Radio Scotland phone in has been fun this morning.
Callers flat out refusing to cancel any Christmas plans, asking how many more variants there will be and whether this will the case every Christmas for evermore.
Virologist comes on and responds with zero-covid strategy: "we must stop this variant in its tracks".
"We should not learn to live with it. We must eradicate it now"
To which the next question should be how do you do that? And drill the person down to he turns silent at which point the interviewer should say "so that would be impossible"...
Presenters response was to comment that it showed how misguided many callers were.
The Groupthink is strong that "something must be done, this is something, so this must be done".
To even suggest that death is a part of the circle of life and not to be prevented at all costs is now viewed as a monstrous suggestion by some people.
You don't think a thousand extra deaths a week, many of them avoidable, is enough?
I don't think its too many.
Most deaths are either the unvaccinated who can own their own choices, or people who are very vulnerable and could die from the common cold or flu or anything else.
NPIs made sense pre-PIs, not anymore. If a thousand 'extra' deaths is the 'new normal' then that's the new normal and that's what we have to live with, though I'm sceptical that excess deaths actually are a thousand a week.
You seemed concerned about people drowning in the channel in far smaller numbers.
They're healthy young people dying a horrible and preventable death and there's a simple solution to stop it happening that doesn't restrict the rights of anyone living here.
So you're a "zero crossings" believer then? Well, good luck with that.
I think crossings should be made safely and legally via humane routes, via proper planes or boats and not dinghies.
If anyone who crosses in a dinghy is instantly deported to a third party nation like Rwanda then the dinghies would stop overnight.
We should then offer MORE asylum to more people, but via proper and safe routes not via people smugglers.
It's touching when your naivety is so openly on display. You can't completely stop people entering the country illegally, even with the policy you describe. Oh you might be able to reduce it at a certain cost, but dinghies and stowaways and overstaying visas and even people walking across the Irish border will still happen. And sometimes people will die in the attempt. You can't legislate it away, you can't public awareness it away. Zero illegal immigration is a myth.
People don't drown in the sea if they overstay visas, people don't die walking across the border, people don't die if they've got here on a plane. I don't care about any of that, I'm OK with that.
I don't care if we don't have zero illegal immigration. People smugglers on a deadly crossing is a different matter.
It'll still happen though. People get through barbed wire, cross raging torrents, choose longer routes etc to avoid being caught. The error you're making is that you think the consequences of being caught will deter everyone. It's the same "hang 'em high" error that headchoppers and thief danglers make. They think perpetrators focus on the outcome if they're apprehended. But we know that very often people don't think they will get caught at all. That's why people slow down for speed cameras and then speed up when they think they're clear.
People will still board dinghies elsewhere no matter how diligently you patrol Dover or how assiduously you punish them when they're caught. And perhaps a higher percentage of them will drown trying from Cherbourg than Calais, who knows?
Except this has already worked in the real world.
"Worked" as in zero migrants? If you are talking about Australia then no, no it hasn't.
Indeed the rhetoric on this from Australia doesn't match reality.
Tens of thousands are on Bridging Visa E (which permits employment) in Australian communities, and only a few hundred on Nauru.
How did those who've got such a visa get into Australia though? Was it via boats, or planes, or some other means?
Nobody surely, least of all me, is suggesting that nobody should be here. Its the method to get here that's under discussion.
A mixture. About half of asylum seekers go by plane and half by boat.
Even a significant proportion of those offshored get Bridging Visa E.
Do you have a source on the number getting BVE via boats?
My understanding was that the vast bulk (if not nearly all) is from people who'd arrived via legal means then overstayed visas etc rather than arriving via boats.
From refugee Council of Australia:
That data is cumulative since eight years ago and doesn't come close to "tens of thousands".
These are the ones that actually were detained overseas. Many more never were, generally on medical or family grounds, and were kept in Australia.
Per capita, Australian asylum numbers are not very different to ours.
Again its not about asylum numbers, its about the numbers coming via boats.
Australian boat numbers collapsed to near-zero following their offshore processing. Asylum through other means continued and there's nothing wrong with that, indeed its a good thing.
You claimed tens of thousands from boats were in Australia on BVE visas. Do you have any figures to support that, or would you like to withdraw that comment?
As posted:
"As at 30 June 2020, 12,450 asylum seekers who arrived by boat remained in the community (10,245 with a current BVE and 2,205 awaiting grant of a further BVE). The remaining 24,576 asylum seekers who were granted BVEs were granted a substantive visa, departed Australia, returned to immigration detention or passed away"
Thank you. That's very different to the data you shared a moment ago.
That data includes people who arrived from 2011. The current policy that halted the boats started a couple of years later so the figures are probably distorted by that.
Your source says 37k have arrived since 2011 and that matches this data from the Refugee Council of Australia - note the annual split of that 37k.
Yet 12 000 are still on BVE, despite average case resolution of 103 weeks.
In addition as I showed, of those offshored, a significant number got BVE or other Australian visas.
Yes people who arrived a decade ago are on that visa. The average for the visa as a whole would include people who've arrived via planes, or have overstayed their visa and are going to leave the country etc
Only a few hundred, not tens of thousands, in a decade got it from the other data.
The annual data shows the crossing dropped to virtually zero after 2013 and have stayed at virtually zero. Including people who arrived in 2011 doesn't change that.
The Labour leadership was branded “pathetic and childish” after it issued an invite for a drinks party jointly hosted by Sir Keir Starmer and his Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves - but not his deputy Angela Rayner
Deep divisions have emerged at the top of the Labour party at a time when speculation is rife over a fresh civil war within party ranks.
Labour source: “It’s idiotic, pathetic and childish to send that invite out today, in that way, to 200 lobby hacks hungry for gossip.”
SKS really is a useless nonentity
I think its the opposite. He's realised that he can bin off and ignore the left. Hence the removal of their remaining element from the Shadow Cabinet and the utter marginalisation of the deputy leader.
Before anyone says "how beastly" in reference to the leader's treatment of the deputy, think back to the conference where they tried to remove Tom Watson and failed miserably.
If the hard left don't want to vote Labour there are a plethora of splinter groups out there, including the laughably named "left unity".
He can't entirely ignore the left. It's not 1997. If he does, he'll lose.
I think he can - "the left" are still foaming on about the Forde report, Jezbollah and witchhunts. Irrelevant to the real needs.
Rayner and Miliband represent a broad soft-left constituency in the party. If he consciously antagonises them, as he appears to be doing in at least one case, and possibly at the behest of some of his team with links to a 1990's approach, he could have big trouble.
What's he doing to Ed? I agree that both are soft left, and frankly they aren't the target. The reality is that Rayner - a proud Blairite remember, just listen to her passionate description of how His government transformed her life chances - is the remaining totem of the hard left.
She seems to enjoy that role as she indulges in mouth-foaming rants about Tory scum which cause the Labour party considerable harm. That one speech alone was enough for Starmer to bin her off.
The makeup of the party is such that Starmer just can't do that. The membership is further to the left than in the late 1990's, quite clearly, and she and Miliband link the left, the soft-left, and Starmer and the right of the party. He antagonises them at his party's, and electoral prospect's, peril.
Starmer and Rayner clearly don't have a warm relationship, but they are elected separately, so Starmer couldn't sack her even if he wanted to, which I don't think he does. Conversely, no left-winger who I know (and I know lots) thinks that Rayner is left-wing. She's louder, punchier and less judicious. The closest parallel is Blair and Prescott. Nobody thought Prescott was left-wing, but he filled the need for someone to be forceful and aggressive while Blair pursued the "can see him as PM" line. Miliband, by contrast, is a clear link to both the inside left and the green movement.
I do agree with Whispering Oracle on the membership - it's somewhat to the left of the leadership, but not in tightly organised form, and there's no obvious correlation between left/right and activism - I know plenty of active and inactive people on both wings. It's pretty much always been that way in the 50 years I've been a member.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Nah. Those pawns on e4/e5 are holding both sides positions together and neither can afford to do much. I reckon black will put a bit of pressure on with Bb7 but there's no big attack coming.
But what do I know...
Not a lot apparently-
"4m ago 13:33 Nepomniachtchi plays 18. Ng3 after three minutes. Carlsen answers with 18. ... Ng6. The challenger takes two more minutes before getting his dark-squared bishop into the mix with 19. Be3. White enjoys a slight positional edge with black’s light-squared bishop in the weeds."
I think the Jenny Harries stuff is a complete red herring. If people are beginning to think about reviewing arrangements over the next month or so, it's nothing to do with what Harries (who hardly anybody has heard of) has said.
What makes people anxious is that after a prolonged period of quiescence on the Covid front we have had a week of serious pronouncements, and a slight rule change, from the Health Secretary and the Prime Minister. Both Javid and Johnson have put their 'this is serious' faces on. Javid has sounded quite rattled. Press conferences have been revived again - a sure sign of concern.
That's what's raised anxiety. Not Harries.
Pull the other one. The main headline in the Guardian was along the lines of “Johnson ignores experts”. Words have consequences.
I of course don’t mind her having her own opinion and it’s important for the process that we have diverging voices. But she should air that in private while part of the formal machine of government policy. Once the team decides on the strategy that is that. If she wants to diverge, she can give up her position and speak as freely as she wants.
Radio Scotland phone in has been fun this morning.
Callers flat out refusing to cancel any Christmas plans, asking how many more variants there will be and whether this will the case every Christmas for evermore.
Virologist comes on and responds with zero-covid strategy: "we must stop this variant in its tracks".
"We should not learn to live with it. We must eradicate it now"
To which the next question should be how do you do that? And drill the person down to he turns silent at which point the interviewer should say "so that would be impossible"...
Presenters response was to comment that it showed how misguided many callers were.
The Groupthink is strong that "something must be done, this is something, so this must be done".
To even suggest that death is a part of the circle of life and not to be prevented at all costs is now viewed as a monstrous suggestion by some people.
You don't think a thousand extra deaths a week, many of them avoidable, is enough?
I don't think its too many.
Most deaths are either the unvaccinated who can own their own choices, or people who are very vulnerable and could die from the common cold or flu or anything else.
NPIs made sense pre-PIs, not anymore. If a thousand 'extra' deaths is the 'new normal' then that's the new normal and that's what we have to live with, though I'm sceptical that excess deaths actually are a thousand a week.
You seemed concerned about people drowning in the channel in far smaller numbers.
They're healthy young people dying a horrible and preventable death and there's a simple solution to stop it happening that doesn't restrict the rights of anyone living here.
So you're a "zero crossings" believer then? Well, good luck with that.
I think crossings should be made safely and legally via humane routes, via proper planes or boats and not dinghies.
If anyone who crosses in a dinghy is instantly deported to a third party nation like Rwanda then the dinghies would stop overnight.
We should then offer MORE asylum to more people, but via proper and safe routes not via people smugglers.
It's touching when your naivety is so openly on display. You can't completely stop people entering the country illegally, even with the policy you describe. Oh you might be able to reduce it at a certain cost, but dinghies and stowaways and overstaying visas and even people walking across the Irish border will still happen. And sometimes people will die in the attempt. You can't legislate it away, you can't public awareness it away. Zero illegal immigration is a myth.
People don't drown in the sea if they overstay visas, people don't die walking across the border, people don't die if they've got here on a plane. I don't care about any of that, I'm OK with that.
I don't care if we don't have zero illegal immigration. People smugglers on a deadly crossing is a different matter.
It'll still happen though. People get through barbed wire, cross raging torrents, choose longer routes etc to avoid being caught. The error you're making is that you think the consequences of being caught will deter everyone. It's the same "hang 'em high" error that headchoppers and thief danglers make. They think perpetrators focus on the outcome if they're apprehended. But we know that very often people don't think they will get caught at all. That's why people slow down for speed cameras and then speed up when they think they're clear.
People will still board dinghies elsewhere no matter how diligently you patrol Dover or how assiduously you punish them when they're caught. And perhaps a higher percentage of them will drown trying from Cherbourg than Calais, who knows?
Except this has already worked in the real world.
"Worked" as in zero migrants? If you are talking about Australia then no, no it hasn't.
Indeed the rhetoric on this from Australia doesn't match reality.
Tens of thousands are on Bridging Visa E (which permits employment) in Australian communities, and only a few hundred on Nauru.
How did those who've got such a visa get into Australia though? Was it via boats, or planes, or some other means?
Nobody surely, least of all me, is suggesting that nobody should be here. Its the method to get here that's under discussion.
A mixture. About half of asylum seekers go by plane and half by boat.
Even a significant proportion of those offshored get Bridging Visa E.
Do you have a source on the number getting BVE via boats?
My understanding was that the vast bulk (if not nearly all) is from people who'd arrived via legal means then overstayed visas etc rather than arriving via boats.
From refugee Council of Australia:
That data is cumulative since eight years ago and doesn't come close to "tens of thousands".
These are the ones that actually were detained overseas. Many more never were, generally on medical or family grounds, and were kept in Australia.
Per capita, Australian asylum numbers are not very different to ours.
Again its not about asylum numbers, its about the numbers coming via boats.
Australian boat numbers collapsed to near-zero following their offshore processing. Asylum through other means continued and there's nothing wrong with that, indeed its a good thing.
You claimed tens of thousands from boats were in Australia on BVE visas. Do you have any figures to support that, or would you like to withdraw that comment?
As posted:
"As at 30 June 2020, 12,450 asylum seekers who arrived by boat remained in the community (10,245 with a current BVE and 2,205 awaiting grant of a further BVE). The remaining 24,576 asylum seekers who were granted BVEs were granted a substantive visa, departed Australia, returned to immigration detention or passed away"
Thank you. That's very different to the data you shared a moment ago.
That data includes people who arrived from 2011. The current policy that halted the boats started a couple of years later so the figures are probably distorted by that.
Your source says 37k have arrived since 2011 and that matches this data from the Refugee Council of Australia - note the annual split of that 37k.
Just a note to say that boat arrivals aren't the same as attempted crossings. Turning a boat back isn't the same as preventing an attempt. This is tangential to the immediate discussion but relevant to the earlier one with me.
Indeed but the figures are there. Once people realised that an attempted crossing couldn't work, the attempts stopped almost overnight. People aren't attempting the crossing anymore because there's no gain from attempting it.
People are attempting the crossing. Fewer, but they still are. My only point was that to expect to totally stop people trying to cross is as unrealistic as "zero covid".
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
Yep. I picture Davey at the election year party conf. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for confidence & supply to a minority Labour government". If that doesn't get the blood pumping nothing will.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Radio Scotland phone in has been fun this morning.
Callers flat out refusing to cancel any Christmas plans, asking how many more variants there will be and whether this will the case every Christmas for evermore.
Virologist comes on and responds with zero-covid strategy: "we must stop this variant in its tracks".
"We should not learn to live with it. We must eradicate it now"
To which the next question should be how do you do that? And drill the person down to he turns silent at which point the interviewer should say "so that would be impossible"...
Presenters response was to comment that it showed how misguided many callers were.
The Groupthink is strong that "something must be done, this is something, so this must be done".
To even suggest that death is a part of the circle of life and not to be prevented at all costs is now viewed as a monstrous suggestion by some people.
You don't think a thousand extra deaths a week, many of them avoidable, is enough?
I don't think its too many.
Most deaths are either the unvaccinated who can own their own choices, or people who are very vulnerable and could die from the common cold or flu or anything else.
NPIs made sense pre-PIs, not anymore. If a thousand 'extra' deaths is the 'new normal' then that's the new normal and that's what we have to live with, though I'm sceptical that excess deaths actually are a thousand a week.
You seemed concerned about people drowning in the channel in far smaller numbers.
They're healthy young people dying a horrible and preventable death and there's a simple solution to stop it happening that doesn't restrict the rights of anyone living here.
So you're a "zero crossings" believer then? Well, good luck with that.
I think crossings should be made safely and legally via humane routes, via proper planes or boats and not dinghies.
If anyone who crosses in a dinghy is instantly deported to a third party nation like Rwanda then the dinghies would stop overnight.
We should then offer MORE asylum to more people, but via proper and safe routes not via people smugglers.
It's touching when your naivety is so openly on display. You can't completely stop people entering the country illegally, even with the policy you describe. Oh you might be able to reduce it at a certain cost, but dinghies and stowaways and overstaying visas and even people walking across the Irish border will still happen. And sometimes people will die in the attempt. You can't legislate it away, you can't public awareness it away. Zero illegal immigration is a myth.
People don't drown in the sea if they overstay visas, people don't die walking across the border, people don't die if they've got here on a plane. I don't care about any of that, I'm OK with that.
I don't care if we don't have zero illegal immigration. People smugglers on a deadly crossing is a different matter.
It'll still happen though. People get through barbed wire, cross raging torrents, choose longer routes etc to avoid being caught. The error you're making is that you think the consequences of being caught will deter everyone. It's the same "hang 'em high" error that headchoppers and thief danglers make. They think perpetrators focus on the outcome if they're apprehended. But we know that very often people don't think they will get caught at all. That's why people slow down for speed cameras and then speed up when they think they're clear.
People will still board dinghies elsewhere no matter how diligently you patrol Dover or how assiduously you punish them when they're caught. And perhaps a higher percentage of them will drown trying from Cherbourg than Calais, who knows?
Except this has already worked in the real world.
"Worked" as in zero migrants? If you are talking about Australia then no, no it hasn't.
Indeed the rhetoric on this from Australia doesn't match reality.
Tens of thousands are on Bridging Visa E (which permits employment) in Australian communities, and only a few hundred on Nauru.
How did those who've got such a visa get into Australia though? Was it via boats, or planes, or some other means?
Nobody surely, least of all me, is suggesting that nobody should be here. Its the method to get here that's under discussion.
A mixture. About half of asylum seekers go by plane and half by boat.
Even a significant proportion of those offshored get Bridging Visa E.
Do you have a source on the number getting BVE via boats?
My understanding was that the vast bulk (if not nearly all) is from people who'd arrived via legal means then overstayed visas etc rather than arriving via boats.
From refugee Council of Australia:
That data is cumulative since eight years ago and doesn't come close to "tens of thousands".
These are the ones that actually were detained overseas. Many more never were, generally on medical or family grounds, and were kept in Australia.
Per capita, Australian asylum numbers are not very different to ours.
Again its not about asylum numbers, its about the numbers coming via boats.
Australian boat numbers collapsed to near-zero following their offshore processing. Asylum through other means continued and there's nothing wrong with that, indeed its a good thing.
You claimed tens of thousands from boats were in Australia on BVE visas. Do you have any figures to support that, or would you like to withdraw that comment?
As posted:
"As at 30 June 2020, 12,450 asylum seekers who arrived by boat remained in the community (10,245 with a current BVE and 2,205 awaiting grant of a further BVE). The remaining 24,576 asylum seekers who were granted BVEs were granted a substantive visa, departed Australia, returned to immigration detention or passed away"
Thank you. That's very different to the data you shared a moment ago.
That data includes people who arrived from 2011. The current policy that halted the boats started a couple of years later so the figures are probably distorted by that.
Your source says 37k have arrived since 2011 and that matches this data from the Refugee Council of Australia - note the annual split of that 37k.
Just a note to say that boat arrivals aren't the same as attempted crossings. Turning a boat back isn't the same as preventing an attempt. This is tangential to the immediate discussion but relevant to the earlier one with me.
Indeed but the figures are there. Once people realised that an attempted crossing couldn't work, the attempts stopped almost overnight. People aren't attempting the crossing anymore because there's no gain from attempting it.
People are attempting the crossing. Fewer, but they still are. My only point was that to expect to totally stop people trying to cross is as unrealistic as "zero covid".
Do you have a source saying people are attempting the crossing? How many? With annual data, not data from decades ago. Because the data I have from the Refugee Council of Australia says the crossings are virtually zero now.
Video has emerged of a group of men spitting at a bus full of Jewish teenagers in Oxford Street where the group were celebrating the first night of Chanukah.
I presume under twitter new rules this sort of thing will be banned, as the individuals spitting and hitting the bus with their shoes haven't given written consent to have their faces shown.
No. This is problem with getting your information from headlines and PB idiots. Here's the blogpost about the policy change. It clearly says there is a public interest "clause".
I was the one who linked to that yesterday and I read it and fully aware. Lets see how they apply it.....they are already incredibly inconsistent with other applications of their rules. That was somewhat facetiously my point.
Radio Scotland phone in has been fun this morning.
Callers flat out refusing to cancel any Christmas plans, asking how many more variants there will be and whether this will the case every Christmas for evermore.
Virologist comes on and responds with zero-covid strategy: "we must stop this variant in its tracks".
"We should not learn to live with it. We must eradicate it now"
To which the next question should be how do you do that? And drill the person down to he turns silent at which point the interviewer should say "so that would be impossible"...
Presenters response was to comment that it showed how misguided many callers were.
The Groupthink is strong that "something must be done, this is something, so this must be done".
To even suggest that death is a part of the circle of life and not to be prevented at all costs is now viewed as a monstrous suggestion by some people.
You don't think a thousand extra deaths a week, many of them avoidable, is enough?
I don't think its too many.
Most deaths are either the unvaccinated who can own their own choices, or people who are very vulnerable and could die from the common cold or flu or anything else.
NPIs made sense pre-PIs, not anymore. If a thousand 'extra' deaths is the 'new normal' then that's the new normal and that's what we have to live with, though I'm sceptical that excess deaths actually are a thousand a week.
You seemed concerned about people drowning in the channel in far smaller numbers.
They're healthy young people dying a horrible and preventable death and there's a simple solution to stop it happening that doesn't restrict the rights of anyone living here.
So you're a "zero crossings" believer then? Well, good luck with that.
I think crossings should be made safely and legally via humane routes, via proper planes or boats and not dinghies.
If anyone who crosses in a dinghy is instantly deported to a third party nation like Rwanda then the dinghies would stop overnight.
We should then offer MORE asylum to more people, but via proper and safe routes not via people smugglers.
It's touching when your naivety is so openly on display. You can't completely stop people entering the country illegally, even with the policy you describe. Oh you might be able to reduce it at a certain cost, but dinghies and stowaways and overstaying visas and even people walking across the Irish border will still happen. And sometimes people will die in the attempt. You can't legislate it away, you can't public awareness it away. Zero illegal immigration is a myth.
People don't drown in the sea if they overstay visas, people don't die walking across the border, people don't die if they've got here on a plane. I don't care about any of that, I'm OK with that.
I don't care if we don't have zero illegal immigration. People smugglers on a deadly crossing is a different matter.
It'll still happen though. People get through barbed wire, cross raging torrents, choose longer routes etc to avoid being caught. The error you're making is that you think the consequences of being caught will deter everyone. It's the same "hang 'em high" error that headchoppers and thief danglers make. They think perpetrators focus on the outcome if they're apprehended. But we know that very often people don't think they will get caught at all. That's why people slow down for speed cameras and then speed up when they think they're clear.
People will still board dinghies elsewhere no matter how diligently you patrol Dover or how assiduously you punish them when they're caught. And perhaps a higher percentage of them will drown trying from Cherbourg than Calais, who knows?
Except this has already worked in the real world.
"Worked" as in zero migrants? If you are talking about Australia then no, no it hasn't.
Indeed the rhetoric on this from Australia doesn't match reality.
Tens of thousands are on Bridging Visa E (which permits employment) in Australian communities, and only a few hundred on Nauru.
How did those who've got such a visa get into Australia though? Was it via boats, or planes, or some other means?
Nobody surely, least of all me, is suggesting that nobody should be here. Its the method to get here that's under discussion.
A mixture. About half of asylum seekers go by plane and half by boat.
Even a significant proportion of those offshored get Bridging Visa E.
Do you have a source on the number getting BVE via boats?
My understanding was that the vast bulk (if not nearly all) is from people who'd arrived via legal means then overstayed visas etc rather than arriving via boats.
From refugee Council of Australia:
That data is cumulative since eight years ago and doesn't come close to "tens of thousands".
These are the ones that actually were detained overseas. Many more never were, generally on medical or family grounds, and were kept in Australia.
Per capita, Australian asylum numbers are not very different to ours.
Again its not about asylum numbers, its about the numbers coming via boats.
Australian boat numbers collapsed to near-zero following their offshore processing. Asylum through other means continued and there's nothing wrong with that, indeed its a good thing.
You claimed tens of thousands from boats were in Australia on BVE visas. Do you have any figures to support that, or would you like to withdraw that comment?
As posted:
"As at 30 June 2020, 12,450 asylum seekers who arrived by boat remained in the community (10,245 with a current BVE and 2,205 awaiting grant of a further BVE). The remaining 24,576 asylum seekers who were granted BVEs were granted a substantive visa, departed Australia, returned to immigration detention or passed away"
Thank you. That's very different to the data you shared a moment ago.
That data includes people who arrived from 2011. The current policy that halted the boats started a couple of years later so the figures are probably distorted by that.
Your source says 37k have arrived since 2011 and that matches this data from the Refugee Council of Australia - note the annual split of that 37k.
Just a note to say that boat arrivals aren't the same as attempted crossings. Turning a boat back isn't the same as preventing an attempt. This is tangential to the immediate discussion but relevant to the earlier one with me.
Indeed but the figures are there. Once people realised that an attempted crossing couldn't work, the attempts stopped almost overnight. People aren't attempting the crossing anymore because there's no gain from attempting it.
People are attempting the crossing. Fewer, but they still are. My only point was that to expect to totally stop people trying to cross is as unrealistic as "zero covid".
Do you have a source saying people are attempting the crossing? How many? With annual data, not data from decades ago. Because the data I have from the Refugee Council of Australia says the crossings are virtually zero now.
Page two of the same site you're looking at. Completed crossings < attempts. Boats get turned back etc.
I've just caught up with PMQs. I note that JRM was wearing a mask; he has resolutely refused to do so previously. Does this mean that the Tory benches have suddenly become less "convivial and fraternal", as per his explanation a month ago for why he had no need to wear a mask in the HoC?
Either that or he's a hypocritical buffoon...
Well, I took that as read.
Is the HOC a space where they have become compulsory?
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
I think the Jenny Harries stuff is a complete red herring. If people are beginning to think about reviewing arrangements over the next month or so, it's nothing to do with what Harries (who hardly anybody has heard of) has said.
What makes people anxious is that after a prolonged period of quiescence on the Covid front we have had a week of serious pronouncements, and a slight rule change, from the Health Secretary and the Prime Minister. Both Javid and Johnson have put their 'this is serious' faces on. Javid has sounded quite rattled. Press conferences have been revived again - a sure sign of concern.
That's what's raised anxiety. Not Harries.
Pull the other one. The main headline in the Guardian was along the lines of “Johnson ignores experts”. Words have consequences.
I of course don’t mind her having her own opinion and it’s important for the process that we have diverging voices. But she should air that in private while part of the formal machine of government policy. Once the team decides on the strategy that is that. If she wants to diverge, she can give up her position and speak as freely as she wants.
Nobody reads The Guardian, surely (except me)? Anyway, you're missing the point of my post. It is government anxiety about Omicron, as displayed by HoC statements by Javid and the re-introduction of Covid press conferences, that have led the public to think 'oh shit, are we heading towards trouble again'?
Radio Scotland phone in has been fun this morning.
Callers flat out refusing to cancel any Christmas plans, asking how many more variants there will be and whether this will the case every Christmas for evermore.
Virologist comes on and responds with zero-covid strategy: "we must stop this variant in its tracks".
"We should not learn to live with it. We must eradicate it now"
To which the next question should be how do you do that? And drill the person down to he turns silent at which point the interviewer should say "so that would be impossible"...
Presenters response was to comment that it showed how misguided many callers were.
The Groupthink is strong that "something must be done, this is something, so this must be done".
To even suggest that death is a part of the circle of life and not to be prevented at all costs is now viewed as a monstrous suggestion by some people.
You don't think a thousand extra deaths a week, many of them avoidable, is enough?
I don't think its too many.
Most deaths are either the unvaccinated who can own their own choices, or people who are very vulnerable and could die from the common cold or flu or anything else.
NPIs made sense pre-PIs, not anymore. If a thousand 'extra' deaths is the 'new normal' then that's the new normal and that's what we have to live with, though I'm sceptical that excess deaths actually are a thousand a week.
You seemed concerned about people drowning in the channel in far smaller numbers.
They're healthy young people dying a horrible and preventable death and there's a simple solution to stop it happening that doesn't restrict the rights of anyone living here.
So you're a "zero crossings" believer then? Well, good luck with that.
I think crossings should be made safely and legally via humane routes, via proper planes or boats and not dinghies.
If anyone who crosses in a dinghy is instantly deported to a third party nation like Rwanda then the dinghies would stop overnight.
We should then offer MORE asylum to more people, but via proper and safe routes not via people smugglers.
It's touching when your naivety is so openly on display. You can't completely stop people entering the country illegally, even with the policy you describe. Oh you might be able to reduce it at a certain cost, but dinghies and stowaways and overstaying visas and even people walking across the Irish border will still happen. And sometimes people will die in the attempt. You can't legislate it away, you can't public awareness it away. Zero illegal immigration is a myth.
People don't drown in the sea if they overstay visas, people don't die walking across the border, people don't die if they've got here on a plane. I don't care about any of that, I'm OK with that.
I don't care if we don't have zero illegal immigration. People smugglers on a deadly crossing is a different matter.
It'll still happen though. People get through barbed wire, cross raging torrents, choose longer routes etc to avoid being caught. The error you're making is that you think the consequences of being caught will deter everyone. It's the same "hang 'em high" error that headchoppers and thief danglers make. They think perpetrators focus on the outcome if they're apprehended. But we know that very often people don't think they will get caught at all. That's why people slow down for speed cameras and then speed up when they think they're clear.
People will still board dinghies elsewhere no matter how diligently you patrol Dover or how assiduously you punish them when they're caught. And perhaps a higher percentage of them will drown trying from Cherbourg than Calais, who knows?
Except this has already worked in the real world.
"Worked" as in zero migrants? If you are talking about Australia then no, no it hasn't.
Indeed the rhetoric on this from Australia doesn't match reality.
Tens of thousands are on Bridging Visa E (which permits employment) in Australian communities, and only a few hundred on Nauru.
How did those who've got such a visa get into Australia though? Was it via boats, or planes, or some other means?
Nobody surely, least of all me, is suggesting that nobody should be here. Its the method to get here that's under discussion.
A mixture. About half of asylum seekers go by plane and half by boat.
Even a significant proportion of those offshored get Bridging Visa E.
Do you have a source on the number getting BVE via boats?
My understanding was that the vast bulk (if not nearly all) is from people who'd arrived via legal means then overstayed visas etc rather than arriving via boats.
From refugee Council of Australia:
That data is cumulative since eight years ago and doesn't come close to "tens of thousands".
These are the ones that actually were detained overseas. Many more never were, generally on medical or family grounds, and were kept in Australia.
Per capita, Australian asylum numbers are not very different to ours.
Again its not about asylum numbers, its about the numbers coming via boats.
Australian boat numbers collapsed to near-zero following their offshore processing. Asylum through other means continued and there's nothing wrong with that, indeed its a good thing.
You claimed tens of thousands from boats were in Australia on BVE visas. Do you have any figures to support that, or would you like to withdraw that comment?
As posted:
"As at 30 June 2020, 12,450 asylum seekers who arrived by boat remained in the community (10,245 with a current BVE and 2,205 awaiting grant of a further BVE). The remaining 24,576 asylum seekers who were granted BVEs were granted a substantive visa, departed Australia, returned to immigration detention or passed away"
Thank you. That's very different to the data you shared a moment ago.
That data includes people who arrived from 2011. The current policy that halted the boats started a couple of years later so the figures are probably distorted by that.
Your source says 37k have arrived since 2011 and that matches this data from the Refugee Council of Australia - note the annual split of that 37k.
Just a note to say that boat arrivals aren't the same as attempted crossings. Turning a boat back isn't the same as preventing an attempt. This is tangential to the immediate discussion but relevant to the earlier one with me.
Indeed but the figures are there. Once people realised that an attempted crossing couldn't work, the attempts stopped almost overnight. People aren't attempting the crossing anymore because there's no gain from attempting it.
People are attempting the crossing. Fewer, but they still are. My only point was that to expect to totally stop people trying to cross is as unrealistic as "zero covid".
Do you have a source saying people are attempting the crossing? How many? With annual data, not data from decades ago. Because the data I have from the Refugee Council of Australia says the crossings are virtually zero now.
Page two of the same site you're looking at. Completed crossings < attempts. Boats get turned back etc.
Yes the data on Page 2 shows that the numbers of people turned back are in the dozens rather than hundreds or thousands.
So again, virtually zero. A few people try it on, but not many. The days of tens of thousands attempting are long over.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Is everything all right John?
Sorry you are watching the chess! ♟
With Briskin he could just as easily be tripping. The man's clearly a basket case.
Too rude! 🤨
Yet... true
Not true - I'm strictly Cigarettes and Alcohol these days.
...and a basket case
Whenever I read an accusation someone is a basket case it shows a profound lack of understanding of mental health, the debilitating effect on the sufferer and their family
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
I think the Jenny Harries stuff is a complete red herring. If people are beginning to think about reviewing arrangements over the next month or so, it's nothing to do with what Harries (who hardly anybody has heard of) has said.
What makes people anxious is that after a prolonged period of quiescence on the Covid front we have had a week of serious pronouncements, and a slight rule change, from the Health Secretary and the Prime Minister. Both Javid and Johnson have put their 'this is serious' faces on. Javid has sounded quite rattled. Press conferences have been revived again - a sure sign of concern.
That's what's raised anxiety. Not Harries.
Of course they are concerned. Have you not seen the polling?
Labour were miles ahead of the LDs at the last election in North Shropshire. Why are they almost certainly going to come third this time? Seems like an interesting question to me.
Because the Lib Dems seem to have woken up after the 2019 general election and started campaigning properly again, perhaps. The result was at the last round of local elections they came within a whisker of winning half a dozen county/unitary seats in the North Shropshire constituency, and then just carried on campaigning. And this has continued seamlessly into the byelection, with the Westminster candidate from last time standing as the candidate this time too, and almost winning a county/unitary seat on the way.
In contrast, Labour dropped their candidate who stood at the last three Westminster elections - seemingly not without a measure of ill-will. And Labour are busy fighting things out among themselves even at the highest level of the party, as today's news stories show.
The results of the 2019 general election are now ancient history. And I hear tell that a lot of people who voted Conservative then did so only because they were afraid of a Corbyn government. This is no longer the case.
Two of the reasons for the improvement in LibDem campaigning, I think, are the election of Mark Pack as president of the LibDems and the extra donations received during the 2019 general election.
It will be a bit embarrassing if the bloke who wrote "How to Win an Election" didn't win any elections...
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Nah. Those pawns on e4/e5 are holding both sides positions together and neither can afford to do much. I reckon black will put a bit of pressure on with Bb7 but there's no big attack coming.
But what do I know...
Not a lot apparently-
"4m ago 13:33 Nepomniachtchi plays 18. Ng3 after three minutes. Carlsen answers with 18. ... Ng6. The challenger takes two more minutes before getting his dark-squared bishop into the mix with 19. Be3. White enjoys a slight positional edge with black’s light-squared bishop in the weeds."
OT, Monbiot is bracingly and completely correct this morning that the extra amendments bolted on to the policing bill, and completely missed by the media, as well as parts of the original bill itself, are a threat to all of us and our basic democratic rights.
Most concerning of all, among many concerns, is the open door to making any noisy, rather than violent, protest - and even helping to publicise such a protest online, by retweeting it, for instance - an arrestable offence.
Very concerning stuff, and as so often in the last two decades, the British media, claiming to be fearless, is asleep at the wheel .
Hmmm. I'll go as far as strong scrutiny is required.
I was shocked to see that even Theresa May has emerged as one of the critics of the Policing Bill. I always thought of her as somewhat of an authoritarian, and compared to Cameron, she was. But it seems that even she sees the extreme dangers of in particular being able to cast what is "disruptive" at will. We seem to be on a trajectory further and further away from proper oversight and accountability.
There is something seriously wrong with this government's approach to democratic checks and balances, as we saw last month in the Commons, and again last week with Dacre, who in the end even himself saw the weakness and absurdity of his position and gave up.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Went to see my GP this morning because of headaches. Getting an "emergency" CT scan some time before Christmas and advised to go private for my respiratory issues because nothing is going to happen soon. Told by the GP that the waiting time for gynaecology (not for me, of course) is now 2 years. He sees no prospects of anything improving in the foreseeable.
My GP is an excellent chap and expressed frustration at how many times he is now recommending private health care. He said he is a strong believer in the NHS but the long term underfunding (in his view) has simply meant it cannot cope with something like Covid and the reductions in capacity that the safeguards bring about.
Pretty sobering way to start the day.
Serious Q: How do the protestations about "there is no capacity" from the Drs' organisations match up with the reality that huge numbers of GPs work part time?
Perhaps we need a condition to require extra hours in time of need in the GP part time contract?
How does forcing folk to work hours they don't choose to (or are incapable of) fit with the bleatings about encroachment on our precious liberties?
You'd have to ask a sheep with such a view.
It seems to be to be a reasonable part of the package for someone with a rewarding and lucrative career in a publicly funded service, who has had a six figure sum (200k or so now?) invested by the taxpayer in their training.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Is everything all right John?
Sorry you are watching the chess! ♟
With Briskin he could just as easily be tripping. The man's clearly a basket case.
Too rude! 🤨
Yet... true
Not true - I'm strictly Cigarettes and Alcohol these days.
...and a basket case
Whenever I read an accusation someone is a basket case it shows a profound lack of understanding of mental health, the debilitating effect on the sufferer and their family
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
Sure, and when someone accuses me of being "pro-Peado", I tend to give it back to them with both barrels. At least what I said is true.
On a slightly tangential note I had a small bet with @rkrkrk that there would be no more legal restrictions this year, winnings to the site. If the administrators can put up the donate button I will make the donation since I have clearly lost.
Thanks DavidL - you got unlucky with Omicron I think!
Labour were miles ahead of the LDs at the last election in North Shropshire. Why are they almost certainly going to come third this time? Seems like an interesting question to me.
Because the Lib Dems seem to have woken up after the 2019 general election and started campaigning properly again, perhaps. The result was at the last round of local elections they came within a whisker of winning half a dozen county/unitary seats in the North Shropshire constituency, and then just carried on campaigning. And this has continued seamlessly into the byelection, with the Westminster candidate from last time standing as the candidate this time too, and almost winning a county/unitary seat on the way.
In contrast, Labour dropped their candidate who stood at the last three Westminster elections - seemingly not without a measure of ill-will. And Labour are busy fighting things out among themselves even at the highest level of the party, as today's news stories show.
The results of the 2019 general election are now ancient history. And I hear tell that a lot of people who voted Conservative then did so only because they were afraid of a Corbyn government. This is no longer the case.
Two of the reasons for the improvement in LibDem campaigning, I think, are the election of Mark Pack as president of the LibDems and the extra donations received during the 2019 general election.
It will be a bit embarrassing if the bloke who wrote "How to Win an Election" didn't win any elections...
Which was the episode of the West Wing, where Toby is drinking in a bar and admits to a fellow drinker that up to that point (it was a pre Bartlett flashback) he'd always lost?
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Nah. Those pawns on e4/e5 are holding both sides positions together and neither can afford to do much. I reckon black will put a bit of pressure on with Bb7 but there's no big attack coming.
But what do I know...
Not a lot apparently-
"4m ago 13:33 Nepomniachtchi plays 18. Ng3 after three minutes. Carlsen answers with 18. ... Ng6. The challenger takes two more minutes before getting his dark-squared bishop into the mix with 19. Be3. White enjoys a slight positional edge with black’s light-squared bishop in the weeds."
Black is slightly worse and needs to get his white bishop involved somehow but without losing control of f5.
It might be hard for either side to do anything without weakening their own defensive position.
We shall see.
If I say White has a powerful mode of attack and the Guardian reports that as "slight positional edge" I take that as a Brisky win.
Although I'm only a club player (or at least was before the pandemic), I have a 100% record against world championship candidates (seriously!).
I only got a draw against Kasperov. (who just happened to be playing 40 odd other people at the same time with the same time on his clock as me). Glory days though.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Is everything all right John?
Sorry you are watching the chess! ♟
With Briskin he could just as easily be tripping. The man's clearly a basket case.
Too rude! 🤨
Yet... true
Not true - I'm strictly Cigarettes and Alcohol these days.
...and a basket case
Whenever I read an accusation someone is a basket case it shows a profound lack of understanding of mental health, the debilitating effect on the sufferer and their family
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
Sure, and when someone accuses me of being "pro-Peado", I tend to give it back to them with both barrels. At least what I said is true.
Defend Derek McKay all you want mate - I'm here all day.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Is everything all right John?
Sorry you are watching the chess! ♟
With Briskin he could just as easily be tripping. The man's clearly a basket case.
Too rude! 🤨
Yet... true
Not true - I'm strictly Cigarettes and Alcohol these days.
...and a basket case
Whenever I read an accusation someone is a basket case it shows a profound lack of understanding of mental health, the debilitating effect on the sufferer and their family
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
Sure, and when someone accuses me of being "pro-Peado", I tend to give it back to them with both barrels. At least what I said is true.
Defend Derek McKay all you want mate - I'm here all day.
Never even tried to defend him. That's one of the symptoms of being a basket case, you start thinking conversations that happened only in your head actually happened in real life.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Nah. Those pawns on e4/e5 are holding both sides positions together and neither can afford to do much. I reckon black will put a bit of pressure on with Bb7 but there's no big attack coming.
But what do I know...
Not a lot apparently-
"4m ago 13:33 Nepomniachtchi plays 18. Ng3 after three minutes. Carlsen answers with 18. ... Ng6. The challenger takes two more minutes before getting his dark-squared bishop into the mix with 19. Be3. White enjoys a slight positional edge with black’s light-squared bishop in the weeds."
Black is slightly worse and needs to get his white bishop involved somehow but without losing control of f5.
It might be hard for either side to do anything without weakening their own defensive position.
We shall see.
If I say White has a powerful mode of attack and the Guardian reports that as "slight positional edge" I take that as a Brisky win.
Although I'm only a club player (or at least was before the pandemic), I have a 100% record against world championship candidates (seriously!).
I only got a draw against Kasperov. (who just happened to be playing 40 odd other people at the same time with the same time on his clock as me). Glory days though.
Lol, that's a decent result as Kasparov was pretty good at simultaneous games.
You guessed right at the circumstances though, it was Nigel Short and he was playing 29 others. He was nowhere near Kasparov's class at the genre. Not on the clock though.
A double horsey attack on the right flank looks quite powerful...
Is everything all right John?
Sorry you are watching the chess! ♟
With Briskin he could just as easily be tripping. The man's clearly a basket case.
Too rude! 🤨
Yet... true
Not true - I'm strictly Cigarettes and Alcohol these days.
...and a basket case
Whenever I read an accusation someone is a basket case it shows a profound lack of understanding of mental health, the debilitating effect on the sufferer and their family
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
Sure, and when someone accuses me of being "pro-Peado", I tend to give it back to them with both barrels. At least what I said is true.
Defend Derek McKay all you want mate - I'm here all day.
Never even tried to defend him. That's one of the symptoms of being a basket case, you start thinking conversations that happened only in your head actually happened in real life.
I've just caught up with PMQs. I note that JRM was wearing a mask; he has resolutely refused to do so previously. Does this mean that the Tory benches have suddenly become less "convivial and fraternal", as per his explanation a month ago for why he had no need to wear a mask in the HoC?
I see the original arstechnica report says the Pfizer pill has a different mechanism of action, which doesn't rely on disrupting the genetic side of matters, so presumably less mutagenic (ie dangerous for the pregnant or rather their embryos.
Let's face it there is also this amusing, completely unscientific but deep rooted belief among the general population that they are more likely to catch Covid off strangers than people they know well. Even though the opposite is largely true. A Covid version of children's stranger-danger. Even JRM seemed to buy it when justifying the Tory MPs mixing maskless.
I don't think people are comparing the relative risks, they're comparing the relative risk:reward ratios.
There's a lot more reward from mixing with friends and family than with strangers, so even if the risk is also higher the ratio is still in favour of prioritising mixing with friends and family over mixing with strangers.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
I'm talking about the electorate deciding who rules the UK> And with respect to that, it's more that: The SNP's job is to make sure Westminster cannot rule Scotland. It's reasonable for the electorate of E&W to decide that they don't want a government beholden to the SNP, and vote accordingly, surely?
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
I see the original arstechnica report says the Pfizer pill has a different mechanism of action, which doesn't rely on disrupting the genetic side of matters, so presumably less mutagenic (ie dangerous for the pregnant or rather their embryos.
It's also considerably more effective, according to the data out there.
Having spent 3 days in North Shropshire - polling would be very difficult - huge area with lots of small villages. Am expecting a low turnout of traditional Conservatives - Asked someone yesterday who she would be voting for - replied Helen. If the electorate are on first name terms with you then you have a chance!
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Eventually the opinion pollsters might even cease to poll Scotland in British polls, just as they don't poll NI.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Eventually the opinion pollsters might even cease to poll Scotland in British polls, just as they don't poll NI.
At least it would stop the SNP Type posters on this site posting their Scottish Sub Samples.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Eventually the opinion pollsters might even cease to poll Scotland in British polls, just as they don't poll NI.
It probably makes a lot of sense to conduct opinion polls separately already. Same with Wales.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Funny, I didn't have you down as thinking of Labour as a credible party of national government.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Funny, I didn't have you down as thinking of Labour as a credible party of national government.
Starmer is clearly not a bad politician. To go from 25 points behind to tied is impressive.
Whether he’s a great politician, only time will tell.
12 years into a a Tory Government and being tied midterm in the polls is impressive?
Labour should be 10-15 clear at this stage
That is grade A bollox. We are just 2 years after a landslide Con election victory.
That’s very rudely put Kinny. That Conservatives can’t see or acknowledge how much more of a threat libdems and Labour will be to them next time and how much less potent Boris and his promises will be next time is actually very funny.
Yes, I'm not one to underestimate the Magnificent but I'm slowly growing in confidence that it will be close.
It’s a change of government to libdems and Labour with SNP ensuring budget and confidence. This is turning into a fag end government now.
I'm an outsider but I always imagine the rest of the UK wouldn't put up with Blackford and co propping up a Labour government, and the threat of it seems to have worked well in the past. Surely just put clips of him standing up saying anything he's ever said and "do you want the PM beholden to this?" for a few weeks and the Labour Minority govt threat collapses? Or am I way out?
"Unionists don't want to let elected MPs take part at Westminster just cos they are Scots" is not a good look. Least of all for a supposedly unionist party.
Not a good look to who? If the Scots won't vote for a credible party of national government then the real parties will stop giving a fig what they think, and English voters certainly won't punish them for that. Same reason no one gives a monkeys what anyone in NI thinks.
Eventually the opinion pollsters might even cease to poll Scotland in British polls, just as they don't poll NI.
It probably makes a lot of sense to conduct opinion polls separately already. Same with Wales.
I'd assume the S**tch E***rts would then feel morally obliged to stop proffering their low-info cra...er...timeless insights on the state of play in Scotland.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
I think CK deserves its rep as masterpiece and in the GOAT conversation. I've seen it many times and I'd watch it again tonight if it was on. It's quite a short film which seems to last a long time, normally a criticism but in this case not. Because the reason it seems to last a long time is it really does encapsulate a human life. The episodic structure is very clever in how it does this. Lots of information is delivered in a lean and elegant way. At the end you know all there is of importance to know about Charles Foster Kane, and because of who he is and how he lived you get insights into big things like media & politics as well as into what the film is really about - how life corrupts and a life without love corrupts absolutely. Bet everyone on here, regardless of how different we are, has a Rosebud.
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
Bet everyone on here, regardless of how different we are, has a Rosebud.
*Spoilers*
Of course living in the north east of Scotland it makes sense - but mine was a crappy red bit of plastic.
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Sorry to see you yawning in the afternoon, I'm guessing you must have just been listening to a Keir Starmer speech?
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
I think CK deserves its rep as masterpiece and in the GOAT conversation. I've seen it many times and I'd watch it again tonight if it was on. It's quite a short film which seems to last a long time, normally a criticism but in this case not. Because the reason it seems to last a long time is it really does encapsulate a human life. The episodic structure is very clever in how it does this. Lots of information is delivered in a lean and elegant way. At the end you know all there is of importance to know about Charles Foster Kane, and because of who he is and how he lived you get insights into big things like media & politics as well as into what the film is really about - how life corrupts and a life without love corrupts absolutely. Bet everyone on here, regardless of how different we are, has a Rosebud.
Ok, time to have a festive all time top 10 movies thing? Or top 5 if that's too much.
Pour moi (in no real order)
Blade Runner Casablanca The Third Man The Searchers Wings of Desire Godfather Alien Paths of Glory Das Boot Death of Stalin
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
I think CK deserves its rep as masterpiece and in the GOAT conversation. I've seen it many times and I'd watch it again tonight if it was on. It's quite a short film which seems to last a long time, normally a criticism but in this case not. Because the reason it seems to last a long time is it really does encapsulate a human life. The episodic structure is very clever in how it does this. Lots of information is delivered in a lean and elegant way. At the end you know all there is of importance to know about Charles Foster Kane, and because of who he is and how he lived you get insights into big things like media & politics as well as into what the film is really about - how life corrupts and a life without love corrupts absolutely. Bet everyone on here, regardless of how different we are, has a Rosebud.
Ok, time to have a festive all time top 10 movies thing? Or top 5 if that's too much.
Pour moi (in no real order)
Blade Runner Casablanca The Third Man The Searchers Wings of Desire Godfather Alien Paths of Glory Das Boot Death of Stalin
Not bad. Three of those (Casablanca, Bladerunner and Wings of Desire) could make my top 10. W of D definitely would. I’d throw in Manhattan and Through a Glass Darkly, and up to half a dozen Terence Davies films!
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Sorry to see you yawning in the afternoon, I'm guessing you must have just been listening to a Keir Starmer speech?
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
I do fear Boris Johnson. I fear the damage he is inflicting on the country and the Conservative party by attracting people like you and Isam to be members. I also fear that gullible fools like you who support him might encourage him to stay where he is.
I also often yawn in the afternoon, as I am sure most people on here do when they see one of your puerile ill-informed keyboard warrior posts on one subject or other that you have zero experience or perspective on.
Casablanca is a great film - one of the black and whites to watch younglings.
I love it. But it wans’t made as a main feature was it, still writing it as they filmed it, knocked it up quickly and cheaply, yet it all works. German and French trying to out sing each other is so totally unforgettable moment from any film.
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
I liked Citizen Kane on first viewing but the re-watch was a bit more of a bore-fest.
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
I think CK deserves its rep as masterpiece and in the GOAT conversation. I've seen it many times and I'd watch it again tonight if it was on. It's quite a short film which seems to last a long time, normally a criticism but in this case not. Because the reason it seems to last a long time is it really does encapsulate a human life. The episodic structure is very clever in how it does this. Lots of information is delivered in a lean and elegant way. At the end you know all there is of importance to know about Charles Foster Kane, and because of who he is and how he lived you get insights into big things like media & politics as well as into what the film is really about - how life corrupts and a life without love corrupts absolutely. Bet everyone on here, regardless of how different we are, has a Rosebud.
Ok, time to have a festive all time top 10 movies thing? Or top 5 if that's too much.
Pour moi (in no real order)
Blade Runner Casablanca The Third Man The Searchers Wings of Desire Godfather Alien Paths of Glory Das Boot Death of Stalin
No real order:
The Empire Strikes Back The Usual Suspects The Godfather The Godfather Part 2 The Shawshank Redemption Superman Batman Begins The Dark Knight The Dark Knight Rises Avengers: Infinity War
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Sorry to see you yawning in the afternoon, I'm guessing you must have just been listening to a Keir Starmer speech?
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
I do fear Boris Johnson. I fear the damage he is inflicting on the country and the Conservative party by attracting people like you and Isam to be members. I also fear that gullible fools like you who support him might encourage him to stay where he is.
I also often yawn in the afternoon, as I am sure most people on here do when they see one of your puerile ill-informed keyboard warrior posts on one subject or other that you have zero experience or perspective on.
Boris Johnson didn't attract me to the Conservative Party, I've almost always been a Conservative. I voted for David Cameron in 2005 (after joining the Party repelled by the fact the blue rinse brigade had voted for IDS so I wanted a say next time).
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Sorry to see you yawning in the afternoon, I'm guessing you must have just been listening to a Keir Starmer speech?
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
I do fear Boris Johnson. I fear the damage he is inflicting on the country and the Conservative party by attracting people like you and Isam to be members. I also fear that gullible fools like you who support him might encourage him to stay where he is.
I also often yawn in the afternoon, as I am sure most people on here do when they see one of your puerile ill-informed keyboard warrior posts on one subject or other that you have zero experience or perspective on.
Boris Johnson didn't attract me to the Conservative Party, I've almost always been a Conservative. I voted for David Cameron in 2005 (after joining the Party repelled by the fact the blue rinse brigade had voted for IDS so I wanted a say next time).
To be fair, the party always has had it's fair share of oddities. Sad thing is that they are currently still in the ascendency. The grown ups will eventually take it back though. Much the same is happening with Labour. The wierdos and oddities then become the minority as many leave and return to the extremist prejudiced swamps from which they came. I am sure the English National Party will have a role for a keyboard warrior.
Yawn, breaking news: "Isam", a candidate for UKIP or Brexit Party (can't remember which crypto-fascist party), more latterly, No2 PB fanboy for the most ludicrous PM in history, posts another obsessive uncomplimentary post about Sir Kier Starmer.
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Sorry to see you yawning in the afternoon, I'm guessing you must have just been listening to a Keir Starmer speech?
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
I wish people wouldn’t say “mandatory vaccines” when they mean something else.
Mandatory vaccines are repugnant. But a surcharge for people who don’t / won’t get vaccinated is actually OK given the strain on health services.
So is a surcharge for eating unwisely and having poor metabolic health, not exercising, living in poor housing, being of low social status. All of these make you more likely to get ill or die.
The vaccine doesn't stop you spreading the disease or passing it on. All-cause mortality was statistically the same in the 'experimental' as in the 'control' group. Dr. Aseem Malhotra has given a 1 min. interview on the academic work suggesting a higher risk of heart disease in the vaccinated ... hardly surprising, given that it causes micro-blood clots for a period. Therefore I submit that you're talking b******s.
Go and read some medical literature ... make your own minds up who is telling the truth.
Funnily I've said that on & off for a year and no-one here seems to bother. They just rely on BBC and Guardian propaganda and the rest of the ... yuk .. 'Trusted News Initiative'.
Comments
Only a few hundred, not tens of thousands, in a decade got it from the other data.
The annual data shows the crossing dropped to virtually zero after 2013 and have stayed at virtually zero. Including people who arrived in 2011 doesn't change that.
I do agree with Whispering Oracle on the membership - it's somewhat to the left of the leadership, but not in tightly organised form, and there's no obvious correlation between left/right and activism - I know plenty of active and inactive people on both wings. It's pretty much always been that way in the 50 years I've been a member.
I of course don’t mind her having her own opinion and it’s important for the process that we have diverging voices. But she should air that in private while part of the formal machine of government policy. Once the team decides on the strategy that is that. If she wants to diverge, she can give up her position and speak as freely as she wants.
My only point was that to expect to totally stop people trying to cross is as unrealistic as "zero covid".
On the other hand, big budget Citizen Kane doesn’t do much for me. It has component parts but not the flow.
Love It’s a wonderful life.
Survation/Mail on Sunday 2017-12-01
Con 38
Lab 46
LD 6
Green 4
19 MONTHS INTO AN SKS LEADERSHIP SKS has underperformed "even Corbyn" in EVERY REAL ELECTION
2021 LE's did worse than even Corbyn
Every Parliamentary BY Election did worse than even Corbyn
The useless nonentity cant even match even Corbyn
The other black and white I'd recommend is His Girl Friday.
Anyway, you're missing the point of my post. It is government anxiety about Omicron, as displayed by HoC statements by Javid and the re-introduction of Covid press conferences, that have led the public to think 'oh shit, are we heading towards trouble again'?
So again, virtually zero. A few people try it on, but not many. The days of tens of thousands attempting are long over.
My own family's battles with extreme mental health and PTSD are well known, but it is also true several of our own posters have admitted to mental health problems and treatments and I just think we need to be kinder
https://euobserver.com/opinion/153678
There is something seriously wrong with this government's approach to democratic checks and balances, as we saw last month in the Commons, and again last week with Dacre, who in the end even himself saw the weakness and absurdity of his position and gave up.
It seems to be to be a reasonable part of the package for someone with a rewarding and lucrative career in a publicly funded service, who has had a six figure sum (200k or so now?) invested by the taxpayer in their training.
At least what I said is true.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/11/womp-womp-efficacy-of-mercks-thor-inspired-covid-pill-crumbles-vexing-experts/
In fact, it looks as though it may be dangerous for pregnant women.
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CW1FV-7Lqj4/?utm_medium=copy_link
You guessed right at the circumstances though, it was Nigel Short and he was playing 29 others. He was nowhere near Kasparov's class at the genre. Not on the clock though.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/first-oral-antiviral-for-covid-19-lagevrio-molnupiravir-approved-by-mhra
That decision might have to be revisited...
(#chess)
There's a lot more reward from mixing with friends and family than with strangers, so even if the risk is also higher the ratio is still in favour of prioritising mixing with friends and family over mixing with strangers.
A game slower than cricket.
A nil-all draw to continue the sports topic.
"Keir Starmer lacks that little bit of political stardust." ✨
"He doesn't have a fourth gear." 🚘
@MattChorley | @patrickkmaguire’
https://twitter.com/timesradio/status/1466028780254904321?s=21
https://twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1466002425626648584
I think the bishops, rooks and Queens have all been wiped out.
Looks like I called it right with my nil-all draw metaphor.
I think they've both got a rook a bishop and a two knights.
Game On.
I've seen boards thrown and near punch ups (as the ref!)
Stuck in 1st underperforming "even Corbyn" in every real Electoral test in his first 19 months
He must really fear him to post so much crap to convince himself he isn't any good.
Of course living in the north east of Scotland it makes sense - but mine was a crappy red bit of plastic.
It isn't big or clever to rephrase ever criticism as "fear". By your logic, you must really fear Boris given your posts on the subject.
Pour moi (in no real order)
Blade Runner
Casablanca
The Third Man
The Searchers
Wings of Desire
Godfather
Alien
Paths of Glory
Das Boot
Death of Stalin
I also often yawn in the afternoon, as I am sure most people on here do when they see one of your puerile ill-informed keyboard warrior posts on one subject or other that you have zero experience or perspective on.
The Empire Strikes Back
The Usual Suspects
The Godfather
The Godfather Part 2
The Shawshank Redemption
Superman
Batman Begins
The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight Rises
Avengers: Infinity War
The vaccine doesn't stop you spreading the disease or passing it on. All-cause mortality was statistically the same in the 'experimental' as in the 'control' group. Dr. Aseem Malhotra has given a 1 min. interview on the academic work suggesting a higher risk of heart disease in the vaccinated ... hardly surprising, given that it causes micro-blood clots for a period. Therefore I submit that you're talking b******s.
Go and read some medical literature ... make your own minds up who is telling the truth.
Funnily I've said that on & off for a year and no-one here seems to bother. They just rely on BBC and Guardian propaganda and the rest of the ... yuk .. 'Trusted News Initiative'.