Much as you long for the dissolution of the UK, a Sinner government in Dublin will polarise opinion in Belfast against it
    It would also lead to an exodus of companies from Dublin who have previously based themselves in low tax Ireland, given SF's tax and spend policies
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    What were outsiders are now the main opposition.

    We may not be far from SF FM in Stormont and in Dublin.
    Much as you long for the dissolution of the UK, a Sinner government in Dublin will polarise opinion in Belfast against it
    The Unionists would need to quit squabbling with each other and get behind an option though, or else Sinn Fein could benefit like the SNP in Scotland.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966
    edited November 2021
    Leon said:

    Not following internal Irish poltiics. Is there some obvious reason for the Sinn Fein surge?

    This may be of help.

    https://harvardpolitics.com/the-rise-of-the-new-sinn-fein/

    TLDR.
    Basically. Have got rid of Adams. Replaced with Mac Donald the most popular leader. Opposed to Church. Appeal to young. Talk about housing and the future.
    FF and FG are associated with past scandals and backward Ireland.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    O/T for reasons I will not bore you with I watched once again William Hague's speech against the EU treaty and his demands for a referendum. It is normally noted for the brilliantly funny skit of Tony Blair becoming President to the horror of Gordon Brown but it really is worth watching in its entirety: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=william+hague+president+of+europe&docid=607987539006618260&mid=6F8858CFBB2BC39B50476F8858CFBB2BC39B5047&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

    What I concluded was that the referendum both became inevitable and was inevitably lost in that cowardly decision by Brown to renege on his commitment to a referendum on the new EU constitution. It gave those who sought to defend the EU and deny its undemocratic consequences nowhere to go and nothing on which to stand.

    It was not only one of the most brilliant and entertaining speeches in the Commons in my lifetime, it was also one of the most important setting a direction for this country for good or ill. Genuinely historic. And very funny.
This discussion has been closed.