Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
The most amusing thing about all of it, he was a big supporter of RFK Jnr, who is a massive conspiracy nutter, anti-vaxxer, released a dodgy book about Fauci etc etc etc. He was happy to be promoting his nonsense when it was all about GMO.
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
The most amusing thing about all of it, he was a big supporter of RFK Jnr, who is a massive conspiracy nutter, anti-vaxxer, released a dodgy book about Fauci etc etc etc. He was happy to be promoting his nonsense when it was all about GMO.
If Young had been clever, he wouldn't have threatened to remove his music, but have used his platform to pressure Spotify about how they aren't applying their content restrictions evenly.
@Liveuamap Putin: We understand that the conventional power of NATO is more than Russia's. But Russia is the top nuclear power. And there will be no winners in the war (in case of Ukraine in NATO, and will attempt to return Crimea with force)
That's quite a serious escalation: is Putin really suggesting he'd use nukes if the West sought to help defend Ukraine?
It's no escalation; it's always been apparent. Russian doctrine - inherited from the Sovs - is to use tactical nukes and chemical weapons to cancel the qualitative technological and logistical advantages held by NATO forces.
If Russian forces are in direct kinetic contact with NATO forces it will go nuclear within days. It doesn't matter at all which side of the Russia/Ukraine border the fighting is happening.
NATO forces will not go to war to defend Ukraine. Economic sanctions would be imposed instead.
NATO would however go to war to defend Poland and the Baltic states and Romania, hence more NATO troops are being moved there to defend those areas. Not that I think Putin would go that far
No10 lying, STRAP clearance takes *weeks even when accelerated*. So No10 press office lying about their new comms guru's security status, Huawei Hari, on his spectacular first day...
Big Dom has definitely taken a leaf out of the Trump playbook of assigning a nickname to everybody.
And sometimes uses funny emoji instead 🙂
Hopefully I can copy and paste from his blog without getting banned. I’ll redact what looks libellous that could get PB shut down
already explained, 🛒 tried to [following three sentences redacted]. Following an interview with [remainder of the sentence redacted]. [following sentence redacted till] on a particularly innocent visit [redacted] to test my hearing. A large [redacted] hit the [redacted] whereby 🐿 [redacted] with her friends. [the rest of the paragraph redacted] leaving 🛒 no choice but to [redacted], and so he did [redacted] bottle of Chanel No. 5 [redacted] woke up tied to slide, naked as the jay bird, his own covid laws scrawled over his [redacted] flesh in marker pen, yelling [redacted for propriety only] #beststaffever.
I am back from the ban someone placed on my account. I have managed to log in today for the first time in weeks.
And the first thing I would like to comment on is this post here, rather than being profound is the most superficial post ever posted. To any social media. Ever. Pineapple works just fine as a pizza topping, in fact indispensable partnered with squid.
Secondly - the reply to your post that got me the ban, I did over step the mark. In the bin of sin, imagining I was one of the “disappeared” for ever as Stodge put it, I reflected on my whole relationship with PB. I think I came to a fair conclusion: I have posted some pretty cute political analysis and made some good political and horsey betting calls at times - but, having had a saucy mind my entire life I have also posted far too much immature, over excited and irrelevant filth - for my second and final coming I intend to get the balance right.
Everyone makes mistakes, it’s how we learn - and how we learn to grow up.
So I don’t blame you at all, TSE, in fact, for the first time in weeks I can now properly apologise to you. Whatever your next pizza is, I hope you enjoy it 👍🏻
(After removing all the fruit bringing the necessary balance to the flavour)
Welcome back.
I hadn’t realised you’d been banned?
Smutty pictures?
Truth is reason for my ban wasn’t explained to me before it was lifted, yet it still afforded me time in the sin bin to reflect on many lessons I should learn now to do better in future and be more careful.
Without being explained I guess it was one of these three.
In what I think you are referring to, The night of my ban I captioned a redacted picture of German actress with “Boris won’t want you to see the juicy bits”. She’s actually clothed behind the blocks, yet that just makes the picture seem all the more sexier, I think people just saw that and not my satirical and topical metaphor. Heathener compared it to Guido totty watch, which I looked up to find out what it is but it’s not remotely the same thing as topical satire I was trying. It may just have been ahead of it’s time as two days later everyone is saying Boris is trying to redact the juicy bits. The idea in my head had been to use a naked redacted Boris Johnson with the same caption - if I had used that instead maybe everyone would have got the satire, or maybe I would still be banned. 🤷♀️
Although I tried to word everything very carefully, I had suggested Boris may try to get MI5 onto Cummings as part of a fight back, my reading of Cummings explanation not to speak with Sue Gray was because Boris did try a similar security smear before. When first banned I feared my ruminating could have got PB closed down and it would be all my fault, so I was too frightened to ask. 😕 I still suspect a story like that as part Boris fight back, maybe in The Mail, discredit the protagonist with picture of Putin operating a Cummings Puppet. In fact I suspect there is big story yet to break about the influence of Russian and Chinese soft power and dirty tricks over UK politics in last 20 years, and no party attacks another because none are clean on it. Did Barry Gardener deny he took all that money? What did they get in return? Tory’s don’t seem interested, is that because photo’s show same lady with Cameron, and close to May’s administration too? In fact Boris may even be able to present himself like Jesus cleaning the money lenders out the Temple - himself driving dirty foreign money out the lobby since he came in. There might be a big story out there yet to break that saves Boris if played in tandem with Ukraine story.
Zola’s artistic style was naturalism. At college I was taught he used four personality types, and they wanted me to be mindful of this when painting portraits as it helps bring out the persons true personality in the painting. I know myself as Sanguine. But I sense TSE as ambitious, brave and proud- good traits from being egocentric is how I would paint him - passions in his life he gets active about, but pull the wrong leavers anytime and he may just get easily roused or even fiery. That’s what I feared I done with a reply to TSE post, pulled the wrong levers. In which case it is my mistake, so I apologised.
I've been focusing too much on politics, even for me. I was watching the Lion King and kept thinking Boris was Scar, taking down May (Mufasa ignored one part of his kingdom, the 'citizens of nowhere' perhaps), and leading a hungry and desperate group of Hyenas (Tories) with the rather basic plea that they would never go hungry (for power) again, and he quickly led them to total power over the land, but it was led to ruin whilst the lioneses (ministers), waited on some entitled saviour (Rishi) to come and save them rather than act themselves. Now some of the hyenas are starting to tear him apart.
I've been focusing too much on politics, even for me. I was watching the Lion King and kept thinking Boris was Scar, taking down May (Mufasa ignored one part of his kingdom, the 'citizens of nowhere' perhaps), and leading a hungry and desperate group of Hyenas (Tories) with the rather basic plea that they would never go hungry (for power) again, and he quickly led them to total power over the land, but it was led to ruin whilst the lioneses (ministers), waited on some entitled saviour (Rishi) to come and save them rather than act themselves. Now some of the hyenas are starting to tear him apart.
I've been focusing too much on politics, even for me. I was watching the Lion King and kept thinking Boris was Scar, taking down May (Mufasa ignored one part of his kingdom, the 'citizens of nowhere' perhaps), and leading a hungry and desperate group of Hyenas (Tories) with the rather basic plea that they would never go hungry (for power) again, and he quickly led them to total power over the land, but it was led to ruin whilst the lioneses (ministers), waited on some entitled saviour (Rishi) to come and save them rather than act themselves. Now some of the hyenas are starting to tear him apart.
Where’s Ed Davey?
What's an "Ed Davey"?
An Oxford graduate, so “unwanted” appears to be the Smithsonian reply.
"British using Chinese CCTV linked to repression of Uighurs
Schools, councils, police forces and government departments are using Chinese surveillance cameras linked to the repression of Uighurs, data shared with The Times shows. Hikvision and Dahua, both Chinese state-owned companies, have been blacklisted in the US after authorities ruled they pose threats to national security. British officials and rights campaigners say they provide the “technological infrastructure” for the oppression of Muslim Uighurs in China. Thousands of public institutions in Britain are thought to have installed the companies’ cameras on buildings, which watch school pupils, government workers and members of the public. Many of the devices have advanced surveillance capabilities including facial, gender and behaviour detection, raising alarm among privacy advocates." (£)
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Do we need “polling” to tell us that bullying is wrong?
Johnson’s slur contributes to the general decline in public life. Which hurts all MPs, including Conservative ones. Ask the families of Jo Cox and David Amess. Note the Chris Whitty assault. Note how many online campaigners supported police assault of Catalonian voters. There are countless other depressing examples.
English politics is heading to a dark, dark place. Johnson is accelerating that journey. If Con MPs are unwilling to take a moral stand, perhaps in the background their wives and families are influencing events?
.
Matt presents and represents a more attractive face of the English character. Con MPs should strive for the light.
Is Neil Young's music any good? Never listened to it.
Saint Etienne's version of "Only Love Can Break Your Heart" is better...
Strongly disagree. Just compared Young’s original (still available on Spotify, why?) with the cover you suggest. No comparison whatsoever. Young’s recording is a wee masterpiece. The cover a dreadful dirge.
@Liveuamap Putin: We understand that the conventional power of NATO is more than Russia's. But Russia is the top nuclear power. And there will be no winners in the war (in case of Ukraine in NATO, and will attempt to return Crimea with force)
That's quite a serious escalation: is Putin really suggesting he'd use nukes if the West sought to help defend Ukraine?
It's no escalation; it's always been apparent. Russian doctrine - inherited from the Sovs - is to use tactical nukes and chemical weapons to cancel the qualitative technological and logistical advantages held by NATO forces.
If Russian forces are in direct kinetic contact with NATO forces it will go nuclear within days. It doesn't matter at all which side of the Russia/Ukraine border the fighting is happening.
I am sure the Russian population would be delighted about their leader spreading nuclear radiation across Southern Russia. It is a bluff, as much as appeasers like to build up Putin.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do try to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
New Populist Conservative = English nationalist, populist, Johnsonian cult* = Neo-UKIP
Farage won. And he didn’t do it at the ballot box. That’s a coup d'état.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
Those particular demons you're describing are the result of doctrinaire fundamentalist capitalism, which Johnson and Trump also represent. They have very successfully stoked culture war and identity demons, sometimes with the unwitting help of less wise parts of the left, to distract attraction from those other demons.
Agreed. Whilst I think Thatcher did some good things, I also think she was a disaster in a fair few ways.
What you also fail to mention is the left has played its part. Portraying large swathes of the population as ignorant hillbillies / 'Gammons' who are racist, ignorant thugs, and claiming that they are automatically privileged just because of the colour of their skin is not exactly helping the situation.
I did mention the responsibility of part of the left, too, in that polarisation, to be fair.
You did indeed.
And Starmer himself is not blameless in his parroting of Twitter memes like “the Johnson variant”. Politicians should find a way to get off Twitter and stay off. No good comes from it.
Everyone involved in politics and political media needs to get the hell off Twitter, and go back to actually talking to each other in person. That way, we might start to see a little more civility in discourse.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
Those particular demons you're describing are the result of doctrinaire fundamentalist capitalism, which Johnson and Trump also represent. They have very successfully stoked culture war and identity demons, sometimes with the unwitting help of less wise parts of the left, to distract attraction from those other demons.
Agreed. Whilst I think Thatcher did some good things, I also think she was a disaster in a fair few ways.
What you also fail to mention is the left has played its part. Portraying large swathes of the population as ignorant hillbillies / 'Gammons' who are racist, ignorant thugs, and claiming that they are automatically privileged just because of the colour of their skin is not exactly helping the situation.
The issue isn’t left v right, it’s privileged elites v the rest of us.
It’s the right elites who have been making out like bandits, and the left elites pushing the culture war stuff.
Meanwhile, the average working man is getting screwed economically and being called racist for it. Yet we wonder where Trump came from in the States? Let’s not also forget, that the reason we now have Johnson as PM was the determination of the elites in London to overturn the EU referendum.
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Would anyone die on the hill of Joe Rogan? He's beyond dull
Another channel has offered him $100 million apparently.
If Spotify dump him, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't just go back to doing his own thing.
I wouldn't be surprised if he got backing from someone like Elon Musk.
It wouldn’t be too difficult for Joe Rogan and Dave Chapelle to set up a massive comedy and podcast network, with someone like Musk helping to bankroll them.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
PS Yes, you are right the last sentence is a straw man argument, so I shouldn't have put it in.
I don't understand what levelling up is, unless it simply means taxing well-off people and doling out the money in poor areas, which isn't exactly a new idea.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
PS Yes, you are right the last sentence is a straw man argument, so I shouldn't have put it in.
I don't understand what levelling up is, unless it simply means taxing well-off people and doling out the money in poor areas, which isn't exactly a new idea.
It will mean different things to different people.
To someone more economically conservative, it means creating an enviroment which presents opportunities, by encouraging private sector investment in job creation in certain regions, with a favourable regulatory and tax regime and training opportunities - for example the Nissan factory in Sunderland that Thatcher courted, or creation of a free port.
To someone more economically left, it might mean more public sector jobs or public transport projects, spending taxpayers’ money in the north rather than the south.
Most of us will want likely want to see elements of both.
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Would anyone die on the hill of Joe Rogan? He's beyond dull
Another channel has offered him $100 million apparently.
If Spotify dump him, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't just go back to doing his own thing.
I wouldn't be surprised if he got backing from someone like Elon Musk.
It wouldn’t be too difficult for Joe Rogan and Dave Chapelle to set up a massive comedy and podcast network, with someone like Musk helping to bankroll them.
While that's true, he is a massive loss leader for Spotify. Simplifying, Spotify basically pays $1.50-2.00 to Rogan for every dollar in advertising revenue he brings in. Why? Because it means people use Spotify over Apple Music or whatever.
Could Rogan start his own company with Chapelle? Yes. Obviously.
But it would have less reach than Spotify, and it wouldn't be cross subsidised by music streaming.
If Rogan were to quit, the biggest winners would be Apple and Google.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
Those particular demons you're describing are the result of doctrinaire fundamentalist capitalism, which Johnson and Trump also represent. They have very successfully stoked culture war and identity demons, sometimes with the unwitting help of less wise parts of the left, to distract attraction from those other demons.
Agreed. Whilst I think Thatcher did some good things, I also think she was a disaster in a fair few ways.
What you also fail to mention is the left has played its part. Portraying large swathes of the population as ignorant hillbillies / 'Gammons' who are racist, ignorant thugs, and claiming that they are automatically privileged just because of the colour of their skin is not exactly helping the situation.
The issue isn’t left v right, it’s privileged elites v the rest of us.
It’s the right elites who have been making out like bandits, and the left elites pushing the culture war stuff.
Meanwhile, the average working man is getting screwed economically and being called racist for it. Yet we wonder where Trump came from in the States? Let’s not also forget, that the reason we now have Johnson as PM was the determination of the elites in London to overturn the EU referendum.
Worth remembering, of course, that from the point of view of someone not in the developed West, we all like privilege elites.
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Would anyone die on the hill of Joe Rogan? He's beyond dull
Another channel has offered him $100 million apparently.
If Spotify dump him, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't just go back to doing his own thing.
I wouldn't be surprised if he got backing from someone like Elon Musk.
It wouldn’t be too difficult for Joe Rogan and Dave Chapelle to set up a massive comedy and podcast network, with someone like Musk helping to bankroll them.
While that's true, he is a massive loss leader for Spotify. Simplifying, Spotify basically pays $1.50-2.00 to Rogan for every dollar in advertising revenue he brings in. Why? Because it means people use Spotify over Apple Music or whatever.
Could Rogan start his own company with Chapelle? Yes. Obviously.
But it would have less reach than Spotify, and it wouldn't be cross subsidised by music streaming.
If Rogan were to quit, the biggest winners would be Apple and Google.
Oh indeed, Spotify pays Rogan more than he can generate elsewhere, because they are using him to attract listeners from other platforms. His demographic in the US is also notoriously difficult to attract to subscription services of any kind.
I didn’t have a Spotify account before Rogan moved there, and it’s easier to stay on one platform rather than keep switching between Spotify and Apple.
But does Rogan really care about the money? Probably not to a great extent, he’s going to be as happy earning $30m a year as $50m a year, and can use the opportunity to build himself a business legacy online, as he is doing with his new physical comedy club in Austin. He is a rebel who would be happy to stick it to those who try and cancel comedy.
Spotify would be a massive loser if he left though, and Daniel Ek knows that. Other losers would be Youtube and Patreon, who currently host a lot of other comedians doing podcasts and shows, if they all upped sticks and went with what Rogan and Chapelle were doing.
The ones who have already called the comments disgraceful in the Conservative MP ranks have already publicly expressed opposition to him.
Do we actually have any polling on the Savile comments and what people think of them? Unless a lot of Conservative MPs seriously think this is hurting them in their constituencies, they will not move against BJ.
Are you still supporting him? I have some respect for such a contrarian stance, but surely it's time for him to go?
Support is too strong.
What I care about is someone comes in and supports a proper levelling up agenda. That is not going to be Sunak or Truss. It's not going to be Mourdant or Hunt or Tom Tugging or whatever he is called. I doubt it will be Johnson. But at least if the bulk of his Red Wall MPs have him by the balls, there is a chance he is forced into doing something meaningful. I don't really care who is the vehicle for change, just as long as it happens.
Plus, being blunt, a lot of the outrage this evening seems confected. It's well known Starmer supported the Government lockdowns and would probably have gone further. So the fact he got surrounded by a bunch of nutjobs and weirdos campaigning against lockdowns is not exactly surprising. They didn't need BJ to tell them to get in Starmer's face. If you want hate, try walking to the Tory conference in Manchester with a sign saying you are Conservative.
That's a straw man distraction. I've been to the Conservative conference in Manchester (as an NGO standholder), mildly amused to carry a copy of the conference agenda booklet with CONSERVATIVE in big letters at the top, and the delegate badge slung round my neck. If anyone was hating me, they didn't show it.
What you're seeing at the moment is the separation between traditional Conservative belief - maintain law and order, respect tradition, try to run the country well, stuff vs. New Populist Conservative. You're right that the former tend not to have any special interest in levelling up. But they do to avoid stirring up demons. It's the same division that you get on the left between socialists who are earnestly concerned with inequality and foreign aid vs populist Trots who like a good riot.
I think that if your party goes for a majority for New Populist Conservatism there will be a rough ride ahead, with multiple defections.
I think that is right re the split. In that case, I would imagine the RW and the rural parts of the Conservative party would stick together, and the suburban MPs would gravitate to some form of coalition with the Lib Dems, although I think that also triggers a possible realignment of LD politics. BTW, I also think Labour is in danger of being split in a similar way (urbanites to the Greens, for example).
Where you are wrong is in the phrase "But they do to avoid stirring up demons". That's the phrase - and apologies Nick because I respect you a lot - of someone who has a very comfortable position and doesn't want to face the facts that, for many people in this country, life is sh1t. The demons have already been stirred. People like Trump and (to a degree) Johnson are symptoms, not causes. A well-functioning democracy that looks after all sections of society should not have a need of such people. They exist because many people have been f**ked over and they don't know to whom to turn.
Those particular demons you're describing are the result of doctrinaire fundamentalist capitalism, which Johnson and Trump also represent. They have very successfully stoked culture war and identity demons, sometimes with the unwitting help of less wise parts of the left, to distract attraction from those other demons.
Agreed. Whilst I think Thatcher did some good things, I also think she was a disaster in a fair few ways.
What you also fail to mention is the left has played its part. Portraying large swathes of the population as ignorant hillbillies / 'Gammons' who are racist, ignorant thugs, and claiming that they are automatically privileged just because of the colour of their skin is not exactly helping the situation.
The issue isn’t left v right, it’s privileged elites v the rest of us.
It’s the right elites who have been making out like bandits, and the left elites pushing the culture war stuff.
Meanwhile, the average working man is getting screwed economically and being called racist for it. Yet we wonder where Trump came from in the States? Let’s not also forget, that the reason we now have Johnson as PM was the determination of the elites in London to overturn the EU referendum.
Worth remembering, of course, that from the point of view of someone not in the developed West, we all like privilege elites.
Oh indeed, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs very much applies.
We don’t see the poor of Africa and Asia obsessing about gender identity or racial bias, they are far more concerned with feeding their families and putting a roof over their heads.
@Liveuamap Putin: We understand that the conventional power of NATO is more than Russia's. But Russia is the top nuclear power. And there will be no winners in the war (in case of Ukraine in NATO, and will attempt to return Crimea with force)
That's quite a serious escalation: is Putin really suggesting he'd use nukes if the West sought to help defend Ukraine?
It's no escalation; it's always been apparent. Russian doctrine - inherited from the Sovs - is to use tactical nukes and chemical weapons to cancel the qualitative technological and logistical advantages held by NATO forces.
If Russian forces are in direct kinetic contact with NATO forces it will go nuclear within days. It doesn't matter at all which side of the Russia/Ukraine border the fighting is happening.
Johnson’s deadcat always looked profoundly unwise. Just how profound is becoming increasingly apparent. Wise heads need to step in immediately and stop the madness.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Ask yourself why and when the prime minister brought up the slur. It was nothing to do with justice or with concern for Savile’s victims. It was all to do with his own selfish interests.
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Ask yourself why and when the prime minister brought up the slur. It was nothing to do with justice or with concern for Savile’s victims. It was all to do with his own selfish interests.
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Yes a throw away jibe when defending himself against charges of breaking criminal law. Not exactly a solemn process of truth discovery for the benefit of Savile’s victims is it. Can’t understand why one or two here are defending it.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Ask yourself why and when the prime minister brought up the slur. It was nothing to do with justice or with concern for Savile’s victims. It was all to do with his own selfish interests.
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Yes a throw away jibe when defending himself against charges of breaking criminal law. Not exactly a solemn process of truth discovery for the benefit of Savile’s victims is it. Can’t understand why one or two here are defending it.
Exactly. He was having a bad session and grabbed at it more in desperation than malice.
Of course he should have retracted and apologised immediately, but ...it's Boris, innit.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
Very displeased to hear about the nonsense with the Leader of the Opposition. The PM's idiotic approach to politics, responsibility, and life generally is not enhancing the national interest.
Good think YouTube has no bad people on it or Neil would be off
Young is still up on Spotify.
It's the old guys that are killing music. The Spotify algorithm predictably returns the same old standards as favourites, turning it ever closer to Smooth Radio. It is possible to explore niche genres there, but it does require a bit of swimming against the tide.
The other problem is that Young doesn't own a lot of his back catalogue, so has no right to remove it. He sold a lot of it to Warner Brothers a few years back for $150 million and no longer has control.
I couldn't care less for Rogan, or Young for that matter, but Spotify does rather personify the incredible concentration of wealth in the audio entertainment industry. Each of them sells their content for hundreds of millions, but the strugglers producing content get trivial royalties per play. Same for YouTube, TikTok, etc etc.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Ask yourself why and when the prime minister brought up the slur. It was nothing to do with justice or with concern for Savile’s victims. It was all to do with his own selfish interests.
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Indeed it was Johnson who thought money spent on investigating historic cases was "spaffing up the wall".
Morning all! The morning after the night before, and hopefully no more reworkings of budgets at high speed required. Put the goalpost back in the ground boys so we know what we're aiming at.
Looks like my holiday away from Microsoft Windows is at an abrupt end. Had two incidents in 3 weeks where web apps simply won't cut it for some of the overly complex shit that lazy people produce without thinking file size and compatibility.
So I need desktop versions of MS shite and that means running Windows again. I hope 11 is better than 10...
Good morning one and all. Not sure how this Saville business is going to play out. Even if the PM breaks the habit of a lifetime and 'fully withdraws and apologises' mud is going to stick, especially in the nastier corners of political life. And Guto Harri might just have the skills to get him off some of the hooks on which he's impaled himself. I must say, as I suggested yesterday, that his turning up to hospitals is getting a bit wearisome. If only someone would, as he arrives, followed by his Press pack, tell him loudly to 'clear(!) off'. And, with their team, then turn round and refuse to show him anything, or answer his questions.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
If you’re going down that line, then an awful lot of people at the BBC and various charities/hospitals made profound errors, long before the matter came before the police or prosecutors. Can’t recall any of them fessing up. Should Margaret Thatcher take the blame? She was ultimately responsible for the state while Savile was sheltering under its wings.
Yes, there were a series of profound errors by all sorts of people. That does not excuse the fact that the final opportunity to get something like justice was missed.
Ask yourself why and when the prime minister brought up the slur. It was nothing to do with justice or with concern for Savile’s victims. It was all to do with his own selfish interests.
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Yes a throw away jibe when defending himself against charges of breaking criminal law. Not exactly a solemn process of truth discovery for the benefit of Savile’s victims is it. Can’t understand why one or two here are defending it.
Exactly. He was having a bad session and grabbed at it more in desperation than malice.
Of course he should have retracted and apologised immediately, but ...it's Boris, innit.
That's the other striking thing.
The Starmer-Saville allegations have been around in the background for a while. They're disgraceful but potent with a certain sort of voter. Like chemical weapons, they shouldn't be used.
But if you are going to deploy those slurs, do it at a time that's effective- just before polling day. Preferably in a way with plausible deniability.
Instead, BoJo said them himself and spaffed them away on a PMQs in mid-term. He used them to lash out because he felt he was losing.
It's like the heat now, pay much later scheme. Some political benefit now but increased pain in the actual election year.
Sadly its not all over yet. They have done flawless testing of the self-contained bit. The bugger is integrating Crossrail's CBTC signalling with existing TPWS / AWS signalling and the new ETCS signalling on the Heathrow section.
Making the various computer systems interface with each other is a bugger, which is why Crossrail won't go to Heathrow or Reading or Shenfield any time soon.
Mr. Leon, I'm sure the people of Leeds are delighted that London is finally getting the transport spending it deserves.
Yes yes yawn. But London has had a pretty crap Covid compared to much of Britain - certainly in the centre - and it genuinely needs a boost. This is perfect in timing and impact
Liverpool St to Paddington in 11 minutes. That’s amazebombs. Canary Wharf to Heathrow in 40. Phenomenal
Now do Crossrail 2 - but avoiding any major works at Camden. Ta
Morning all! The morning after the night before, and hopefully no more reworkings of budgets at high speed required. Put the goalpost back in the ground boys so we know what we're aiming at.
Looks like my holiday away from Microsoft Windows is at an abrupt end. Had two incidents in 3 weeks where web apps simply won't cut it for some of the overly complex shit that lazy people produce without thinking file size and compatibility.
So I need desktop versions of MS shite and that means running Windows again. I hope 11 is better than 10...
If by “better”, you mean “pushing everything into Microsoft’s accounts and online services, while generating valuable (for them) data on all of your activity”, then yes, 11 is better than 10.
Seriously, get 10 if you can, 11 is a sh!t-show of an operating system for a small businessman.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
Sadly its not all over yet. They have done flawless testing of the self-contained bit. The bugger is integrating Crossrail's CBTC signalling with existing TPWS / AWS signalling and the new ETCS signalling on the Heathrow section.
Making the various computer systems interface with each other is a bugger, which is why Crossrail won't go to Heathrow or Reading or Shenfield any time soon.
Just getting it going in central london - finally - linking the wharf with padders - will be huge.
That article says the whole show should be up and running entirely by 2023
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
'It's the rich wot make the trouble. It's the poor wot get the blame'. As example, as yet at least no-one who was at the top in the Post Office while the sub-postmasters were hounded has yet, (AFAIK anyway) accepted, or been forced to accept any responsibility.
Edit. On checking, Paula Vennels, the PO Chair at the time has lost the job(s) she took after leaving the PO.
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
Yes, I think that is the reason so many Tories are being mealy mouthed about the slur. They know Johnson is toast, so are hoping some mud sticks.
The Tories need a long spell in opposition to learn some manners and respect.
Morning all! The morning after the night before, and hopefully no more reworkings of budgets at high speed required. Put the goalpost back in the ground boys so we know what we're aiming at.
Looks like my holiday away from Microsoft Windows is at an abrupt end. Had two incidents in 3 weeks where web apps simply won't cut it for some of the overly complex shit that lazy people produce without thinking file size and compatibility.
So I need desktop versions of MS shite and that means running Windows again. I hope 11 is better than 10...
If by “better”, you mean “pushing everything into Microsoft’s accounts and online services, while generating valuable (for them) data on all of your activity”, then yes, 11 is better than 10.
Seriously, get 10 if you can, 11 is a sh!t-show of an operating system for a small businessman.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
'It's the rich wot make the trouble. It's the poor wot get the blame'. As example, as yet at least no-one who was at the top in the Post Office while the sub-postmasters were hounded has yet, (AFAIK anyway) accepted, or been forced to accept any responsibility.
There really need to be prison sentences for senior managers at the Post Office, who can be implicated in the scandal, especially those responsible for making the decision to prosecute people without proper independent auditing of the figures.
Rock star Neil Young has posted a message on his website encouraging Spotify employees to leave the company and criticizing its CEO over the ongoing controversy centered around coronavirus misinformation on "The Joe Rogan Experience."
Would anyone die on the hill of Joe Rogan? He's beyond dull
Another channel has offered him $100 million apparently.
If Spotify dump him, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't just go back to doing his own thing.
I wouldn't be surprised if he got backing from someone like Elon Musk.
It wouldn’t be too difficult for Joe Rogan and Dave Chapelle to set up a massive comedy and podcast network, with someone like Musk helping to bankroll them.
While that's true, he is a massive loss leader for Spotify. Simplifying, Spotify basically pays $1.50-2.00 to Rogan for every dollar in advertising revenue he brings in. Why? Because it means people use Spotify over Apple Music or whatever.
Could Rogan start his own company with Chapelle? Yes. Obviously.
But it would have less reach than Spotify, and it wouldn't be cross subsidised by music streaming.
If Rogan were to quit, the biggest winners would be Apple and Google.
Possibly but 100 per cent of the families I know with a Spotify subscription (which is one) cancelled following news of the Rogan/Young kerfuffle.
Morning all! The morning after the night before, and hopefully no more reworkings of budgets at high speed required. Put the goalpost back in the ground boys so we know what we're aiming at.
Looks like my holiday away from Microsoft Windows is at an abrupt end. Had two incidents in 3 weeks where web apps simply won't cut it for some of the overly complex shit that lazy people produce without thinking file size and compatibility.
So I need desktop versions of MS shite and that means running Windows again. I hope 11 is better than 10...
If by “better”, you mean “pushing everything into Microsoft’s accounts and online services, while generating valuable (for them) data on all of your activity”, then yes, 11 is better than 10.
Seriously, get 10 if you can, 11 is a sh!t-show of an operating system for a small businessman.
But 10 is also shit.
10 is the shining light of operating systems compared to the unpolished turd that is 11.
Windows 7 was the best of the lot, but that’s now an unsupported dodo.
(My personal laptop is a Mac with a W10 virtual machine installed, for those emergencies when Windows is for some reason required).
Mr. Leon, the princess complaining her diamond shoes are too tight may not necessarily draw the sympathy of the barefoot kid a few streets away.
Let’s be honest, no one cares about the North. Not even Northerners, otherwise they wouldn’t have turned it into such a dump.
And besides, everyone gains from the Lizzie Line. Londoners get a 5 bazillion dollar new railway which offers handjobs by sexbots between stations and northerners get to fondly imagine what it might be like to have a world class public transport system. They get to dream, and everyone needs a dream
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
Smears good/bad.
One man's smears are another man's truth. For instance, I have zero doubt that Corbyn is an anti-Semite, and there is evidence to back that assertion up. I'm guessing you would see that as a smear.
That's another thing about this mess; if it had been a Conservative in charge of the CPS at the time, many of those defending Starmer would be saying: "Now convenient the records have been destroyed! How unlikely is it that the head of the organisation was not told of an investigation into a very public figure?"
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
You sound pleased. Is that true?
Not remotely. But the coverage has all been about Boris; nobody has been focussing on the overall harm that a well-aimed slur can do to somebody seeking the top job in the land.
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
Yes, I think that is the reason so many Tories are being mealy mouthed about the slur. They know Johnson is toast, so are hoping some mud sticks.
The Tories need a long spell in opposition to learn some manners and respect.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
'It's the rich wot make the trouble. It's the poor wot get the blame'. As example, as yet at least no-one who was at the top in the Post Office while the sub-postmasters were hounded has yet, (AFAIK anyway) accepted, or been forced to accept any responsibility.
There really need to be prison sentences for senior managers at the Post Office, who can be implicated in the scandal, especially those responsible for making the decision to prosecute people without proper independent auditing of the figures.
To be fair, looks as though, when the Inquiry reports (joke!) Parker will turn out to be the chap who sorted it. There appear to be a few people a little further down the tree who misled him in his early days, though.
British politics should be based on mutual respect of differences. We’re all there to change the world. So here are some Tories I like and respect. @Jochurchill_MP
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
You sound pleased. Is that true?
Not remotely. But the coverage has all been about Boris; nobody has been focussing on the overall harm that a well-aimed slur can do to somebody seeking the top job in the land.
Glad you’re not pleased. The type of people who buy into this shit are not going to vote Labour anyway. It’s a dog whistle for the extreme parts of Boris’ coalition. Tories need to decide if they are Trumpists or conservatives.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
Smears good/bad.
One man's smears are another man's truth. For instance, I have zero doubt that Corbyn is an anti-Semite, and there is evidence to back that assertion up. I'm guessing you would see that as a smear.
That's another thing about this mess; if it had been a Conservative in charge of the CPS at the time, many of those defending Starmer would be saying: "Now convenient the records have been destroyed! How unlikely is it that the head of the organisation was not told of an investigation into a very public figure?"
Exactly, as I pointed out the other day Starmer was fully involved in the Chris Huhne case, but apparently knew absolutely nothing about the Saville case.
Mr. Leon, I'm sure the people of Leeds are delighted that London is finally getting the transport spending it deserves.
Yes yes yawn. But London has had a pretty crap Covid compared to much of Britain - certainly in the centre - and it genuinely needs a boost. This is perfect in timing and impact
Liverpool St to Paddington in 11 minutes. That’s amazebombs. Canary Wharf to Heathrow in 40. Phenomenal
Now do Crossrail 2 - but avoiding any major works at Camden. Ta
I'm sure the red-wall taxpayers will be keen to dig deep in the coffers for that one...
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
Smears good/bad.
One man's smears are another man's truth. For instance, I have zero doubt that Corbyn is an anti-Semite, and there is evidence to back that assertion up. I'm guessing you would see that as a smear.
That's another thing about this mess; if it had been a Conservative in charge of the CPS at the time, many of those defending Starmer would be saying: "Now convenient the records have been destroyed! How unlikely is it that the head of the organisation was not told of an investigation into a very public figure?"
Exactly, as I pointed out the other day Starmer was fully involved in the Chris Huhne case, but apparently knew absolutely nothing about the Saville case.
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
Smears good/bad.
One man's smears are another man's truth. For instance, I have zero doubt that Corbyn is an anti-Semite, and there is evidence to back that assertion up. I'm guessing you would see that as a smear.
That's another thing about this mess; if it had been a Conservative in charge of the CPS at the time, many of those defending Starmer would be saying: "Now convenient the records have been destroyed! How unlikely is it that the head of the organisation was not told of an investigation into a very public figure?"
Exactly, as I pointed out the other day Starmer was fully involved in the Chris Huhne case, but apparently knew absolutely nothing about the Saville case.
If it had been a SeniorTory as head of the CPS at the time this happened, would Labour just accept his word that he knew nothing.
As someone on the left, who looks forward to the end of this rotten Government, I regretfully have to agree with you. Mud sticks, to both the thrower and the target.
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
Yes, I think that is the reason so many Tories are being mealy mouthed about the slur. They know Johnson is toast, so are hoping some mud sticks.
The Tories need a long spell in opposition to learn some manners and respect.
I'm no fan of Angela Rayner, but I believe she did eventually apologise and retract the comments. She certainly gave what was a heartfelt and (imo) sincere apology on Matt Forde's podcast.
Regardless of the rising pressure from its allies, Berlin appears to be sticking to its murky messaging on Nord Stream 2 with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz struggling to even mention the pipeline during his inaugural trip to visit US President Joe Biden. https://bit.ly/3HCXzNI
The Savile slur was not the first time the PM has wrongly smeared people doing their job. Nor the first time the Home Secretary has done so. Nor the first time the Attorney-General has remained quiet. Nor the first time the PM and the Home Secretary have been warned or criticised about what they have said.
It was, let's be blunt, a none too disguised nasty smear, designed to get people thinking exactly what this mob were shouting.
An utter disgrace.
Still, kudos to Julian Smith, former Chief Whip and Northern Ireland Secretary, who seems to be one of the few Tory MPs with a moral compass.
I don't know who is worse. The moral degenerate who said it. Or the moral degenerates who even now are resolutely defending him.
Or the moral degenerates who defended Corbyn? Or who defended Brown during McBride's shitbaggery?
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
'It's the rich wot make the trouble. It's the poor wot get the blame'. As example, as yet at least no-one who was at the top in the Post Office while the sub-postmasters were hounded has yet, (AFAIK anyway) accepted, or been forced to accept any responsibility.
There really need to be prison sentences for senior managers at the Post Office, who can be implicated in the scandal, especially those responsible for making the decision to prosecute people without proper independent auditing of the figures.
To be fair to him, he came in after almost all of the relevant events and appears to have played a role, as a fresh pair of clean hands, in finally getting the PO to take responsibility and start to put things right. It can’t have been fun and one can’t blame him for wanting to move on; it is hard to clean up such a big mess without getting dirty.
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
Yes, I think that is the reason so many Tories are being mealy mouthed about the slur. They know Johnson is toast, so are hoping some mud sticks.
The Tories need a long spell in opposition to learn some manners and respect.
I'm no fan of Angela Rayner, but I believe she did eventually apologise and retract the comments. She certainly gave what was a heartfelt and (imo) sincere apology on Matt Forde's podcast.
I think too there is a difference between a statement made late at night at a conference bar, and one made at the despatch box.
Mr. Leon, I'm sure the people of Leeds are delighted that London is finally getting the transport spending it deserves.
Yes yes yawn. But London has had a pretty crap Covid compared to much of Britain - certainly in the centre - and it genuinely needs a boost. This is perfect in timing and impact
Liverpool St to Paddington in 11 minutes. That’s amazebombs. Canary Wharf to Heathrow in 40. Phenomenal
Now do Crossrail 2 - but avoiding any major works at Camden. Ta
I'm sure the red-wall taxpayers will be keen to dig deep in the coffers for that one...
Yes I agree. In fact there should probably be a special tax on northern folk just to fund crossrail 2. You could call it the “flat vowel” tax. Every time someone says “glass” to rhyme with “lass” then they have to pay £6 to HMT. Thus sparing any further impositions on hard pressed Londoners in their million pound marble mansions, who already drive the UK economy simply by owning properties that endlessly go up in value
Besides, there’s no point in spending money IN the north because look what happens when you do. Manchester built a “European boulevard” which looks like a portakabin next to a car park and Edinburgh built a hotel which so closely resembles a turd it is now officially called “The Turd”. Enough of this silly wastage. Give everything to London
Thread header asks if its the Savile (wrongly spelt!) comment that finally brings down Boris. Possibly, but if it has resulted in more letters, it has been done without announcement by those doing so.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
You sound pleased. Is that true?
Not remotely. But the coverage has all been about Boris; nobody has been focussing on the overall harm that a well-aimed slur can do to somebody seeking the top job in the land.
Glad you’re not pleased. The type of people who buy into this shit are not going to vote Labour anyway. It’s a dog whistle for the extreme parts of Boris’ coalition. Tories need to decide if they are Trumpists or conservatives.
Not sure I can agree on the type of people "buying into this shit" though. They are the politically not very engaged, who Labour need to engage as far as the ballot box at least. Being linked to Savile has no positives for Starmer in getting them there.
It's takes more time for me to get to Sheffield than it does to get to London.
And crossing into Yorkshire from Merseyside is a nightmare.
I can't wait to try out Crossrail - I love London. But the investment energy down there needs to extend north. With interest rates so low for so long, should've all happened 2010 - 2020.
O/T but I’ve been a bit gobsmacked this morning listening to the Today programme’s reporting and commentary on BP’s results this morning. They keep banging on about how BP and Shell’s profits could cover the whole of the UK’s energy bills and about a windfall tax.
Not once have they had the wit to say “this is great news for UK pensions as they will comprise a large portion of pension assets”.
There has been a small nod to Sunak being reluctant to make a windfall tax as it deters investment but it’s as if the editorial line is BP evil and they should give the money away.
Just luckily had someone on making the pensions point but the language and tone is very unbalanced from the presenters.
Fuck me, I had low expectations for a Boris Johnson premiership, but he sinks so much lower than I thought was possible.
We need to be rid of Britain Trump.
Anyone who enables him will be spoken by history with all the warmth of the Vichy collaborators.
Incidentally, why is the phrase Britain Trump? Shouldn’t it be Britain’s Trump, or the British Trump?
It's a direct quote from Trump about Johnson. "They call him Britain Trump."
And incidentally he was likely wrong, I don't think many did or do call him Britain Trump (though the number of comparisons has increased as his behaviour deterioriates further) for the reason turbotubbs gave, as different phrasing would have been used.
Trump got something wrong? I can hardly believe it!!!!!
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh44QPT1mPE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwLtFjvS7-s
He walked on stage and asked "This is London, right? Where is the fog?"
NATO would however go to war to defend Poland and the Baltic states and Romania, hence more NATO troops are being moved there to defend those areas. Not that I think Putin would go that far
Hopefully I can copy and paste from his blog without getting banned. I’ll redact what looks libellous that could get PB shut down
already explained, 🛒 tried to [following three sentences redacted]. Following an interview with [remainder of the sentence redacted]. [following sentence redacted till] on a particularly innocent visit [redacted] to test my hearing. A large [redacted] hit the [redacted] whereby 🐿 [redacted] with her friends. [the rest of the paragraph redacted] leaving 🛒 no choice but to [redacted], and so he did [redacted] bottle of Chanel No. 5 [redacted] woke up tied to slide, naked as the jay bird, his own covid laws scrawled over his [redacted] flesh in marker pen, yelling [redacted for propriety only] #beststaffever.
Without being explained I guess it was one of these three.
In what I think you are referring to, The night of my ban I captioned a redacted picture of German actress with “Boris won’t want you to see the juicy bits”. She’s actually clothed behind the blocks, yet that just makes the picture seem all the more sexier, I think people just saw that and not my satirical and topical metaphor. Heathener compared it to Guido totty watch, which I looked up to find out what it is but it’s not remotely the same thing as topical satire I was trying. It may just have been ahead of it’s time as two days later everyone is saying Boris is trying to redact the juicy bits. The idea in my head had been to use a naked redacted Boris Johnson with the same caption - if I had used that instead maybe everyone would have got the satire, or maybe I would still be banned. 🤷♀️
Although I tried to word everything very carefully, I had suggested Boris may try to get MI5 onto Cummings as part of a fight back, my reading of Cummings explanation not to speak with Sue Gray was because Boris did try a similar security smear before. When first banned I feared my ruminating could have got PB closed down and it would be all my fault, so I was too frightened to ask. 😕 I still suspect a story like that as part Boris fight back, maybe in The Mail, discredit the protagonist with picture of Putin operating a Cummings Puppet. In fact I suspect there is big story yet to break about the influence of Russian and Chinese soft power and dirty tricks over UK politics in last 20 years, and no party attacks another because none are clean on it. Did Barry Gardener deny he took all that money? What did they get in return? Tory’s don’t seem interested, is that because photo’s show same lady with Cameron, and close to May’s administration too? In fact Boris may even be able to present himself like Jesus cleaning the money lenders out the Temple - himself driving dirty foreign money out the lobby since he came in. There might be a big story out there yet to break that saves Boris if played in tandem with Ukraine story.
Zola’s artistic style was naturalism. At college I was taught he used four personality types, and they wanted me to be mindful of this when painting portraits as it helps bring out the persons true personality in the painting. I know myself as Sanguine. But I sense TSE as ambitious, brave and proud- good traits from being egocentric is how I would paint him - passions in his life he gets active about, but pull the wrong leavers anytime and he may just get easily roused or even fiery. That’s what I feared I done with a reply to TSE post, pulled the wrong levers. In which case it is my mistake, so I apologised.
Good night.
Schools, councils, police forces and government departments are using Chinese surveillance cameras linked to the repression of Uighurs, data shared with The Times shows. Hikvision and Dahua, both Chinese state-owned companies, have been blacklisted in the US after authorities ruled they pose threats to national security. British officials and rights campaigners say they provide the “technological infrastructure” for the oppression of Muslim Uighurs in China. Thousands of public institutions in Britain are thought to have installed the companies’ cameras on buildings, which watch school pupils, government workers and members of the public. Many of the devices have advanced surveillance capabilities including facial, gender and behaviour detection, raising alarm among privacy advocates." (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/32e8d7cc-877a-11ec-8600-c48a9935f856
Johnson’s slur contributes to the general decline in public life. Which hurts all MPs, including Conservative ones. Ask the families of Jo Cox and David Amess. Note the Chris Whitty assault. Note how many online campaigners supported police assault of Catalonian voters. There are countless other depressing examples.
English politics is heading to a dark, dark place. Johnson is accelerating that journey. If Con MPs are unwilling to take a moral stand, perhaps in the background their wives and families are influencing events?
Matt presents and represents a more attractive face of the English character. Con MPs should strive for the light.
Farage won. And he didn’t do it at the ballot box. That’s a coup d'état.
*
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/lord-patten-boris-johnson_uk_61fd2e32e4b09170e9cfd074/
It’s the right elites who have been making out like bandits, and the left elites pushing the culture war stuff.
Meanwhile, the average working man is getting screwed economically and being called racist for it. Yet we wonder where Trump came from in the States? Let’s not also forget, that the reason we now have Johnson as PM was the determination of the elites in London to overturn the EU referendum.
To someone more economically conservative, it means creating an enviroment which presents opportunities, by encouraging private sector investment in job creation in certain regions, with a favourable regulatory and tax regime and training opportunities - for example the Nissan factory in Sunderland that Thatcher courted, or creation of a free port.
To someone more economically left, it might mean more public sector jobs or public transport projects, spending taxpayers’ money in the north rather than the south.
Most of us will want likely want to see elements of both.
Could Rogan start his own company with Chapelle? Yes. Obviously.
But it would have less reach than Spotify, and it wouldn't be cross subsidised by music streaming.
If Rogan were to quit, the biggest winners would be Apple and Google.
I didn’t have a Spotify account before Rogan moved there, and it’s easier to stay on one platform rather than keep switching between Spotify and Apple.
But does Rogan really care about the money? Probably not to a great extent, he’s going to be as happy earning $30m a year as $50m a year, and can use the opportunity to build himself a business legacy online, as he is doing with his new physical comedy club in Austin. He is a rebel who would be happy to stick it to those who try and cancel comedy.
Spotify would be a massive loser if he left though, and Daniel Ek knows that. Other losers would be Youtube and Patreon, who currently host a lot of other comedians doing podcasts and shows, if they all upped sticks and went with what Rogan and Chapelle were doing.
We don’t see the poor of Africa and Asia obsessing about gender identity or racial bias, they are far more concerned with feeding their families and putting a roof over their heads.
Rishi, your hour has come.
https://www.reuters.com/business/softbanks-66-bln-sale-arm-nvidia-collapses-ft-2022-02-08/
The deal had been under scrutiny from regulators in USA, UK and EU, with authorities keen not to allow more consolidation in the chip market.
Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes; and AFAIAA only his driver was ever jailed. The question is how and why Saville got away with it. The investigation criticised both the police and the CPS.
So who was to blame for those mistakes ('errors of judgement'), and did they get penalised for those mistakes? Or was it just another case of moving on, lessons unlearned?
There are correct ways to criticise the CPS. Johnson chose another path.
Of course he should have retracted and apologised immediately, but ...it's Boris, innit.
"He has got other stuff to get on with today," I'm told……
The source suggested it was unreasonable that "this was Boris's fault and not the mob's fault."
They added that "his tweet was sincere" -- a reference to Boris Johnson's reaction last night to Sir Keir facing a mob in the street in Westminster.
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1490941535562924034?s=20&t=ybjLQ3wSNdjHujV8ax5uYw
As well as every verbal or emotional bully or gaslighter and trivialising the harsh human cost we see there, especially in teens and social media.
Seriously?
Very displeased to hear about the nonsense with the Leader of the Opposition. The PM's idiotic approach to politics, responsibility, and life generally is not enhancing the national interest.
The other problem is that Young doesn't own a lot of his back catalogue, so has no right to remove it. He sold a lot of it to Warner Brothers a few years back for $150 million and no longer has control.
I couldn't care less for Rogan, or Young for that matter, but Spotify does rather personify the incredible concentration of wealth in the audio entertainment industry. Each of them sells their content for hundreds of millions, but the strugglers producing content get trivial royalties per play. Same for YouTube, TikTok, etc etc.
Great news for London, as we emerge from Covid. Oddly enough the delays mean that the timing of Crossrail’s first proper service is optimal
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/08/it-has-to-be-flawless-long-wait-for-londons-elizabeth-line-is-nearly-over
Looks like my holiday away from Microsoft Windows is at an abrupt end. Had two incidents in 3 weeks where web apps simply won't cut it for some of the overly complex shit that lazy people produce without thinking file size and compatibility.
So I need desktop versions of MS shite and that means running Windows again. I hope 11 is better than 10...
Not sure how this Saville business is going to play out. Even if the PM breaks the habit of a lifetime and 'fully withdraws and apologises' mud is going to stick, especially in the nastier corners of political life.
And Guto Harri might just have the skills to get him off some of the hooks on which he's impaled himself.
I must say, as I suggested yesterday, that his turning up to hospitals is getting a bit wearisome. If only someone would, as he arrives, followed by his Press pack, tell him loudly to 'clear(!) off'. And, with their team, then turn round and refuse to show him anything, or answer his questions.
The Starmer-Saville allegations have been around in the background for a while. They're disgraceful but potent with a certain sort of voter. Like chemical weapons, they shouldn't be used.
But if you are going to deploy those slurs, do it at a time that's effective- just before polling day. Preferably in a way with plausible deniability.
Instead, BoJo said them himself and spaffed them away on a PMQs in mid-term. He used them to lash out because he felt he was losing.
It's like the heat now, pay much later scheme. Some political benefit now but increased pain in the actual election year.
Idiot.
Making the various computer systems interface with each other is a bugger, which is why Crossrail won't go to Heathrow or Reading or Shenfield any time soon.
Liverpool St to Paddington in 11 minutes. That’s amazebombs. Canary Wharf to Heathrow in 40. Phenomenal
Now do Crossrail 2 - but avoiding any major works at Camden. Ta
Seriously, get 10 if you can, 11 is a sh!t-show of an operating system for a small businessman.
To make it clear: Johnson was in the wrong. However I would refer you to my post below: mistakes were made by the CPS and the police. What happened to those who made those critical mistakes?
(I think we all know the answer).
That article says the whole show should be up and running entirely by 2023
Edit. On checking, Paula Vennels, the PO Chair at the time has lost the job(s) she took after leaving the PO.
But I do wonder how much damage it has done to Starmer as well. For those who don't pay much attention to politics, they just hear Starmer and Savile in the same sentence. They may not have known his previous job involved decisions on prosecuting Savile. They probably have no idea of timelines, on whether it was him or his predecessor who made those calls. They may just take away Starmer could have - should have - done more to stop Savile. And that sticks. Starmer can't go on having to say he has no responsibility - when you are explaining, you are losing - unfair as that might be.
There is no political positive for Starmer in the shit Boris has flung around. It may do for Boris, but it might also have made his successor's task of winning the next election that bit easier.
Chris Phip’s ministerial brief includes misinformation. I’m not sure this is the response that Tory MPs and many others were hoping for this morning.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1490954306555580417
The Tories need a long spell in opposition to learn some manners and respect.
The latest news is that PO chairman Tim Parker will stand down in the autumn, presumably with a rather nice pension affording him a luxury retirement.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10486039/Post-Office-chairman-Tim-Parker-QUITS-week-inquiry-opens-scandal.html
Windows 7 was the best of the lot, but that’s now an unsupported dodo.
(My personal laptop is a Mac with a W10 virtual machine installed, for those emergencies when Windows is for some reason required).
And besides, everyone gains from the Lizzie Line. Londoners get a 5 bazillion dollar new railway which offers handjobs by sexbots between stations and northerners get to fondly imagine what it might be like to have a world class public transport system. They get to dream, and everyone needs a dream
That's another thing about this mess; if it had been a Conservative in charge of the CPS at the time, many of those defending Starmer would be saying: "Now convenient the records have been destroyed! How unlikely is it that the head of the organisation was not told of an investigation into a very public figure?"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
There appear to be a few people a little further down the tree who misled him in his early days, though.
😮😮👍👍
This is going to transform east west travel across london
https://www.cityam.com/the-elizabeth-line-in-pictures-our-first-look-at-crossrail/
British politics should be based on mutual respect of differences. We’re all there to change the world. So here are some Tories I like and respect.
@Jochurchill_MP
@William_Wragg
@chhcalling
@tracey_crouch
@JackLopresti
@TomTugendhat
@aliciakearns
@Pauline_Latham
@bernardjenkin
https://twitter.com/RhonddaBryant/status/1490956110999605250?s=20&t=CeuKLZOXfCovmbA2nkNcvw
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-16869488
If it had been a SeniorTory as head of the CPS at the time this happened, would Labour just accept his word that he knew nothing.
https://twitter.com/POLITICOEurope/status/1490959210561294336?s=20&t=CeuKLZOXfCovmbA2nkNcvw
Over a month later:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Besides, there’s no point in spending money IN the north because look what happens when you do. Manchester built a “European boulevard” which looks like a portakabin next to a car park and Edinburgh built a hotel which so closely resembles a turd it is now officially called “The Turd”. Enough of this silly wastage. Give everything to London
And crossing into Yorkshire from Merseyside is a nightmare.
I can't wait to try out Crossrail - I love London. But the investment energy down there needs to extend north. With interest rates so low for so long, should've all happened 2010 - 2020.
Not once have they had the wit to say “this is great news for UK pensions as they will comprise a large portion of pension assets”.
There has been a small nod to Sunak being reluctant to make a windfall tax as it deters investment but it’s as if the editorial line is BP evil and they should give the money away.
Just luckily had someone on making the pensions point but the language and tone is very unbalanced from the presenters.
Now Ed Davey saying it’s “unfair”. FFS…..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/08/new-zealand-omicron-wave-likely-to-peak-in-march-with-up-to-30000-cases-a-day-says-ardern