I expect a reduced Labour lead today with Redfield and Wilton of about 10% as the storm slowly blows over.
I can see Johnson lasting at least another 6-11 months.
Storm slowly blowing over talk is just silly given that we are only on the way in at the moment. Unless you expect Gray to be a damp squib and I don't see how that works because it requires her finding nothing to see here move along, and everybody meekly accepting that.
Are you on the side of the rebels, Z, your hopes and best wishes travel with them? If so You have to regard yourself as being in a partial position, a protagonist, either unconsciously or consciously, your posts on this are lacking something because of it.
The coup attempt was right IMO It’s better for Tories in long run the policy chalk board changed hand to those who can put better things on it. But then the coup revealed something nobody knew existed - there is still too much faith at this time in Project Boris, he has enough support believing he has not failed yet.
He will probably lead them into the next election now, and at this stage none of us can be certain he will cease to be PM after it.
Blessed are the PB MoonRabbits, analysing and predicting what is actually happening rather than just posting partisan gumpf or following media narrative 😇
I want Johnson gone, sure, but I have large ish betting positions so am trying to see beyond my personal preferences
We will see. The coup attempt hasn't really not succeeded yet, though. If I were a plotter I'd be begging my supporters to hold fire on letters until Gray has reported.
From confident, you are now sounding uncertain, as the penny drops: has it missed its moment to succeed. (I’m going easy on you but I have already analysed why it failed and I moved on from it days ago. As usual PB will treat my posts as though I am insanely out of touch, and slowly catch up with me to claim they knew this all the time).
But let’s not miss that there are other things afoot on what is a big news day. Emmerdale is being moved from its current slot.
And Liz Truss team are styling her brilliantly. If it did come to a leadership election (small chance) you would have to argue substance always triumphs over style, otherwise she’s got it in the bag now.
Already done it. See down thread where I already commented on this former PB analysis (before my time but I gather was arch Remainer who couldn’t accept defeat?)
It wasn’t just that Mr Meeks couldn’t accept defeat, it was more that Brexit seemed to make him physically ill, and delirious with loathing
Which is a damn shame, as he is super sharp and was a great commenter on PB. He is missed. But note that he removed himself (wisely, for his sanity) - no one chased him off
It seems that you can't accept "victory" as you seem to post about Brexit even more than you do about aliens and the Chinese or how good your latest cocktail is/was. Maybe it is because you realise it was nothing more than a pyrrhic victory, and that Mr. Meeks was right all along?
Or, I just post a lot - on a lot of different subjects. There is always that explanation
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
I expect a reduced Labour lead today with Redfield and Wilton of about 10% as the storm slowly blows over.
I can see Johnson lasting at least another 6-11 months.
Storm slowly blowing over talk is just silly given that we are only on the way in at the moment. Unless you expect Gray to be a damp squib and I don't see how that works because it requires her finding nothing to see here move along, and everybody meekly accepting that.
Are you on the side of the rebels, Z, your hopes and best wishes travel with them? If so You have to regard yourself as being in a partial position, a protagonist, either unconsciously or consciously, your posts on this are lacking something because of it.
The coup attempt was right IMO It’s better for Tories in long run the policy chalk board changed hand to those who can put better things on it. But then the coup revealed something nobody knew existed - there is still too much faith at this time in Project Boris, he has enough support believing he has not failed yet.
He will probably lead them into the next election now, and at this stage none of us can be certain he will cease to be PM after it.
Blessed are the PB MoonRabbits, analysing and predicting what is actually happening rather than just posting partisan gumpf or following media narrative 😇
I want Johnson gone, sure, but I have large ish betting positions so am trying to see beyond my personal preferences
We will see. The coup attempt hasn't really not succeeded yet, though. If I were a plotter I'd be begging my supporters to hold fire on letters until Gray has reported.
From confident, you are now sounding uncertain, as the penny drops: has it missed its moment to succeed. (I’m going easy on you but I have already analysed why it failed and I moved on from it days ago. As usual PB will treat my posts as though I am insanely out of touch, and slowly catch up with me to claim they knew this all the time).
But let’s not miss that there are other things afoot on what is a big news day. Emmerdale is being moved from its current slot.
And Liz Truss team are styling her brilliantly. If it did come to a leadership election (small chance) you would have to argue substance always triumphs over style, otherwise she’s got it in the bag now.
Already done it. See down thread where I already commented on this former PB analysis (before my time but I gather was arch Remainer who couldn’t accept defeat?)
It wasn’t just that Mr Meeks couldn’t accept defeat, it was more that Brexit seemed to make him physically ill, and delirious with loathing
Which is a damn shame, as he is super sharp and was a great commenter on PB. He is missed. But note that he removed himself (wisely, for his sanity) - no one chased him off
It seems that you can't accept "victory" as you seem to post about Brexit even more than you do about aliens and the Chinese or how good your latest cocktail is/was. Maybe it is because you realise it was nothing more than a pyrrhic victory, and that Mr. Meeks was right all along?
Or, I just post a lot - on a lot of different subjects. There is always that explanation
Indeed. Almost 15000 I see in just this incarnation alone.
I expect a reduced Labour lead today with Redfield and Wilton of about 10% as the storm slowly blows over.
I can see Johnson lasting at least another 6-11 months.
Storm slowly blowing over talk is just silly given that we are only on the way in at the moment. Unless you expect Gray to be a damp squib and I don't see how that works because it requires her finding nothing to see here move along, and everybody meekly accepting that.
Are you on the side of the rebels, Z, your hopes and best wishes travel with them? If so You have to regard yourself as being in a partial position, a protagonist, either unconsciously or consciously, your posts on this are lacking something because of it.
The coup attempt was right IMO It’s better for Tories in long run the policy chalk board changed hand to those who can put better things on it. But then the coup revealed something nobody knew existed - there is still too much faith at this time in Project Boris, he has enough support believing he has not failed yet.
He will probably lead them into the next election now, and at this stage none of us can be certain he will cease to be PM after it.
Blessed are the PB MoonRabbits, analysing and predicting what is actually happening rather than just posting partisan gumpf or following media narrative 😇
I want Johnson gone, sure, but I have large ish betting positions so am trying to see beyond my personal preferences
We will see. The coup attempt hasn't really not succeeded yet, though. If I were a plotter I'd be begging my supporters to hold fire on letters until Gray has reported.
From confident, you are now sounding uncertain, as the penny drops: has it missed its moment to succeed. (I’m going easy on you but I have already analysed why it failed and I moved on from it days ago. As usual PB will treat my posts as though I am insanely out of touch, and slowly catch up with me to claim they knew this all the time).
But let’s not miss that there are other things afoot on what is a big news day. Emmerdale is being moved from its current slot.
And Liz Truss team are styling her brilliantly. If it did come to a leadership election (small chance) you would have to argue substance always triumphs over style, otherwise she’s got it in the bag now.
Already done it. See down thread where I already commented on this former PB analysis (before my time but I gather was arch Remainer who couldn’t accept defeat?)
It wasn’t just that Mr Meeks couldn’t accept defeat, it was more that Brexit seemed to make him physically ill, and delirious with loathing
Which is a damn shame, as he is super sharp and was a great commenter on PB. He is missed. But note that he removed himself (wisely, for his sanity) - no one chased him off
That is not quite accurate. He asked 1 poster not to engage with him. That poster promptly engaged with him at which point Mr M said that because this simple request had not been complied with he was off for good.
I take no sides as to who was right or wrong.
I wish he were back. He is an acute observer of politics and other matters.
I didn’t see it that way (tho I may have missed the particular exchange you reference)
After Brexit he got progressively more unhinged. He would have weeks of remission, then his Strasbourg Syndrome would return in full force, as he spat alarming bile at people, often entirely undeserving. It was not nice to watch. And THEN he would get all haughty if someone was equally disparaging in response, like he was the Queen and someone had heedlessly farted in court
It was wise of him to leave so he could calm down. But, like you, I wish he would return. He is so perceptive, when he’s not shrieking like an affronted Victorian auntie
He was great when he was antifrank. Looking at his blog again, he seems, I would suggest, in a somewhat better place. He's even chosen a cheerful-looking photo of himself.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
My darling - if you worked in my team you would realise how hopeless such an adage would be. How else could we have coped with the stress?
Anyway, if you use such words in bed you're not swearing are you - but instructing, no?! 😉
There are instructions and then there are urgent, angry needs. A well timed “fuck me, fuck me harder” from a hitherto strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman can be indescribably erotic. If she’s spent the entire evening dropping F bombs it is less effective.
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
Thousands of body bags arriving at RAF Lyneham. (Which is in Wiltshire. Which is in England. Quick geography lesson for mendacious BritNat Nige.)
You are a very very sick bastard. If there were any proof needed that many Scots Nats are nasty and unpleasant wankers then your posts like this (and particularly the previous one on this subject where you seemed to think this could be a topic of amusement) certainly provide it.
I could not agree more
He is not representative of the Scottish people, just bigoted and anti English
Nonsense.
I’m an Anglophile. Very pro-England and her people.
What I’m opposed to is British Nationalism, which is rampant on these threads. Shame on you Big G for joining in their chorus.
Rubbish. I have never once seen you say anything that was not highly critical of the English. And usually in the most crass and ignorant manner as well.
It is slightly Jews/Israel, the kind of conflation that got Corbyn into a mess.
The greatest achievement of the SNP is cementing a distinction between "Westminster" and "the English".
No doubt supported by numerous English* SNP members.
*people originally from England who now live in Scotland.
I'm sure most English SNP members are perfectly friendly people, but it is very much possible to be English yet also be an Anglophobe. Corbynism pretty much demonstrates this, as many of the Absolute Boy's most committed followers despise the UK, England and Englishness.
Excellent sneaky accusation of English SNP members being Anglophobes. That sort of sclerotic view is why Lab are just as meh in Scotland polling wise as they've been for a decade despite the Starmer miracle (aka hanging on until everyone realises how shite is BJ).
Is there only one version of the UK, England and Englishness? Who knew?
You were essentially claiming that being an English SNP member meant you can't be an Anglophobe.
Sky News have picked up the Mail's leader that Downing St police have given "extremely damning" evidence to Sue Gray.
Well I'm happy if that's true but how the blazers does anyone know this? How would that have leaked? Serious question.
The rozzers themselves?
Only 3 possible sources:-
1. Journalists speculating. Or "making stuff up" as it might be termed. 2. The police. I would not be surprised. They have form for this sort of stuff. Remember Andrew Mitchell. I've written before about the unhealthy relationship between the police and the press. 3. Someone on the investigation team. Very very bad form if so.
I think number 2 is most likely. And it might be as reliable as in the Mitchell case.
The police are notorious for leaking to press - remember synchronising with the press on arrests of people who turned out to be innocent?
Indeed, they were appalled when it was suggested that they stop it.
They didn’t learn their lesson, even when South Yorks plod and the BBC had to pay Cliff Richard a couple of million.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
My darling - if you worked in my team you would realise how hopeless such an adage would be. How else could we have coped with the stress?
Anyway, if you use such words in bed you're not swearing are you - but instructing, no?! 😉
There are instructions and then there are urgent, angry needs. A well timed “fuck me, fuck me harder” from a hitherto strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman can be indescribably erotic. If she’s spent the entire evening dropping F bombs it is less effective.
It is 9.10pm in Sri Lanka
Well I hope you find your "strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman". But spare us the rest. We'll take it as read.
I am off to be decorously polite as I advise my client on how to do whistleblowing investigations.
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Sky News have picked up the Mail's leader that Downing St police have given "extremely damning" evidence to Sue Gray.
Well I'm happy if that's true but how the blazers does anyone know this? How would that have leaked? Serious question.
Not only how did it leak, but if there was such damning evidence from the police, what was their excuse for not acting on it at the time?
I have been asking this question since yesterday. I hope Sue Gray asks it of the police too.
Police excuses.....
- Someone called me a Pleb - I was too busy selling PNC records to journalists to record an offence - I had newspaper vendors to hit and a long list of immigrant artisans who needed shooting at Stockwell Tube Station
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
It is an uncanny echo. But surely an even more striking parallel is China in Hong Kong, as it is so much more recent. And Hong Kong came after Putin seized Crimea
The great autocracies have realised the West is in retreat, and unwilling and/or unable to stop great power revanchism. So they will keep doing it. We must hope that Xi is satisfied once he has Taiwan and that Putin stops at the Elbe
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
My darling - if you worked in my team you would realise how hopeless such an adage would be. How else could we have coped with the stress?
Anyway, if you use such words in bed you're not swearing are you - but instructing, no?! 😉
There are instructions and then there are urgent, angry needs. A well timed “fuck me, fuck me harder” from a hitherto strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman can be indescribably erotic. If she’s spent the entire evening dropping F bombs it is less effective.
It is 9.10pm in Sri Lanka
Well I hope you find your "strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman". But spare us the rest. We'll take it as read.
I am off to be decorously polite as I advise my client on how to do whistleblowing investigations.
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
To be like 1945, it would need to end up with the entire Ukraine inside Russia with the entire leadership dead, and most of the "intelligentsia" as well.
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
Thousands of body bags arriving at RAF Lyneham. (Which is in Wiltshire. Which is in England. Quick geography lesson for mendacious BritNat Nige.)
You are a very very sick bastard. If there were any proof needed that many Scots Nats are nasty and unpleasant wankers then your posts like this (and particularly the previous one on this subject where you seemed to think this could be a topic of amusement) certainly provide it.
I could not agree more
He is not representative of the Scottish people, just bigoted and anti English
Nonsense.
I’m an Anglophile. Very pro-England and her people.
What I’m opposed to is British Nationalism, which is rampant on these threads. Shame on you Big G for joining in their chorus.
Rubbish. I have never once seen you say anything that was not highly critical of the English. And usually in the most crass and ignorant manner as well.
It is slightly Jews/Israel, the kind of conflation that got Corbyn into a mess.
The greatest achievement of the SNP is cementing a distinction between "Westminster" and "the English".
No doubt supported by numerous English* SNP members.
*people originally from England who now live in Scotland.
I'm sure most English SNP members are perfectly friendly people, but it is very much possible to be English yet also be an Anglophobe. Corbynism pretty much demonstrates this, as many of the Absolute Boy's most committed followers despise the UK, England and Englishness.
Excellent sneaky accusation of English SNP members being Anglophobes. That sort of sclerotic view is why Lab are just as meh in Scotland polling wise as they've been for a decade despite the Starmer miracle (aka hanging on until everyone realises how shite is BJ).
Is there only one version of the UK, England and Englishness? Who knew?
You were essentially claiming that being an English SNP member meant you can't be an Anglophobe.
I suspect most "English" SNP members would probably not describe themselves as English even if they were born in Tunbridge Wells. It is a herring of a very vivid red colour, and yet another attempt at Nats saying
" We are not racists and we don't hate the English bastards, honest....look at all these English members we have "
"who?"
"...er, well, there is Robert McDougall, he was born somewhere near the border"
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
“Treaties are like eggs - made to be broken” - Josef Stalin
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
Thousands of body bags arriving at RAF Lyneham. (Which is in Wiltshire. Which is in England. Quick geography lesson for mendacious BritNat Nige.)
You are a very very sick bastard. If there were any proof needed that many Scots Nats are nasty and unpleasant wankers then your posts like this (and particularly the previous one on this subject where you seemed to think this could be a topic of amusement) certainly provide it.
I could not agree more
He is not representative of the Scottish people, just bigoted and anti English
Nonsense.
I’m an Anglophile. Very pro-England and her people.
What I’m opposed to is British Nationalism, which is rampant on these threads. Shame on you Big G for joining in their chorus.
Rubbish. I have never once seen you say anything that was not highly critical of the English. And usually in the most crass and ignorant manner as well.
It is slightly Jews/Israel, the kind of conflation that got Corbyn into a mess.
The greatest achievement of the SNP is cementing a distinction between "Westminster" and "the English".
No doubt supported by numerous English* SNP members.
*people originally from England who now live in Scotland.
I'm sure most English SNP members are perfectly friendly people, but it is very much possible to be English yet also be an Anglophobe. Corbynism pretty much demonstrates this, as many of the Absolute Boy's most committed followers despise the UK, England and Englishness.
Excellent sneaky accusation of English SNP members being Anglophobes. That sort of sclerotic view is why Lab are just as meh in Scotland polling wise as they've been for a decade despite the Starmer miracle (aka hanging on until everyone realises how shite is BJ).
Is there only one version of the UK, England and Englishness? Who knew?
You were essentially claiming that being an English SNP member meant you can't be an Anglophobe.
I'll add 'essentially' to 'probably' and 'could have' to your list of terms that indicate that you're making an assertion rather than a statement of fact.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
“Treaties are like eggs - made to be broken” - Josef Stalin
I recall that the leading Nazi's had a laugh at Ribbentrop's expense. For his birthday someone had proposed that they present him with a fancy casket filled with copies of all the treaties he'd negotiated. Someone pointed out that Hitler and binned nearly all of them, so there wouldn't be much to put inside. So it could be a very small casket.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
To be like 1945, it would need to end up with the entire Ukraine inside Russia with the entire leadership dead, and most of the "intelligentsia" as well.
You are setting falsely high targets to be proved wrong Malmsy 🙂
I accept these terms - despite shoulder to shoulder allies having enough equipment in the region to re fight and win the Martian Invasion in War of the Worlds, we simply watch Putin own all Ukraines current borders and install puppet regime, to achieve 1945 all over again.
Michelle Clifford, Europe correspondent of Sky confirming there is disunity in the EU over Russia with Germany and their stance at present
Also confirmed reports of NATO sending arms and troops to eastern Europe including French participation
Just heard a US Senator state on TV that 42% of the German economy is dependent on Russian gas supplies. Stunning (and stunningly stupid on the Germans' part) if so.
I don't think it's quite as bad as that, though if the Russians decided to sell their gas elsewhere (say China) much of western Europe could just about survive on LNG imports, Germany is singularly reliant on piped gas and would have to hope that EU countries are able to pipe them gas from their LNG terminals. There's been a negligent lack of foresight from the German state on energy security, even worse than the UK, which is no great example.
Given they removal of Nuclear power on almost a whim, negligent is probably an understatement when talking about Germany and energy security.
Mind you their internet connectivity isn't much better - I remember back in 2019 having conversations about dial-up because nothing else was suitable in some shopping malls (this was an issue so important and so annoying it was brought up by the client in the first project meeting).
Ha, I remember the days of RAS and DUN configurations, overnight polling, and all the troubleshooting that you get when the store unplugs the phone line or switch off the modem!
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
I suspect the Russia Ukraine crisis is only leading the news as there is currently no Boris news available. We just need to see what report is published and how everyone reacts to it.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
When it comes to the next General Election, I don’t expect Red Wall voters to want all levelling up to be done and dusted, just, for the first time in generations, it to have begun and fine examples of delivery so far pointed to.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Thank you for that insight. He says though Sue agreed it was a good idea? Can he not ”testify under oath” in written answers? As he promised I’m sure there are some a tad disappointed Doms input now has a line through.
Dom also implies Boris has some security angle thing hanging over Dom and waiting to use it? What a bizarre twist!
This all misses the point. It is priced in by everyone that Dom is a vindictive bastard out to get BJ at all costs so there was never going to be any "The witness impressed me with his open and frank demeanour" shit anyway, nobody believes a word he says without corroboration. The point of him is he knows where the bodies are buried, and if you go and dig where he says and there's a corpse there, that's corroboration sho 'nuff.
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Boris has run rings around his opponents. Ironically, these shenanigans have actually started to make him look like a winner again - albeit of the underhand and shameless variety - so that will help his standing with the many Tories who get pleasure out of that sort of thing.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
Damn it. I could have taken notes.
All the comments used to be archived, but I’m pretty sure they got deleted when the dire Vanilla turned up. Sean is lucky.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
“Treaties are like eggs - made to be broken” - Josef Stalin
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
I suspect the Russia Ukraine crisis is only leading the news as there is currently no Boris news available. We just need to see what report is published and how everyone reacts to it.
It does seem to be heading towards conflict and it must be a worry across Europe and indeed the globe
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
To be like 1945, it would need to end up with the entire Ukraine inside Russia with the entire leadership dead, and most of the "intelligentsia" as well.
You are setting falsely high targets to be proved wrong Malmsy 🙂
I accept these terms - despite shoulder to shoulder allies having enough equipment in the region to re fight and win the Martian Invasion in War of the Worlds, we simply watch Putin own all Ukraines current borders and install puppet regime, to achieve 1945 all over again.
Personally, I'm hoping for no nuclear explosions. Me being an optimist and all.
For all the "didn't he do well!" comments on BJ and vaccines / the boosters is there any evidence that he is this visionary leader of people who can cut through the noise and chaos and get straight to not only the solution but how we do so at record speed?
We know that Mancock was the cabinet minister banging the cabinet table for vaccines in the early days. So the vaccine programme as an idea can't be attributed to Boris, nor can the actual amazing work done in developing it. He *authorised* it. Having been badgered by his Health Secretary and the actual scientists. "Oh cripes, ok then" is more his style than "I HAVE A VISION" leadership.
Same with boosters. He pulled the trigger on a seemingly impossible December booster program and thanks to herculean work by medics and volunteers we just about got away with it.
That's not true, the story of vaccines is Patrick Vallance and Dom approaching the PM telling him to take vaccine procurement away from the DoH and specifically Hancock because they/he was liable to fuck it up. Boris personally contacted Dame Kate Bingham and convinced her to take on the role as head of a new vaccine procurement body which would answer directly to him and Patrick Vallance, not the DoH.
Hancock got the meme that he watched a movie and bought all the vaccines but it's not true. It was Kate Bingham and team who did the purchasing and she was put in place by Boris but advised by Dom and Patrick Vallance.
Appreciate the correction of the record. My point remains - it was not the PM who like a titan stood there and said "we will need vaccines, get on with it". So when he personally gets the credit I just giggle a little.
I think listening to the advice and getting the DoH out of the picture was a good move, he could have done nothing and let Hancock fuck it up and land us with not enough of the right vaccines or bought loads of vaccines that didn't stand and chance of being approved because of cheapness (CureVac) because that's what the DoH would probably have done. It contrasts with what Starmer would have done in the same place as well. There's simply no chance that the current Labour party would allow a pharmaceuticals VC expert near the national vaccine procurement programme, this, IMO is where the plaudits are deserved, though that's not specific to Boris, rather a difference in outlook from Labour (though probably not Blair).
I'm not entirely sure a Labour government (I exclude Corbyn) wouldn't have ended up doing much the same, given that the expertise was in the private sector, and there was no real capacity for such accelerated programs in the public sector. No way of really knowing.
Hmm, I fear there would have been too much ideological resistance to allowing a VC person to lead the programme and we would probably have been in the EU procurement programme which we know didn't work out well for the first (and critical) 6 months of the rollout.
No real way of knowing - and I don't fancy setting up the whole experiment again to find out.
Where I think it is clear that Boris was demonstrably worse is on Winter 2020/21, which of course is when the bulk of deaths occurred (and when we knew vaccines were tantalisingly close).
Only if you're a lockdown lover.
Lockdowns are not a "precautionary principle" they are an evil that should be resisted until the last possible moment, only once it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be necessary. Considering the NHS didn't collapse in winter 2020/21 it looks like that was timed as late as possible, so it was called right to me.
The one thing I would say was wrong was having kids go in to school for the one day, then locking the country down that night, because it was the first working day back to make the decision: They should in my opinion have got the relevant people to work over the weekend and make that call on the weekend instead of the Monday.
If that means disrupting your weekend or holiday by a day then do that.
If you leave lockdowns to the last minute, they end up having to be (much) longer. If they are so evil, should you not act in a way so as to minimise the total amount of time in lockdown? That means going early so you can come out sooner, even if occasionally you end up with a short, unnecessary lockdown.
No, absolutely categorically not.
That's like saying like Judge Dredd the Police should extrajudicially kill those they think are guilty of murder without a trial, even if you kill a few innocents, because then you're going to stop more murders.
An unnecessary lockdown is an utter failure and to have a lockdown the case has to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. If that means in the very rare occasions it actually becomes necessary that it has to last a bit longer, then so be it.
Much as I enjoy the satire of Judge Dredd, that's a silly comparison. The real police do act to stop crimes taking place. They have to make judgements about when to do that. Likewise, public health actions require judgements to be made.
A lockdown is undoubtedly a very serious step and it's not a choice that should be taken lightly, but if you resist them until the last possible moment, you cause more morbidity, more mortality and more time in lockdown.
And have done the right thing.
If you don't resist them until the last possible minute you go in and out of lockdown like a yo-yo unnecessarily. Potentially preventing a bit of morbidity is not an excuse to strip away people's fundamental human rights unnecessarily.
I like how I spoke of morbidity and mortality, but you turned that into "a bit of morbidity"! You see, I'm unaware of anything that strips away someone's fundamental human rights more than mortality.
There is no right to not die of natural causes.
Why do we spend lots of money on a national Breast Screening Programme? Why do we spend lots of money on flu vaccinations? Why do we spend lots of money on cervical cancer vaccinations? Why do we spend lots of money on treating people with diabetes, dementia, heart disease, colon cancer, etc. etc. etc.? Why do we have an NHS!?
Why do we have extensive legislative structures to ensure we eat unadulterated food, we live and work in safe buildings, the air we breath is not too polluted, transport is safe...
Government for centuries... nay, millennia... has had a role to protect citizens. We take that for granted when it comes to protecting us from cholera, dysentery etc. (both through vaccinations but more so through providing clean water and effective sewers). Yet because COVID-19 is a newer disease, suddenly protecting people from disease is not what government should do...???
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
Swedes are not prudish, but sexism is a no-go area.
Feminism is strong throughout society. Very prevalent in management for example and throughout middle class. It is by no means the odd leftist cult it tends to get portrayed as in English speaking countries.
In fact, it could be argued that feminism and equality is one of few ideological topics that Swedes genuinely care deeply about.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
But to mention Appeasement is obviously to invoke an exact historical comparison, as if Putin's Russia was Nazi Germany. It's not great, but it's not that, either.
The comparison with 1938 Sudetenland is nonetheless quite apposite.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
“Treaties are like eggs - made to be broken” - Josef Stalin
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
She was the lady who wrote that comedy sketch show in the early ‘90s, wasn’t she? A teenage me thought it was rather lovely. Milky milky.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
When it comes to the next General Election, I don’t expect Red Wall voters to want all levelling up to be done and dusted, just, for the first time in generations, it to have begun and fine examples of delivery so far pointed to.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
As much as he may have the scoop on some shady stuff its always worth remembering why he cannot automatically be trusted (few can)
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
And it was filth adulterated by very bad writing in any case.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
When it comes to the next General Election, I don’t expect Red Wall voters to want all levelling up to be done and dusted, just, for the first time in generations, it to have begun and fine examples of delivery so far pointed to.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
Nope. For reference the Treasury North Campus won't be finished until 2024 (planning permission hasn't been sought yet) and they are about to move into an empty office block in April to just get things started.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
Damn it. I could have taken notes.
All the comments used to be archived, but I’m pretty sure they got deleted when the dire Vanilla turned up. Sean is lucky.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
And it was filth adulterated by very bad writing in any case.
Disgusting. Might at least aim for 'literature' status.
Chaucer and I wrote a story Bawdy and lewd from the start But mine, people said, was just filthy, While Chaucer's was Classical Art
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
Oh great. Already the most likes I’ve ever had. 🤗
If I add - and we can even smell your cheap aftershave tonight from here - could I double them?
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
My darling - if you worked in my team you would realise how hopeless such an adage would be. How else could we have coped with the stress?
Anyway, if you use such words in bed you're not swearing are you - but instructing, no?! 😉
There are instructions and then there are urgent, angry needs. A well timed “fuck me, fuck me harder” from a hitherto strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman can be indescribably erotic. If she’s spent the entire evening dropping F bombs it is less effective.
It is 9.10pm in Sri Lanka
Well I hope you find your "strait-laced, polite, decorously behaved woman". But spare us the rest. We'll take it as read.
I am off to be decorously polite as I advise my client on how to do whistleblowing investigations.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
And it was filth adulterated by very bad writing in any case.
Do you have a link? This was before my time but it all sounds very intriguing
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
But that ones attacking Rishi’s Achilles heel - so you have to wonder whose side that ministers on, which game plan he is working to.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
Oh great. Already the most likes I’ve ever had. 🤗
If I add - and we can even smell your cheap aftershave tonight from here - could I double them?
I think that's actually the cheap gin. But have a like anyway....
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
Do you have any more exciting news from your brother “who has lived in Amsterdam since he was 20” but was somehow unaware that his entire country was in strict lockdown from mid December for four whole weeks?
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
But that ones attacking Rishi’s Achilles heel - so you have to wonder whose side that ministers on, which game plan he is working to.
Or he could, incredibly, be resigning as a matter of principle. (Which seems to be the case.)
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
As much as he may have the scoop on some shady stuff its always worth remembering why he cannot automatically be trusted (few can)
Why do you tink wanting to answer questions in writing suggests he can't be trusted. I can see some very good reasons for it.
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
Do you have any more exciting news from your brother “who has lived in Amsterdam since he was 20” but was somehow unaware that his entire country was in strict lockdown from mid December for four whole weeks?
He asked a cab driver in Amsterdam about the restrictions. It turned out to be a Albanian driving a London Cab.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
When it comes to the next General Election, I don’t expect Red Wall voters to want all levelling up to be done and dusted, just, for the first time in generations, it to have begun and fine examples of delivery so far pointed to.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
Nope. For reference the Treasury North Campus won't be finished until 2024 (planning permission hasn't been sought yet) and they are about to move into an empty office block in April to just get things started.
Nope? 🙂. Red Wall voters, having waited forty years for levelling up against globalisation to start won’t expect Rome built in a day.
I know this isn’t what you or I want to hear Eek - but we have to accept Gove and Boris will have plenty for the next General Election Campaign for the toss to be argued over.
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
I have no idea which news you are watching but it is Russia Ukraine and right now a live NATO conference
All travel testing canned from Feb 11th. Excellent, hope that the government can convince Europe and the US to follow suit. I always wonder what, say, Italy or France, gain from disallowing 1 extra case from the UK when they're clocking in 200k and 400k cases per day respectively. Were booked in for Mexico rather than Italy for Feb because we can't be bothered with the faff of isolating to avoid risking a positive test result and having to cancel/rebook. I'm sure we're not the only people.
For all the "didn't he do well!" comments on BJ and vaccines / the boosters is there any evidence that he is this visionary leader of people who can cut through the noise and chaos and get straight to not only the solution but how we do so at record speed?
We know that Mancock was the cabinet minister banging the cabinet table for vaccines in the early days. So the vaccine programme as an idea can't be attributed to Boris, nor can the actual amazing work done in developing it. He *authorised* it. Having been badgered by his Health Secretary and the actual scientists. "Oh cripes, ok then" is more his style than "I HAVE A VISION" leadership.
Same with boosters. He pulled the trigger on a seemingly impossible December booster program and thanks to herculean work by medics and volunteers we just about got away with it.
That's not true, the story of vaccines is Patrick Vallance and Dom approaching the PM telling him to take vaccine procurement away from the DoH and specifically Hancock because they/he was liable to fuck it up. Boris personally contacted Dame Kate Bingham and convinced her to take on the role as head of a new vaccine procurement body which would answer directly to him and Patrick Vallance, not the DoH.
Hancock got the meme that he watched a movie and bought all the vaccines but it's not true. It was Kate Bingham and team who did the purchasing and she was put in place by Boris but advised by Dom and Patrick Vallance.
Appreciate the correction of the record. My point remains - it was not the PM who like a titan stood there and said "we will need vaccines, get on with it". So when he personally gets the credit I just giggle a little.
I think listening to the advice and getting the DoH out of the picture was a good move, he could have done nothing and let Hancock fuck it up and land us with not enough of the right vaccines or bought loads of vaccines that didn't stand and chance of being approved because of cheapness (CureVac) because that's what the DoH would probably have done. It contrasts with what Starmer would have done in the same place as well. There's simply no chance that the current Labour party would allow a pharmaceuticals VC expert near the national vaccine procurement programme, this, IMO is where the plaudits are deserved, though that's not specific to Boris, rather a difference in outlook from Labour (though probably not Blair).
I'm not entirely sure a Labour government (I exclude Corbyn) wouldn't have ended up doing much the same, given that the expertise was in the private sector, and there was no real capacity for such accelerated programs in the public sector. No way of really knowing.
Hmm, I fear there would have been too much ideological resistance to allowing a VC person to lead the programme and we would probably have been in the EU procurement programme which we know didn't work out well for the first (and critical) 6 months of the rollout.
No real way of knowing - and I don't fancy setting up the whole experiment again to find out.
Where I think it is clear that Boris was demonstrably worse is on Winter 2020/21, which of course is when the bulk of deaths occurred (and when we knew vaccines were tantalisingly close).
Only if you're a lockdown lover.
Lockdowns are not a "precautionary principle" they are an evil that should be resisted until the last possible moment, only once it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be necessary. Considering the NHS didn't collapse in winter 2020/21 it looks like that was timed as late as possible, so it was called right to me.
The one thing I would say was wrong was having kids go in to school for the one day, then locking the country down that night, because it was the first working day back to make the decision: They should in my opinion have got the relevant people to work over the weekend and make that call on the weekend instead of the Monday.
If that means disrupting your weekend or holiday by a day then do that.
If you leave lockdowns to the last minute, they end up having to be (much) longer. If they are so evil, should you not act in a way so as to minimise the total amount of time in lockdown? That means going early so you can come out sooner, even if occasionally you end up with a short, unnecessary lockdown.
No, absolutely categorically not.
That's like saying like Judge Dredd the Police should extrajudicially kill those they think are guilty of murder without a trial, even if you kill a few innocents, because then you're going to stop more murders.
An unnecessary lockdown is an utter failure and to have a lockdown the case has to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. If that means in the very rare occasions it actually becomes necessary that it has to last a bit longer, then so be it.
Much as I enjoy the satire of Judge Dredd, that's a silly comparison. The real police do act to stop crimes taking place. They have to make judgements about when to do that. Likewise, public health actions require judgements to be made.
A lockdown is undoubtedly a very serious step and it's not a choice that should be taken lightly, but if you resist them until the last possible moment, you cause more morbidity, more mortality and more time in lockdown.
And have done the right thing.
If you don't resist them until the last possible minute you go in and out of lockdown like a yo-yo unnecessarily. Potentially preventing a bit of morbidity is not an excuse to strip away people's fundamental human rights unnecessarily.
I like how I spoke of morbidity and mortality, but you turned that into "a bit of morbidity"! You see, I'm unaware of anything that strips away someone's fundamental human rights more than mortality.
There is no right to not die of natural causes.
Why do we spend lots of money on a national Breast Screening Programme? Why do we spend lots of money on flu vaccinations? Why do we spend lots of money on cervical cancer vaccinations? Why do we spend lots of money on treating people with diabetes, dementia, heart disease, colon cancer, etc. etc. etc.? Why do we have an NHS!?
Why do we have extensive legislative structures to ensure we eat unadulterated food, we live and work in safe buildings, the air we breath is not too polluted, transport is safe...
Government for centuries... nay, millennia... has had a role to protect citizens. We take that for granted when it comes to protecting us from cholera, dysentery etc. (both through vaccinations but more so through providing clean water and effective sewers). Yet because COVID-19 is a newer disease, suddenly protecting people from disease is not what government should do...???
The government can assist us in those things but not control us over them.
Breast screening is available - people aren't incarcerated to prevent them from leaving the house until they're screened.
Vaccines are comparable to that. They're available and anyone who isn't thick will take them up, but people have the right to be thick.
Stripping us of our fundamental civil liberties and locking us down is something completely different and far more sinister; lockdown fanatics like yourself need to be disabused of the notion that is something in your arsenal to be wielded on a "precautionary" basis.
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
To be like 1945, it would need to end up with the entire Ukraine inside Russia with the entire leadership dead, and most of the "intelligentsia" as well.
You are setting falsely high targets to be proved wrong Malmsy 🙂
I accept these terms - despite shoulder to shoulder allies having enough equipment in the region to re fight and win the Martian Invasion in War of the Worlds, we simply watch Putin own all Ukraines current borders and install puppet regime, to achieve 1945 all over again.
Personally, I'm hoping for no nuclear explosions. Me being an optimist and all.
Then you must find your own avatar as freaky as Dicksons undoubtedly is.
But I accept your surrender in these negotiations and pleased we have a deal.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
“ The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive.”
🤣🤣🤣
And how do you know you are achieving that? Surely the main factor it depends how determined or desperate the antagonist is, the very thing you cannot for certain be sure of?
There are certainties in War - Death, misery, destruction....
The outcome isn't on of them. Indeed, it is arguable that every country that *started* a war since 1870 has lost.
Peace is to be preferred. But the question them becomes - Are *you* prepared to be the price of peace?
This got missed. A fascinating conjecture
“Every country that started a war since 1870 has lost”
I can see where you are coming from, but obvious exceptions immediately spring to mind
Israel surely started a couple of wars, then won. Also several wars of independence? Ireland, Vietnam, multiple others
Russia in Crimea, very recently
The devil is in the detail of “starting”. Sensible countries about to invade or overthrow someone else usually invent a casus belli, so they can claim “we didn’t start it”
Michelle Clifford, Europe correspondent of Sky confirming there is disunity in the EU over Russia with Germany and their stance at present
Also confirmed reports of NATO sending arms and troops to eastern Europe including French participation
Just heard a US Senator state on TV that 42% of the German economy is dependent on Russian gas supplies. Stunning (and stunningly stupid on the Germans' part) if so.
I don't think it's quite as bad as that, though if the Russians decided to sell their gas elsewhere (say China) much of western Europe could just about survive on LNG imports, Germany is singularly reliant on piped gas and would have to hope that EU countries are able to pipe them gas from their LNG terminals. There's been a negligent lack of foresight from the German state on energy security, even worse than the UK, which is no great example.
Russia can't sell gas to China because there's no pipe (yet).
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
UK will send weapons, drones and probably a few “diplomats” from Hereford to help out. As will most of the West, including the US once Mr President has woken up from his afternoon nap.
The RAF MQ-9A fleet is in Mosul and Kuwait, though with American mercenaries, sorry contractors, doing the launch and recovery element. They can't transit controlled airspace and couldn't be deconflicted even if they could get to Ukraine.
This isn't some Call of Duty DLC with really good textures we're talking about. It's a real shooting war with fucking Russia. I can't believe how naive and blasé people are about involving British forces.
Agreed, though of course there are already UK forces in Ukraine - albeit in limited numbers, and for training purposes only.
Is there anyone here arguing for committing British forces to fight in Ukraine?
I am. If Ukraine requests them.
Then you are foolish. That risks escalating to WWIII for very little gain over sending equipment.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and 1939. The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive. We failed to do that in 2014, which is why we need a different approach. Is equipment enough? Let's hope so. But if it's not we either up the ante or we fold. And if we fold, how do you think things will look in another 8 years? How will Europe enjoy a wave of Ukrainian refugees, with Russian agents provocateurs mixed in with them? I don't like the sound of that, personally.
“ The way you prevent wars is by making aggression too expensive.”
🤣🤣🤣
And how do you know you are achieving that? Surely the main factor it depends how determined or desperate the antagonist is, the very thing you cannot for certain be sure of?
There are certainties in War - Death, misery, destruction....
The outcome isn't on of them. Indeed, it is arguable that every country that *started* a war since 1870 has lost.
Peace is to be preferred. But the question them becomes - Are *you* prepared to be the price of peace?
This got missed. A fascinating conjecture
“Every country that started a war since 1870 has lost”
I can see where you are coming from, but obvious exceptions immediately spring to mind
Israel surely started a couple of wars, then won. Also several wars of independence? Ireland, Vietnam, multiple others
Russia in Crimea, very recently
The devil is in the detail of “starting”. Sensible countries about to invade or overthrow someone else usually invent a casus belli, so they can claim “we didn’t start it”
Israel arguably never started any wars.
Who started the war is very arguable and the victors tend to write that it was the losers that did.
Michelle Clifford, Europe correspondent of Sky confirming there is disunity in the EU over Russia with Germany and their stance at present
Also confirmed reports of NATO sending arms and troops to eastern Europe including French participation
Just heard a US Senator state on TV that 42% of the German economy is dependent on Russian gas supplies. Stunning (and stunningly stupid on the Germans' part) if so.
I don't think it's quite as bad as that, though if the Russians decided to sell their gas elsewhere (say China) much of western Europe could just about survive on LNG imports, Germany is singularly reliant on piped gas and would have to hope that EU countries are able to pipe them gas from their LNG terminals. There's been a negligent lack of foresight from the German state on energy security, even worse than the UK, which is no great example.
Russia can't sell gas to China because there's no pipe (yet).
Yet being the key operator. One would hope that Germany would use that time to build a bunch of LNG terminals but instead they're actively saying no and turning down planning permission.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Apart frrom "Tory Minister resigns in Covid fraud". which happens to be leading the news but I am surprised. This sort of thing is so commonplace with this government It's odd that they bother to report it
But that ones attacking Rishi’s Achilles heel - so you have to wonder whose side that ministers on, which game plan he is working to.
Or he could, incredibly, be resigning as a matter of principle. (Which seems to be the case.)
He was an education minister for what seemed like ages, with a laserlike obsession with not wasting money (though the Academy system certainly had more highly paid managers than LEAs did). Fond of a friendly wager as well;
The academies minister Lord Agnew has said he will bet any headteacher “a bottle of champagne and a letter of commendation” that he can identify more potential savings in their schools.
I expect a reduced Labour lead today with Redfield and Wilton of about 10% as the storm slowly blows over.
I can see Johnson lasting at least another 6-11 months.
Storm slowly blowing over talk is just silly given that we are only on the way in at the moment. Unless you expect Gray to be a damp squib and I don't see how that works because it requires her finding nothing to see here move along, and everybody meekly accepting that.
Are you on the side of the rebels, Z, your hopes and best wishes travel with them? If so You have to regard yourself as being in a partial position, a protagonist, either unconsciously or consciously, your posts on this are lacking something because of it.
The coup attempt was right IMO It’s better for Tories in long run the policy chalk board changed hand to those who can put better things on it. But then the coup revealed something nobody knew existed - there is still too much faith at this time in Project Boris, he has enough support believing he has not failed yet.
He will probably lead them into the next election now, and at this stage none of us can be certain he will cease to be PM after it.
Blessed are the PB MoonRabbits, analysing and predicting what is actually happening rather than just posting partisan gumpf or following media narrative 😇
I want Johnson gone, sure, but I have large ish betting positions so am trying to see beyond my personal preferences
We will see. The coup attempt hasn't really not succeeded yet, though. If I were a plotter I'd be begging my supporters to hold fire on letters until Gray has reported.
From confident, you are now sounding uncertain, as the penny drops: has it missed its moment to succeed. (I’m going easy on you but I have already analysed why it failed and I moved on from it days ago. As usual PB will treat my posts as though I am insanely out of touch, and slowly catch up with me to claim they knew this all the time).
But let’s not miss that there are other things afoot on what is a big news day. Emmerdale is being moved from its current slot.
And Liz Truss team are styling her brilliantly. If it did come to a leadership election (small chance) you would have to argue substance always triumphs over style, otherwise she’s got it in the bag now.
Already done it. See down thread where I already commented on this former PB analysis (before my time but I gather was arch Remainer who couldn’t accept defeat?)
It wasn’t just that Mr Meeks couldn’t accept defeat, it was more that Brexit seemed to make him physically ill, and delirious with loathing
Which is a damn shame, as he is super sharp and was a great commenter on PB. He is missed. But note that he removed himself (wisely, for his sanity) - no one chased him off
That is not quite accurate. He asked 1 poster not to engage with him. That poster promptly engaged with him at which point Mr M said that because this simple request had not been complied with he was off for good.
I take no sides as to who was right or wrong.
I wish he were back. He is an acute observer of politics and other matters.
I didn’t see it that way (tho I may have missed the particular exchange you reference)
After Brexit he got progressively more unhinged. He would have weeks of remission, then his Strasbourg Syndrome would return in full force, as he spat alarming bile at people, often entirely undeserving. It was not nice to watch. And THEN he would get all haughty if someone was equally disparaging in response, like he was the Queen and someone had heedlessly farted in court
It was wise of him to leave so he could calm down. But, like you, I wish he would return. He is so perceptive, when he’s not shrieking like an affronted Victorian auntie
I may be remembering wrong, but I recall he got upset with this particular poster (which to be clear wasn't you) when they suggested that his partner not getting life saving meds because of a no deal Brexit was a price worth paying
All travel testing canned from Feb 11th. Excellent, hope that the government can convince Europe and the US to follow suit. I always wonder what, say, Italy or France, gain from disallowing 1 extra case from the UK when they're clocking in 200k and 400k cases per day respectively. Were booked in for Mexico rather than Italy for Feb because we can't be bothered with the faff of isolating to avoid risking a positive test result and having to cancel/rebook. I'm sure we're not the only people.
That’s one of the main reasons I am in Sri Lanka. No testing on arrival. No risk of being quarantined for a week or two at the beginning of your stay
This is no small risk. I spoke to a Thai-American friend yesterday. She returned to Bangkok late last year when they had a “test and release” policy (it’s even worse now). She was entirely symptom-free but she got a positive. She was whisked off to a dour “hospital-hotel” for ten days compulsory isolation, at her own expense
Who the F wants to risk that? If you have two weeks holiday?
Senseless
Tourist industries will only revive when they drop this draconian restriction
Michelle Clifford, Europe correspondent of Sky confirming there is disunity in the EU over Russia with Germany and their stance at present
Also confirmed reports of NATO sending arms and troops to eastern Europe including French participation
Just heard a US Senator state on TV that 42% of the German economy is dependent on Russian gas supplies. Stunning (and stunningly stupid on the Germans' part) if so.
I don't think it's quite as bad as that, though if the Russians decided to sell their gas elsewhere (say China) much of western Europe could just about survive on LNG imports, Germany is singularly reliant on piped gas and would have to hope that EU countries are able to pipe them gas from their LNG terminals. There's been a negligent lack of foresight from the German state on energy security, even worse than the UK, which is no great example.
Russia can't sell gas to China because there's no pipe (yet).
Yet being the key operator. One would hope that Germany would use that time to build a bunch of LNG terminals but instead they're actively saying no and turning down planning permission.
While actively shutting down nuclear etc too
You couldn't have a much more Russophile German energy policy if an actively puppet government had been installed.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
As much as he may have the scoop on some shady stuff its always worth remembering why he cannot automatically be trusted (few can)
Did you notice Cummings reference about that security stuff being held over him.
My suspicion is, as part of the Battle of Big Dogs Bulge counter offensive, they have contacted Dom, whip like, to let him know he doesn’t hold all the cards, and the sort of things they got. Or else what do you make of Cummings MI5 reference and “Protagonist in the lobby”?
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
Thousands of body bags arriving at RAF Lyneham. (Which is in Wiltshire. Which is in England. Quick geography lesson for mendacious BritNat Nige.)
You are a very very sick bastard. If there were any proof needed that many Scots Nats are nasty and unpleasant wankers then your posts like this (and particularly the previous one on this subject where you seemed to think this could be a topic of amusement) certainly provide it.
I could not agree more
He is not representative of the Scottish people, just bigoted and anti English
Nonsense.
I’m an Anglophile. Very pro-England and her people.
What I’m opposed to is British Nationalism, which is rampant on these threads. Shame on you Big G for joining in their chorus.
Rubbish. I have never once seen you say anything that was not highly critical of the English. And usually in the most crass and ignorant manner as well.
It is slightly Jews/Israel, the kind of conflation that got Corbyn into a mess.
The greatest achievement of the SNP is cementing a distinction between "Westminster" and "the English".
I agree - and bear in mind I am a positive advocate for a successful Scottish independence. But Stuart does not attack Westminster alone. He specifically attacks the English. It is a stupid and pointless attitude and betrays some deep seated and rather unseemly loathing on his part.
It also shows a very small brained prejudice. "The English" are a somewhat diverse group of folk. I think he just uses it as a prejudiced shorthand for people he hates including those who are Scottish who don't share his views.
No, it is very specifically ”the English” for a lot of Scot Nats. Of course this is nuts on top of bigotry as “the English” means everyone from a Geordie fireman to a Punjabi stockbroker in Brum to a Jewish doctor in Bristol to a half Caribbean Devonian nurse to the Duke of Westminster to a Cockney gangster in Essex to you and me and God (surely an Englishman)
Nonetheless there is a lurking fear and loathing of “the English”, in toto, in Scot Nattery, even if a specific hatred is reserved for posher English Tory types.
The reason is fecking obvious. A deep seated inferiority complex, painfull to witness. But also highly understandable. The Scots have been whipped by the English for 1000 years and forced to speak the English language. That’s gonna leave scars
Moreover, should Scotland ever achieve Indy (if they get another chance) I’m not sure that would solve it. The Irish still have a deep-rooted Anglophobia born of inferiority complex, it was blatant in early Covid.
At least theirs is more justified, because of the Famine, and unlike the Scots they didn’t eagerly volunteer for the joint British enterprise of Empire, whipping lots of other countries in turn. The Scots did, with gusto.
Until the 1707 Act of Union of course Scotland was England's oldest enemy after the French. The French and Scots often combined against England via the Auld Alliance.
The French also assisted Catholics in Ireland against the British eg at the Battle of the Boyne or Wolfe Tone
No way the French helped the Irish against the British at the Boyne. The British didn't exist as such.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Fuck off you patronising man!
If you think that was bad, you should see what the disgusting letch was writing - under his own name - a decade ago. Pure, unadulterated filth.
I thought Mary Whitehouse died a few decades ago. Odd to think her spirit lives on in Sweden, of all places...
She was the lady who wrote that comedy sketch show in the early ‘90s, wasn’t she? A teenage me thought it was rather lovely. Milky milky.
She had Channel 4 put red blobs on the screen at the start of any films with rude bits from the mid-1980s as I recall. Very helpful to my housemates and myself when deciding what to watch on TV of a Friday evening. If in doubt we picked the ones with the red blobs.
She was always going on about the National Viewers' and Listeners' Alliance (?) but when one asked how many members it had apart from her husband to back her in this moral crusade, she would never answer, or am I being unfair?
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Senior Elysée source tells me: “There is a kind of alarmism in Washington and London which we cannot understand. We see no immediate likelihood of Russian military action. We simply want our interpretation to be taken into account before a common western approach is agreed.”
Are they not aware of Russia massing on Ukraine border?
Reading between the lines, French are actually accusing us of bigging the thing up.
The Russians are actually massing on the border in a serious way are they?
Yes, they are. Multiple reports from journalists from a number of countries of units from all over Russia massing in the area. Complete with photos from the ground, commercial satellite pictures etc.
It’s painting a hideous picture then, political promises of standing shoulder to shoulder, of European and NATO forces piled up in countries and waters and airspace all around Ukraine, and just watching Putin go in and do his thing - like 1945 all over again 😕
Unlike in 1945, the Ukrainians have some real backing form the states around them and from abroad.
That’s true, we are airlifting in a few useful things to help them. I concede that. Will you concede though to be unlike 1945 it needs the outcome not to be same as 1945?
To be like 1945, it would need to end up with the entire Ukraine inside Russia with the entire leadership dead, and most of the "intelligentsia" as well.
You are setting falsely high targets to be proved wrong Malmsy 🙂
I accept these terms - despite shoulder to shoulder allies having enough equipment in the region to re fight and win the Martian Invasion in War of the Worlds, we simply watch Putin own all Ukraines current borders and install puppet regime, to achieve 1945 all over again.
Personally, I'm hoping for no nuclear explosions. Me being an optimist and all.
Then you must find your own avatar as freaky as Dicksons undoubtedly is.
But I accept your surrender in these negotiations and pleased we have a deal.
I *like* nuclear explosions. Just not er... free range ones
All travel testing canned from Feb 11th. Excellent, hope that the government can convince Europe and the US to follow suit. I always wonder what, say, Italy or France, gain from disallowing 1 extra case from the UK when they're clocking in 200k and 400k cases per day respectively. Were booked in for Mexico rather than Italy for Feb because we can't be bothered with the faff of isolating to avoid risking a positive test result and having to cancel/rebook. I'm sure we're not the only people.
Switzerland has announced removal for vaccinated, as I'm sure you know. The trend is vaccinated can travel: unvaccinated grounded.
EU foreign ministers are planning to condemn "Russia's continued aggressive actions and threats against Ukraine", while calling for de-escalation at Monday's (24 January) meeting in Brussels.
Can anybody understand or explain the EU's foreign policy approach on is eastern borders? It seems to lack all coherence.
Is the EU hopelessly split or hopelessly united? The spin changes so often one becomes dizzy.
They’re hopelessly split, trying hard to spin being united against Russia, while standing back and letting Putin roll the tanks towards Kiev.
As if they had a choice. They mostly rely on other powers to underwrite any military deterrent. Including powers that, in Britain, they have a rocky relationship with and despise.
Its nuts.
So what do the hawks on this propose? Sending our troops and planes to defend the Ukraine steppe? If so what happens if there is direct and fatal conflict with the Russian Army?
Thousands of body bags arriving at RAF Lyneham. (Which is in Wiltshire. Which is in England. Quick geography lesson for mendacious BritNat Nige.)
You are a very very sick bastard. If there were any proof needed that many Scots Nats are nasty and unpleasant wankers then your posts like this (and particularly the previous one on this subject where you seemed to think this could be a topic of amusement) certainly provide it.
I could not agree more
He is not representative of the Scottish people, just bigoted and anti English
Nonsense.
I’m an Anglophile. Very pro-England and her people.
What I’m opposed to is British Nationalism, which is rampant on these threads. Shame on you Big G for joining in their chorus.
Rubbish. I have never once seen you say anything that was not highly critical of the English. And usually in the most crass and ignorant manner as well.
It is slightly Jews/Israel, the kind of conflation that got Corbyn into a mess.
The greatest achievement of the SNP is cementing a distinction between "Westminster" and "the English".
I agree - and bear in mind I am a positive advocate for a successful Scottish independence. But Stuart does not attack Westminster alone. He specifically attacks the English. It is a stupid and pointless attitude and betrays some deep seated and rather unseemly loathing on his part.
It also shows a very small brained prejudice. "The English" are a somewhat diverse group of folk. I think he just uses it as a prejudiced shorthand for people he hates including those who are Scottish who don't share his views.
No, it is very specifically ”the English” for a lot of Scot Nats. Of course this is nuts on top of bigotry as “the English” means everyone from a Geordie fireman to a Punjabi stockbroker in Brum to a Jewish doctor in Bristol to a half Caribbean Devonian nurse to the Duke of Westminster to a Cockney gangster in Essex to you and me and God (surely an Englishman)
Nonetheless there is a lurking fear and loathing of “the English”, in toto, in Scot Nattery, even if a specific hatred is reserved for posher English Tory types.
The reason is fecking obvious. A deep seated inferiority complex, painfull to witness. But also highly understandable. The Scots have been whipped by the English for 1000 years and forced to speak the English language. That’s gonna leave scars
Moreover, should Scotland ever achieve Indy (if they get another chance) I’m not sure that would solve it. The Irish still have a deep-rooted Anglophobia born of inferiority complex, it was blatant in early Covid.
At least theirs is more justified, because of the Famine, and unlike the Scots they didn’t eagerly volunteer for the joint British enterprise of Empire, whipping lots of other countries in turn. The Scots did, with gusto.
Until the 1707 Act of Union of course Scotland was England's oldest enemy after the French. The French and Scots often combined against England via the Auld Alliance.
The French also assisted Catholics in Ireland against the British eg at the Battle of the Boyne or Wolfe Tone
No way the French helped the Irish against the British at the Boyne. The British didn't exist as such.
Michelle Clifford, Europe correspondent of Sky confirming there is disunity in the EU over Russia with Germany and their stance at present
Also confirmed reports of NATO sending arms and troops to eastern Europe including French participation
Just heard a US Senator state on TV that 42% of the German economy is dependent on Russian gas supplies. Stunning (and stunningly stupid on the Germans' part) if so.
I don't think it's quite as bad as that, though if the Russians decided to sell their gas elsewhere (say China) much of western Europe could just about survive on LNG imports, Germany is singularly reliant on piped gas and would have to hope that EU countries are able to pipe them gas from their LNG terminals. There's been a negligent lack of foresight from the German state on energy security, even worse than the UK, which is no great example.
Russia can't sell gas to China because there's no pipe (yet).
Yet being the key operator. One would hope that Germany would use that time to build a bunch of LNG terminals but instead they're actively saying no and turning down planning permission.
Germany is in quite an invidious position, despite being the most potent economy in Europe
It is economically dependent on the Chinese import/export market, it is strategically dependant on Russian energy - to an unusual extent in both cases
Totally hobbles their foreign policy “independence”
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!
You are forgiven, because you are probably in bed, and we are also at war
The Russia Ukraine crisis is now leading the media and increasingly so
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters. Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
Boris has run rings around his opponents. Ironically, these shenanigans have actually started to make him look like a winner again - albeit of the underhand and shameless variety - so that will help his standing with the many Tories who get pleasure out of that sort of thing.
That’s the spirit.
Whilst Starmer’s opposition are seeing how many likes they can get, Boris is building something far stronger in the true Machiavellian sense. His premiership is morphing in front our eyes into a more substantial thing. To be feared.
Now PB, in terms of power, is it better to be feared, or loved?
All travel testing canned from Feb 11th. Excellent, hope that the government can convince Europe and the US to follow suit. I always wonder what, say, Italy or France, gain from disallowing 1 extra case from the UK when they're clocking in 200k and 400k cases per day respectively. Were booked in for Mexico rather than Italy for Feb because we can't be bothered with the faff of isolating to avoid risking a positive test result and having to cancel/rebook. I'm sure we're not the only people.
That’s one of the main reasons I am in Sri Lanka. No testing on arrival. No risk of being quarantined for a week or two at the beginning of your stay
This is no small risk. I spoke to a Thai-American friend yesterday. She returned to Bangkok late last year when they had a “test and release” policy (it’s even worse now). She was entirely symptom-free but she got a positive. She was whisked off to a dour “hospital-hotel” for ten days compulsory isolation, at her own expense
Who the F wants to risk that? If you have two weeks holiday?
Senseless
Tourist industries will only revive when they drop this draconian restriction
Yup, we've avoided Thailand for that reason too. We don't particularly want to go to Phuket where there's no restrictions on coming and going and everywhere else requires managed quarantine for foreigners. All of SE Asia is off the radar for us for at least 6 months I think, which is rather disappointing.
For all the fails and deaths we had in from March 2020 to Feb 2021 I'd rather be where we are now than where the rest of the world is. The UK seems to have begun making the psychological move to treat COVID like any other disease that might kill us when we get old. Very few other places seem to be doing that.
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
When it comes to the next General Election, I don’t expect Red Wall voters to want all levelling up to be done and dusted, just, for the first time in generations, it to have begun and fine examples of delivery so far pointed to.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
Nope. For reference the Treasury North Campus won't be finished until 2024 (planning permission hasn't been sought yet) and they are about to move into an empty office block in April to just get things started.
Nope? 🙂. Red Wall voters, having waited forty years for levelling up against globalisation to start won’t expect Rome built in a day.
I know this isn’t what you or I want to hear Eek - but we have to accept Gove and Boris will have plenty for the next General Election Campaign for the toss to be argued over.
My point was that anything announced now won't be finished in time to be shown at the next election. For reference as another example locally they are planning to improve the route into the town (essential considering 7,500 additional people will be travelling into the town centre. That requires improvements to 3 roundabouts which even if started this year will take all of 2023 to build and chances are they won't be starting work til late 2023.
Which means that for a lot of people the Tories will have failed to deliver what has been promised and because a lot will be in the early planning stage they will be at risk (see HS2E as an example) of being cancelled on a whim.
Bad bad move. You always interview. Always. And if someone doesn't want to be interviewed in something they claim to be as important as this you view what they tell you with a hugely sceptical eye.
He can't be forced to an interview. But the consequences of him refusing to do so for the investigation should be spelt out.
Frankly I'd be inclined to discount very clearly in the report - in the executive summary - anything he says unless it is clearly corroborated elsewhere by reliable evidence. I would also list out all the unanswered questions and issues I was not able to address as a result of this witness being unwilling to be interviewed.
Please Cyclefree, that is unladylike. remember the adage:
Men should only weep in war, women should only swear in bed
Comments
Or, I just post a lot - on a lot of different subjects. There is always that explanation
I think it might be even worse than he's suggesting. He's got Theresa May down as 'unknown'.....
https://alastair-meeks.medium.com/every-conservative-mps-position-on-boris-johnson-and-the-parties-in-number-10-bc4f5f77032f
https://www.ft.com/content/805fa759-fabc-4d04-acdf-3616932d2164
Looking at his blog again, he seems, I would suggest, in a somewhat better place. He's even chosen a cheerful-looking photo of himself.
https://twitter.com/robertshrimsley/status/1485638210936057859
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1485636828367572999
But stuff to do. And I must conserve my energy for CycleFree Week. So must be off. Till later. X
It is 9.10pm in Sri Lanka
Is the worst of the pandemic ahead or behind us
Behind 50% (+16%)
Ahead 26% (-17%)
Since 10-12th December
It’s war now. It’s war!
I am off to be decorously polite as I advise my client on how to do whistleblowing investigations.
Czechoslovakia caved in to Germany in 1938 because they were forced. Powers who had committed to support it - the UK and France (?) - agreed with Germany and Italy for Cz to be carved up. Then we told the Cz government that that was what we were doing.
We have a Treaty with the Russian Federation and USA that the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan will be respected, as part of the agreement for those countries to give up nuclear weapons. France and China gave assurances separately.
The Treaty was reaffirmed in 2009.
Russia then walked away from the Treaty they had signed. Wiki:
On 4 March 2014, the Russian president Vladimir Putin replied to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum, describing the current Ukrainian situation as a revolution: "a new state arises, but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
- Someone called me a Pleb
- I was too busy selling PNC records to journalists to record an offence
- I had newspaper vendors to hit and a long list of immigrant artisans who needed shooting at Stockwell Tube Station
The great autocracies have realised the West is in retreat, and unwilling and/or unable to stop great power revanchism. So they will keep doing it. We must hope that Xi is satisfied once he has Taiwan and that Putin stops at the Elbe
Have you heard the big news about Emmerdale?
1) The Sue Gray report is presented to the HOC by Boris and lots of sounds of fury but his mps fail to send in the letters.
Boris stands firm against Russia, Rishi announces the suspension of the NI rise, abolishes vat on energy and implements a generous grant scheme to all standard rate taxpayer households, Gove announces the levelling up schemes and Boris carries on praying for some respite in May
Or
2) He is gone by the end of the week
If I was betting on that I think 1 is favourite
" We are not racists and we don't hate the English bastards, honest....look at all these English members we have "
"who?"
"...er, well, there is Robert McDougall, he was born somewhere near the border"
Finds most English regions are set to receive less funding for regional development than they did under either David Cameron or Theresa May: https://www.northernpowerhousepartnership.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Regional-Allocation-of-the-Shared-Prosperity-Fund-SPF-Pre-White-Paper-Analysis-FINAL-SIGNED-OFF.pdf
Comes as MPs get the chance to put questions to Department for Levelling Up ministers.
Michael Gove hitting back firmly at accusations that funds are being awarded politically - "There is no evidence of any abuse of levelling up funding."
https://twitter.com/LiseMcNally/status/1485641313114595328
I accept these terms - despite shoulder to shoulder allies having enough equipment in the region to re fight and win the Martian Invasion in War of the Worlds, we simply watch Putin own all Ukraines current borders and install puppet regime, to achieve 1945 all over again.
This can easily be achieved by Gove and Boris ahead of the election, can’t it?
However, your last sentence is spot on
Why do we have extensive legislative structures to ensure we eat unadulterated food, we live and work in safe buildings, the air we breath is not too polluted, transport is safe...
Government for centuries... nay, millennia... has had a role to protect citizens. We take that for granted when it comes to protecting us from cholera, dysentery etc. (both through vaccinations but more so through providing clean water and effective sewers). Yet because COVID-19 is a newer disease, suddenly protecting people from disease is not what government should do...???
Feminism is strong throughout society. Very prevalent in management for example and throughout middle class. It is by no means the odd leftist cult it tends to get portrayed as in English speaking countries.
In fact, it could be argued that feminism and equality is one of few ideological topics that Swedes genuinely care deeply about.
But Whitehouse? Er… no.
If they have got rid of Boris.
Chaucer and I wrote a story
Bawdy and lewd from the start
But mine, people said, was just filthy,
While Chaucer's was Classical Art
If I add - and we can even smell your cheap aftershave tonight from here - could I double them?
"How I seduced Theresa May."
(Which seems to be the case.)
What are the odds, eh?
I know this isn’t what you or I want to hear Eek - but we have to accept Gove and Boris will have plenty for the next General Election Campaign for the toss to be argued over.
Breast screening is available - people aren't incarcerated to prevent them from leaving the house until they're screened.
Vaccines are comparable to that. They're available and anyone who isn't thick will take them up, but people have the right to be thick.
Stripping us of our fundamental civil liberties and locking us down is something completely different and far more sinister; lockdown fanatics like yourself need to be disabused of the notion that is something in your arsenal to be wielded on a "precautionary" basis.
But I accept your surrender in these negotiations and pleased we have a deal.
“Every country that started a war since 1870 has lost”
I can see where you are coming from, but obvious exceptions immediately spring to mind
Israel surely started a couple of wars, then won. Also several wars of independence? Ireland, Vietnam, multiple others
Russia in Crimea, very recently
The devil is in the detail of “starting”. Sensible countries about to invade or overthrow someone else usually invent a casus belli, so they can claim “we didn’t start it”
Who started the war is very arguable and the victors tend to write that it was the losers that did.
The academies minister Lord Agnew has said he will bet any headteacher “a bottle of champagne and a letter of commendation” that he can identify more potential savings in their schools.
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/minister-bets-heads-a-bottle-of-champagne-he-can-find-savings-in-their-schools/
This is no small risk. I spoke to a Thai-American friend yesterday. She returned to Bangkok late last year when they had a “test and release” policy (it’s even worse now). She was entirely symptom-free but she got a positive. She was whisked off to a dour “hospital-hotel” for ten days compulsory isolation, at her own expense
Who the F wants to risk that? If you have two weeks holiday?
Senseless
Tourist industries will only revive when they drop this draconian restriction
You couldn't have a much more Russophile German energy policy if an actively puppet government had been installed.
My suspicion is, as part of the Battle of Big Dogs Bulge counter offensive, they have contacted Dom, whip like, to let him know he doesn’t hold all the cards, and the sort of things they got. Or else what do you make of Cummings MI5 reference and “Protagonist in the lobby”?
With the help of the Dutch, of course.
Which side were the Scots on?
She was always going on about the National Viewers' and Listeners' Alliance (?) but when one asked how many members it had apart from her husband to back her in this moral crusade, she would never answer, or am I being unfair?
https://twitter.com/thhamilton/status/1485643776613834756
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1485636828367572999
More like Project Orion....
It is economically dependent on the Chinese import/export market, it is strategically dependant on Russian energy - to an unusual extent in both cases
Totally hobbles their foreign policy “independence”
Whilst Starmer’s opposition are seeing how many likes they can get, Boris is building something far stronger in the true Machiavellian sense. His premiership is morphing in front our eyes into a more substantial thing. To be feared.
Now PB, in terms of power, is it better to be feared, or loved?
For all the fails and deaths we had in from March 2020 to Feb 2021 I'd rather be where we are now than where the rest of the world is. The UK seems to have begun making the psychological move to treat COVID like any other disease that might kill us when we get old. Very few other places seem to be doing that.
Which means that for a lot of people the Tories will have failed to deliver what has been promised and because a lot will be in the early planning stage they will be at risk (see HS2E as an example) of being cancelled on a whim.