Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
*I knew a chap who did very well out of that. Pre-revolution, the French in particular, had been lending quite a bot of money to Russia. In the revolution the debt was defaulted on. As part of restoring Russia to international finance, the debt was resumed. The chap in question had been collecting pre-revolution government debt certificates as tradable art works - a few pounds each. Suddenly they were worth face value.....
The international financial institutions which dictated what turned out to be disastrous policies for Russia were completely dominated by, and located in, the West. Western businessmen then came in alongside, using their frameworks.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
*I knew a chap who did very well out of that. Pre-revolution, the French in particular, had been lending quite a bot of money to Russia. In the revolution the debt was defaulted on. As part of restoring Russia to international finance, the debt was resumed. The chap in question had been collecting pre-revolution government debt certificates as tradable art works - a few pounds each. Suddenly they were worth face value.....
The international financial institutions which dictated what turned out to be entirely disastrous policies for Russia were completely dominated by the West.
They didn't dictate - they made suggestions which the Russian state.... implemented.... in their own, interesting style.
And then kept on throwing bags of money over the wall on easy terms.
'Stop The War' has managed to condemn 'the movement of Russian forces into eastern Ukraine', though it goes on to explain that almost the entire blame rests with NATO, USA and UK. Closing with:
'(We) can best support (local campaigners) by demanding a change in Britain's own policy'.
Fascinating to think that one of their top useful idiots wasn't far off becoming PM in 2017.
55 seats too short, winning just 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010.
Lab + LD + SNP was only 8 behind Con, and maybe only 10-15 seats short of being able to pass a Queen's Speech.
The LDs made clear they would not make Corbyn PM.
They would still have voted down May's Brexit deal but even if the Conservatives + DUP had not had a majority May would still likely have stayed a PM if Labour + SNP also did not have a majority. However she would still obviously not have been able to deliver Brexit. Only the Tory majority Boris won in 2019 got Brexit delivered
"Boots will begin selling single Covid tests for £5.99 from Wednesday, despite free kits being available via the NHS until 1 April.
Customers can purchase a pack of four lateral flow tests online for £17, or one test for £5.99, including delivery.
Next month people can buy them in-store for £12 for a pack of five." ===========
Going to say an event or seeing a vulnerable loved one and paying a £6 cost for peace of mind isn't too bad, but if you wanted to lateral flow for a period of time or say you have a family and you all wanted to test because you had come into contact with someone who had Covid well the cost will really rack up.
The vast majority of people just aren't going to test anymore.
I wonder how much of the population is still bothering as it is?
I have a box of LFTs from work, and I did use one this morning, but I have to admit that I am getting a little out of the habit at this stage. The remaining stockpile will last through until about the end of April at the rate of two a week; after that, unless my employer decides to keep supplying us with freebies, I'll almost certainly stop.
Throughout the pandemic I think I have used perhaps 4 in toto.
The 5 for £12 (£2.40 each) from Boots has already blown Ed Davey's overblown rhetoric from 2-3 days ago ("4 million face £500 tax on caring") to smithereens; he assumed £5.80 each.
It also makes a nonsense of the £2bn per month cost claimed, since the tests will be a great deal cheaper than that for the government to purchase.
It's a sign of how degraded our public debate is that we don't know how much of the £2bn cost is for the PCR tests and how much for the LFTs.
A decision on whether to keep LFTs going for longer depends to an extent on whether they're £400m a month (20% of the total) or £100m a month (5%).
It feels as though the debate is being manipulated by having relevant information restricted. I really don't like that, even though I support the general idea of putting the pandemic behind us as much as possible.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
I've just discovered that isage was founded by Carole Cadwalladr. Others may be aware, but I was totally in the dark. How has this not been more prominent? If there was a campaign group founded by a notorious right-wing campaigner/journalist - Toby Young, say - well, they'd be given airtime, but the background to the group would always be made clear.
Cookie - you are very slow to the party on this one! Its notable how much posting the iSAGErs have done about Codswallop and her travails after allegedly lying about people she doesn't like (Banks).
Anyone who thinks iSAGE are just about covid has not looked hard enough. (Not suggesting that's you by the way).
I haven't actually followed isage's tweeting as I know it will just annoy me.
I've always assumed they were malign. I'm just surprised this fact hasn't been more widely reported by those giving isage airtime.
I'm surprised you're suprised. It's been known for years that right-wing talking heads always get their affiliations flagged up by the broadcast media, but left-wing ones rarely do. And the reason why is pretty obvious too.
Richard Madeley actually flagged up Susan Michie’s political affiliations and the guy who headed up Isage also had his New Labour affiliations flagged up on one of the news channels.
Both replied with plenty of bluster.
But this is fair to point out. Would we accept politically active Tories views so readily ? I wouldn’t.
I remember the reaction when Staines (Guido Fawkes) was introduced as the "Right wing blogger... ", after the usual non-political introductions.
He replied with "I'm happy to be here with the noted Left-wing commentator X"
Which upset everyone. The X in question was from the left hand side of the Labour party, IIRC.
Its great that we have dedicated commentators / broadcasters / bloggers from across the spectrum. That includes lunatics like Guido and Bastani. Both are explicit about who they are and what the support (both - the Tories!)
What isn't great is when we have groups that purport to be either non-aligned or non-political like the Taxpayers Alliance...
Its just as common for left wing people to be presented with no affiliation. Its almost a given that an NHS doctor or nurse 'raising concerns' about Tory policy will be found within hours to be a labour party member, union rep or huge fan of JC.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. For balance though if you want to describe some guests e.g. Paul Staines as right wing, then you must do the same for left wing commentators.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
Are you really this naïve? The US state department was all over post-collapse Russia like a rash. Whether they genuinely thought that binding Russia into the West via full-on libertarian privatisation of everything in the entire state was the path to peace and prosperity for all, or deliberately set out to hobble Russia’s prospects as a future counterparty to the US in the future is up for debate of course. Personally, I suspect mostly the former. That the outcome was mostly the latter as they cleared the way for the next generation of sociopaths to loot the state’s resources in Russia was an accidental outcome.
Andrew Roth @Andrew__Roth · 20m One big surprise from this week is how the EU (and particularly Germany), usually viewed as more dovish or riven by internal disagreements on Russia, have put together tougher sanctions packages than the US and certainly the UK
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
*I knew a chap who did very well out of that. Pre-revolution, the French in particular, had been lending quite a bot of money to Russia. In the revolution the debt was defaulted on. As part of restoring Russia to international finance, the debt was resumed. The chap in question had been collecting pre-revolution government debt certificates as tradable art works - a few pounds each. Suddenly they were worth face value.....
The international financial institutions which dictated what turned out to be entirely disastrous policies for Russia were completely dominated by the West.
They didn't dictate - they made suggestions which the Russian state.... implemented.... in their own, interesting style.
And then kept on throwing bags of money over the wall on easy terms.
The Russians had little option after 1991. The previous structures had collapsed, and there were very considerable both financial and ideological pressures. it was only several years later that Western economists working with institutions like the World Bank in Russia, such as Noreena Hertz, whose experiences there turned her into a soft-leftist, realised and documented how much damage had been done.
Economic orthodoxy has moved on now, somewhat, but the damage to Russia is done.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
*I knew a chap who did very well out of that. Pre-revolution, the French in particular, had been lending quite a bot of money to Russia. In the revolution the debt was defaulted on. As part of restoring Russia to international finance, the debt was resumed. The chap in question had been collecting pre-revolution government debt certificates as tradable art works - a few pounds each. Suddenly they were worth face value.....
The international financial institutions which dictated what turned out to be entirely disastrous policies for Russia were completely dominated by the West.
They didn't dictate - they made suggestions which the Russian state.... implemented.... in their own, interesting style.
And then kept on throwing bags of money over the wall on easy terms.
The Russians had very little option after 1991. The previous structures had collapsed, and there was very considerable both financial and ideological pressures - it was only several years after that Western economists working with institutions like like the World Bank in Russia, like Noreena Hertz whose experiences there turned her into a soft-leftist, realised and documented how much damage had been done.
Economic orthodoxy is moving on now, somewhat, but the damage is Russia is done.
There is an argument that the World Bank caused Islamist radicalisation in Pakistan as WB-mandated cuts left the field open for Saudi-funded madrassas.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Typical Putin apologist.
The problem in Russia is the terrible state that the Soviet Union was in which is why it collapsed, and the cronyism and corruption and mismanagement of Putin.
Not simply "oligarchs" as much as Putin has tried to rewrite history to make them the problem.
It is indisputable that in the post-soviet chaos, many of the current oligarchs found (legal, sometimes) ways to loot the state, a process which inevitably impoverished their fellow citizens as they sought to move that loot out of Russia. That they were cheered on (and often aided & abetted) by a west that was convinced (as in post-invasion Iraq) that bluntly applied libertarianism would result in peace and prosperity for all is also indisputable, although how much actual affect on the outcome the wests meddling had is up for debate.
Putin blaming “oligarchs” for the current parlous state of Russia when he himself is the uber-oligarch, with personal control of more wealth than possibly any other individual on the planet is of course utterly ludicrous.
The problem was that the West *didn't* meddle in Russian affairs. Just opened markets and trade with them*. There was very little done in even suggesting what to do.
Are you really this naïve? The US state department was all over post-collapse Russia like a rash. Whether they genuinely thought that binding Russia into the West via full-on libertarian privatisation of everything in the entire state was the path to peace and prosperity for all, or deliberately set out to hobble Russia’s prospects as a future counterparty to the US in the future is up for debate of course. Personally, I suspect mostly the former. That the outcome was mostly the latter as they cleared the way for the next generation of sociopaths to loot the state’s resources in Russia was an accidental outcome.
The naivety was in thinking that simply opening up to Russia would create democratic liberalism.
The Russians chose to privatise in the manner they did.
There was a deliberate policy of not telling the Russians what to do - that their civil institutions got some advice, but that was it.
Note that the same approach was taken with China - just open trade with them and hope.
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
'Stop The War' has managed to condemn 'the movement of Russian forces into eastern Ukraine', though it goes on to explain that almost the entire blame rests with NATO, USA and UK. Closing with:
'(We) can best support (local campaigners) by demanding a change in Britain's own policy'.
Fascinating to think that one of their top useful idiots wasn't far off becoming PM in 2017.
55 seats too short, winning just 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010.
Lab + LD + SNP was only 8 behind Con, and maybe only 10-15 seats short of being able to pass a Queen's Speech.
The LDs made clear they would not make Corbyn PM.
They would still have voted down May's Brexit deal but even if the Conservatives + DUP had not had a majority May would still likely have stayed a PM if Labour + SNP also did not have a majority. However she would still obviously not have been able to deliver Brexit. Only the Tory majority Boris won in 2019 got Brexit delivered
Off topic
Fantastic news for you in The Guardian. Ministers plans to reduce student loans on the basis of higher A level grades, which should help restrict the numbers of poorer students going to University. Wealthy parents paying for private tuition to get wealthy students bigger non repayable grants! Happy days.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
I've just discovered that isage was founded by Carole Cadwalladr. Others may be aware, but I was totally in the dark. How has this not been more prominent? If there was a campaign group founded by a notorious right-wing campaigner/journalist - Toby Young, say - well, they'd be given airtime, but the background to the group would always be made clear.
Cookie - you are very slow to the party on this one! Its notable how much posting the iSAGErs have done about Codswallop and her travails after allegedly lying about people she doesn't like (Banks).
Anyone who thinks iSAGE are just about covid has not looked hard enough. (Not suggesting that's you by the way).
I haven't actually followed isage's tweeting as I know it will just annoy me.
I've always assumed they were malign. I'm just surprised this fact hasn't been more widely reported by those giving isage airtime.
I'm surprised you're suprised. It's been known for years that right-wing talking heads always get their affiliations flagged up by the broadcast media, but left-wing ones rarely do. And the reason why is pretty obvious too.
Richard Madeley actually flagged up Susan Michie’s political affiliations and the guy who headed up Isage also had his New Labour affiliations flagged up on one of the news channels.
Both replied with plenty of bluster.
But this is fair to point out. Would we accept politically active Tories views so readily ? I wouldn’t.
I remember the reaction when Staines (Guido Fawkes) was introduced as the "Right wing blogger... ", after the usual non-political introductions.
He replied with "I'm happy to be here with the noted Left-wing commentator X"
Which upset everyone. The X in question was from the left hand side of the Labour party, IIRC.
Its great that we have dedicated commentators / broadcasters / bloggers from across the spectrum. That includes lunatics like Guido and Bastani. Both are explicit about who they are and what the support (both - the Tories!)
What isn't great is when we have groups that purport to be either non-aligned or non-political like the Taxpayers Alliance...
Everyone claims to be independent. Call 'em what they are. And if it upsets them - even better.
When this is done, it does seem to upset some on the left more. Because they are not used to it, probably.
I recall one occasion when Yasmin Alibhai-Brown got upset by being called left-wing....
One of the problems with labels is that people often don't agree on what they mean. So if I describe myself as a socialist different people will make different assumptions about what that implies for my beliefs, opinions and likely actions.
So I can understand being a bit touchy about being labelled for that reason
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Things you do to win wars, part 145.
Or are you suggesting that all past actions should not be criticised? Does that mean we need to put some statutes back?
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Russian state TV is now following up on Putin's speech with a graphic diagramming territorial "gifts" to Ukraine from Russian Czars, Stalin, Lenin and Khrushchev. The yellow bit in the middle is labeled "Ukraine."
'Stop The War' has managed to condemn 'the movement of Russian forces into eastern Ukraine', though it goes on to explain that almost the entire blame rests with NATO, USA and UK. Closing with:
'(We) can best support (local campaigners) by demanding a change in Britain's own policy'.
Fascinating to think that one of their top useful idiots wasn't far off becoming PM in 2017.
55 seats too short, winning just 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010.
Lab + LD + SNP was only 8 behind Con, and maybe only 10-15 seats short of being able to pass a Queen's Speech.
The LDs made clear they would not make Corbyn PM.
They would still have voted down May's Brexit deal but even if the Conservatives + DUP had not had a majority May would still likely have stayed a PM if Labour + SNP also did not have a majority. However she would still obviously not have been able to deliver Brexit. Only the Tory majority Boris won in 2019 got Brexit delivered
Off topic
Fantastic news for you in The Guardian. Ministers plans to reduce student loans on the basis of higher A level grades, which should help restrict the numbers of poorer students going to University. Wealthy parents paying for private tuition to get wealthy students bigger non repayable grants! Happy days.
Levelling up in action!
Dontya love Johnson Tories?
No. just the government has announced that students will need grade 4 or 5 passes in GCSE English and Maths or the equivalent of 2 grade Es at A Level to be able to go to university and get loans for tuition and maintenance.
The key is to restrict offers to courses which do not offer a good chance of a graduate job after. Thus helping poorer students avoid high levels of student debt for courses which are unlikely to get them a graduate level job anyway
They should also encourage more pupils to consider apprenticeships or other non university level qualifications instead
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
Right now, my biggest question is over Trump and the US right wing. Some of the stuff coming out of this crowd is genuinely disturbing.
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Things you do to win wars, part 145.
Or are you suggesting that all past actions should not be criticised? Does that mean we need to put some statutes back?
I would suggest it is probably best SNP supporters and particularly the odious supporters of Salmond kept quiet about 1930s fascism:
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
Right now, my biggest question is over Trump and the US right wing. Some of the stuff coming out of this crowd is genuinely disturbing.
Given the GOP control nether the Presidency or Congress at the moment that is not an issue.
They might retake the House in November, maybe even the Senate, though a few anti Trump GOP Senators like Romney are also still firmly anti Putin too
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
'Stop The War' has managed to condemn 'the movement of Russian forces into eastern Ukraine', though it goes on to explain that almost the entire blame rests with NATO, USA and UK. Closing with:
'(We) can best support (local campaigners) by demanding a change in Britain's own policy'.
Fascinating to think that one of their top useful idiots wasn't far off becoming PM in 2017.
55 seats too short, winning just 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010.
Lab + LD + SNP was only 8 behind Con, and maybe only 10-15 seats short of being able to pass a Queen's Speech.
The LDs made clear they would not make Corbyn PM.
They would still have voted down May's Brexit deal but even if the Conservatives + DUP had not had a majority May would still likely have stayed a PM if Labour + SNP also did not have a majority. However she would still obviously not have been able to deliver Brexit. Only the Tory majority Boris won in 2019 got Brexit delivered
So that would have been the ideal result, wouldn't it, young HY? Your posts are increasingly reasonable these days. I continue to have high hopes for your progress.
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Things you do to win wars, part 145.
Or are you suggesting that all past actions should not be criticised? Does that mean we need to put some statutes back?
I’m all for non selective accounts of events. Righties seem to like selecting Iron Curtain Winston to Up Stalin’s Arse Winston from the Churchill selection box, I prefer acknowledging the existence of soft and hard centres even though I’m not a great fan of chocolates.
Russian state TV is now following up on Putin's speech with a graphic diagramming territorial "gifts" to Ukraine from Russian Czars, Stalin, Lenin and Khrushchev. The yellow bit in the middle is labeled "Ukraine."
There seems to have been an idea take hold in the last 12 hours that the sanctions announced yesterday wll be the last ones, because there won't be any more sanctions without further Russian aggression, and there won't be any further Russian aggression.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
The word of Putin is like the word of God: - He says "genocide" => mass graves appear - He says LPR/DPR are threatened => multiple attacks are "foiled" - He says Kyiv out to get Russian church => attack by "neo-nazis" is foiled….
=> So imagine the kind of concerns his claim that "Ukraine does not exist" should raise given how he tends to be "proven right" after the fact.
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
Right now, my biggest question is over Trump and the US right wing. Some of the stuff coming out of this crowd is genuinely disturbing.
Given the GOP control nether the Presidency or Congress at the moment that is not an issue.
They might retake the House in November, maybe even the Senate, though a few anti Trump GOP Senators like Romney are also still firmly anti Putin too
At the moment it looks possible, even likely, that a Trumpist GOP will win a trifecta of Presidency, House and Senate in 2024.
That means we have nearly three years to prepare for the security implications that would have for us. We should do something useful with that time.
I can now see Macron beating Le Pen or Pecresse easily in the run off with 58-60% because Pecresse has run such an embarrasing campaign.
I'm assuming Le Pen will get the nomination signatures by March 4.
Pecresse might have been value at 3-1, 2-3 months ago but that is no longer the case.
Depends entirely on whether Pecresse can win over Le Pen and Zemmour voters in the runoff if she gets to the runoff.
If she does she will be close to 50% and Macron will need to get high turnout of Melenchon voters for him as well as Socialist and Green voters to be re elected.
Macron would get about 60% against Zemmour and 55% against Le Pen though yes, as Pecresse voters would generally vote for Macron over them. Though a few Melenchon voters might vote for Le Pen over Macron
I can now see Macron beating Le Pen or Pecresse easily in the run off with 58-60% because Pecresse has run such an embarrasing campaign.
I'm assuming Le Pen will get the nomination signatures by March 4.
Pecresse might have been value at 3-1, 2-3 months ago but that is no longer the case.
Depends entirely on whether Pecresse can win over Le Pen and Zemmour voters in the runoff if she gets to the runoff.
If she does she will be close to 50% and Macron will need to get high turnout of Melenchon voters for him as well as Socialist and Green voters to be re elected
I can see a very low turnout in the run off, maybe as low as 60%, it was 65% last time IIRC although that includes blank votes.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
There's a theory that the Soviet Union really did think that their propaganda about capitalism was correct ie that everything was owned by a tiny minority and that the vast majority owned nothing and were exploited.
And when communism collapsed the 'capitalism' which was introduced was their propaganda version rather than any of the versions which did exist in western countries.
I don't think that is correct. There were well intentioned attempts to transfer nationalised industries into the private sector to be owned and run by the workers in those industries. Workers were given vouchers to buy shares in the state enterprises, but those workers were poor people, they had no capital to invest, and some future profit years in the future wasn't worth anything to them at the time when the were struggling to feed their families, and wages were months in arrears. So the workers ended up trading their shares/vouchers to the people who did have capital and could wait to rake in the riches, they were either foreigners or the few wealthy people in Russia, who were almost all criminals.
What happened was one of the greatest transfers of wealth in history. That wealth was meant to go from the state to the people, but it ended up instead in the hands of the few.
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
Right now, my biggest question is over Trump and the US right wing. Some of the stuff coming out of this crowd is genuinely disturbing.
Given the GOP control nether the Presidency or Congress at the moment that is not an issue.
They might retake the House in November, maybe even the Senate, though a few anti Trump GOP Senators like Romney are also still firmly anti Putin too
At the moment it looks possible, even likely, that a Trumpist GOP will win a trifecta of Presidency, House and Senate in 2024.
That means we have nearly three years to prepare for the security implications that would have for us. We should do something useful with that time.
I doubt the GOP win the Senate in November, given most seats up are already GOP, though they should win the House.
If Trump wins in 2024 he will probably bring along the Senate too (hence Democrats need a younger centrist candidate like Buttigieg to hold him off).
However regardless yes all European nations need to increase defence spending and co ordination through NATO.
The US can be relied on to work with other western nations to contain Communist China, both Biden and Trump are clear on that, Trump would probably even go to war with China if it invaded Taiwan unlike Biden who would only impose sanctions as he would if Putin invaded Ukraine.
However the US cannot be relied on to contain Putin's Russia. Biden would take military action against Russia if a NATO European nation was invaded, Trump would probably not even do that as he considers Putin a fellow anti woke warrior
"Why I blame the arrogant, foolish West: Our response to this crisis in Ukraine has been to react with mistrust and abuse, and with blatant attempts to worsen the situation, writes Peter Hitchens"
Hitchens is just a loudmouth contrarian, trying to get clicks and likes for the Mail. We should all have learned during the pandemic, that such types generate way more heat than light.
Oh, and the horseshoe of political views, where the left and right end up almost meeting, is definitely true when it comes to issues like Russia.
On that note, I shall take a few days off from here. Ukranian situation is way too close to home, to want to get into arguments with random internet people.
I actually agree with quite a lot of what Hichens says there, but then he ruins it all near the end, talking about "anti-Putin hysteria", and the implication that the West should do nothing now. The West certainly carries a fair level of responsibility for driving Russia in general, and Putin in particular, away from a pro-Western view, for economic, legal, and strategic reasons, but that doesn't at all mean it shouldn't try and stand up to him or deter him further, now we are in this current situation.
Certainly the west's attitude to post Communist Russia in the nineties was a massive strategic error. The greed to buy up Russian state assets at knockdown prices led to the mafioso oligarchs of today. A problem in Ukraine and other former Soviet territories too.
One way to upset Putin is to expose the corruption and opulent greed of his kleptocratic friends and courtiers. I hope that we have our own trolls planting this stuff all over Russian Social Media. Navalny is no paladin, but I see why Putin found his campaign such a threat. Russia needs a few Bolsheviks agitating against their new aristocracy.
There's a theory that the Soviet Union really did think that their propaganda about capitalism was correct ie that everything was owned by a tiny minority and that the vast majority owned nothing and were exploited.
And when communism collapsed the 'capitalism' which was introduced was their propaganda version rather than any of the versions which did exist in western countries.
I have theory.
During Soviet times, state TV used to broadcast Dallas and Dynasty. IIRC they were actually pirating them...
Anyway, the idea was to convince The! True! Soviet! People! of the evils of the West.
My theory is that, instead, they accidentally indoctrinated a generation with the following understanding of Capitalism -
- Business consists entirely of shouty arguments in a big office between powerful men - Who drink a lot. - Murder, bribery and general corruption is how you get stuff done. - Betraying your business partners on a weekly basis is important. - Women's place is having affairs, big hair and big shoulder pads. - Modernist Mafiia Roccco is the height of style for interiors.
It matches the observed results perfectly.
In which case I am hoping to wake up and learn that politics from 2015 onwards was just a dream.....
I mean, I voted for Chaos with Ed Miliband... I got half of that, I suppose.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
As much as Putin and his apologists try to rewrite history, the biggest problem with nineties Russia isn't the actions of "oligarchs". It is that post Soviet Russia was quite literally a failed state.
Failed states do tend to have corruption and some people can make a (somewhat dodgy) killing out of failed states ... but they're not responsible for the fact the state is failed.
The reason that Russia was a failed state is due to the failure and collapse of Putin's beloved Soviet Union.
The post Soviet republics all were failed states in the early nineties and some struggled more than others. But the ones that have succeeded are those that have embraced democracy, capitalism and most importantly the rule of law. Not those that have embraced kleptocratic hard men like Putin.
That some Putin apologists wish to turn Putin's atrocities into an excuse to persecute Putin's enemies whom British (and other) courts have been sheltering from Putin rather than to face up to the failures of Putin and the Soviets/Russians is an utter disgrace.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Every day at 9am there's an auto-email summarising lineages from the 8-10 thousand SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced in the previous 24 hours @sangerinstitute. The Delta number has been bouncing around in single digits, and today was the first day with zero. 🎺☠️
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Well we don't have to do or believe everything Churchill did
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Summary of entire russian history?
When I was teaching Russian history, a student asked me what the Ukrainian peasantry actually wanted.
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
"Boots will begin selling single Covid tests for £5.99 from Wednesday, despite free kits being available via the NHS until 1 April.
Customers can purchase a pack of four lateral flow tests online for £17, or one test for £5.99, including delivery.
Next month people can buy them in-store for £12 for a pack of five." ===========
Going to say an event or seeing a vulnerable loved one and paying a £6 cost for peace of mind isn't too bad, but if you wanted to lateral flow for a period of time or say you have a family and you all wanted to test because you had come into contact with someone who had Covid well the cost will really rack up.
The vast majority of people just aren't going to test anymore.
I wonder how much of the population is still bothering as it is?
I have a box of LFTs from work, and I did use one this morning, but I have to admit that I am getting a little out of the habit at this stage. The remaining stockpile will last through until about the end of April at the rate of two a week; after that, unless my employer decides to keep supplying us with freebies, I'll almost certainly stop.
Throughout the pandemic I think I have used perhaps 4 in toto.
The 5 for £12 (£2.40 each) from Boots has already blown Ed Davey's overblown rhetoric from 2-3 days ago ("4 million face £500 tax on caring") to smithereens; he assumed £5.80 each.
It also makes a nonsense of the £2bn per month cost claimed, since the tests will be a great deal cheaper than that for the government to purchase.
It's a sign of how degraded our public debate is that we don't know how much of the £2bn cost is for the PCR tests and how much for the LFTs.
A decision on whether to keep LFTs going for longer depends to an extent on whether they're £400m a month (20% of the total) or £100m a month (5%).
It feels as though the debate is being manipulated by having relevant information restricted. I really don't like that, even though I support the general idea of putting the pandemic behind us as much as possible.
AFAIK, the government has refused to divulge the cost details for lateral flow tests, giving the usual excuse of "commercial confidentiality".
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Denmark demonstrating the value of surveillance and sequencing:
New study: Omicron BA.2 reinfections are rare but can occur relatively shortly after a BA.1 infection. The majority of the infected were young and unvaccinated, and most experienced mild symptoms during their infections. Read more on: en.ssi.dk/news/news/2022…
Confiscating assets from those thought to be mates of Putin is a really crazy idea. If they're going to do something like it should comply with a law that applies to everyone. This sounds like a seriously banana republic idea. I know a British production company that opened in Russia. If the Russians confiscated that as a reprisal who could blame them and where will it end?
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Well we don't have to do or believe everything Churchill did
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Summary of entire russian history?
When I was teaching Russian history, a student asked me what the Ukrainian peasantry actually wanted.
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
Even that depends on when you're talking about. The individual ownership of land was not something that was that popular, and the land reforms instituted by Stolypin were as much a failure as success, in part because many peasants didn't actually want that.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
Every day at 9am there's an auto-email summarising lineages from the 8-10 thousand SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced in the previous 24 hours @sangerinstitute. The Delta number has been bouncing around in single digits, and today was the first day with zero. 🎺☠️
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
And if the Germans confiscated the Russian money, the front of DB would fall over like that house in the Buster Keaton movie.....
Deutsche Bahn is a front for Russian money?
They went off the rails when they started running buses.
If you're trying to make this another punning session, you must have a loco motive.
Punning is my station in life.
Does that mean you are going to stop doing it?
No, I'll carriage on.
That was below par. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it hit bogie.
Always wondered about the phrases above and below par. Isn't below par good in golf?
You have under par and over par. Under par is good, over par is normal bad.
But you also have above par and below par, which is how you measure a performance. Above par shows you have done well, below par shows you have done badly.
Therefore, in golf under par is above par, and over par is below par.
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
Frankly, Putin's 'Ukraine is not a real country' speech seemed tailor made to undercut anyone or any nation who was clinging to the suggestion that Russia had legitimate concerns that needed to be taken on board.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile, ill-advised and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
And if the Germans confiscated the Russian money, the front of DB would fall over like that house in the Buster Keaton movie.....
Deutsche Bahn is a front for Russian money?
They went off the rails when they started running buses.
If you're trying to make this another punning session, you must have a loco motive.
Punning is my station in life.
Does that mean you are going to stop doing it?
No, I'll carriage on.
That was below par. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it hit bogie.
Always wondered about the phrases above and below par. Isn't below par good in golf?
You have under par and over par. Under par is good, over par is normal bad.
But you also have above par and below par, which is how you measure a performance. Above par shows you have done well, below par shows you have done badly.
Therefore, in golf under par is above par, and over par is below par.
I hope that clears it up for you.
You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that’s in the side that’s in goes out and when he’s out comes in and the next man goes in until he’s out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
When they are all out, the side that’s out comes in and the side that’s been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.
Sometimes there are men still in and not out.
There are men called umpires who stay out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
Depending on the weather and the light, the umpires can also send everybody in, no matter whether they’re in or out.
When both sides have been in and all the men are out (including those who are not out), then the game is finished.
AFAIK, the government has refused to divulge the cost details for lateral flow tests, giving the usual excuse of "commercial confidentiality".
Basically they don't want the public to know.
The Flowflex tests that have been sent out were £5 per test when bought in packs of seven if you sourced them commercially. The cheapest LFTS I saw were around £3 each if you ordered huge numbers, literally tens of thousands. I don't know what tests Boots have to get down to £12 for 5.
Denmark demonstrating the value of surveillance and sequencing:
New study: Omicron BA.2 reinfections are rare but can occur relatively shortly after a BA.1 infection. The majority of the infected were young and unvaccinated, and most experienced mild symptoms during their infections. Read more on: en.ssi.dk/news/news/2022…
I had one of my colleagues, who has been at the extreme end of worry about covid, try to tell me that Denmark is seeing a big spike in deaths and its due to BA2. I told him to get off twitter, which he agrees has been good for him (I've been keeping him grounded for the last two years on covid). I could find nothing anywhere suggesting that BA2 is more severe than BA1.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Summary of entire russian history?
When I was teaching Russian history, a student asked me what the Ukrainian peasantry actually wanted.
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
Even that depends on when you're talking about. The individual ownership of land was not something that was that popular, and the land reforms instituted by Stolypin were as much a failure as success, in part because many peasants didn't actually want that.
Not really. The failure with the kulaks (the real ones under Stolypin, not the ones that Stalin thought were kulaks) was that they took land from the other peasants, at a time when rapid population growth meant there wasn't enough to go round anyway. Which was definitely unpopular.
The peasantry as a whole certainly did want the land they farmed, as they proved by trying and failing to seize it by force in 1861-62 and rather more successfully in 1917-18.
But that didn't suit Stalin as it meant they were outside his control and growing what they wanted to eat not what he wanted to sell. Hence collectivisation and all that flowed from it.
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
Frankly, Putin's 'Ukraine is not a real country' speech seemed tailor made to undercut anyone or any nation who was clinging to the suggestion that Russia had legitimate concerns that needed to be taken on board.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
Historian of Holocaust and Holodomor Timothy Snyder comments....
"When you deny that another nation exists, as in Putin's myth about Ukraine, you're making a claim that it's okay to destroy that other nation. This kind of language is something we have to pay attention to because it usually precedes atrocious actions."
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Summary of entire russian history?
When I was teaching Russian history, a student asked me what the Ukrainian peasantry actually wanted.
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
Them and Westeros
The common people pray for rain, health and a summer that never ends. They dont care what games the high lords play.
Mr. Malmesbury, it's the same way, writ small, that Corbyn marching with the hammer and sickle and banners of Lenin and Stalin barely due media comment whereas a Conservative leader would be (rightly) crucified in the press for attending a march with swastikas and Hitler banners.
The Hammer and Sickle was once the symbol of our noble allies; despite appeasement and Hitlergruße by various British folk, the swastikas and Hitler banners are not symbols of former allies.
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
I was characterising the attitude of Churchill and his pals who commanded that the Hammer and Sickle should be flown over every town hall in the country to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Red Army.
Well we don't have to do or believe everything Churchill did
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
And if the Germans confiscated the Russian money, the front of DB would fall over like that house in the Buster Keaton movie.....
Deutsche Bahn is a front for Russian money?
They went off the rails when they started running buses.
If you're trying to make this another punning session, you must have a loco motive.
Punning is my station in life.
Does that mean you are going to stop doing it?
No, I'll carriage on.
That was below par. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it hit bogie.
Always wondered about the phrases above and below par. Isn't below par good in golf?
You have under par and over par. Under par is good, over par is normal bad.
But you also have above par and below par, which is how you measure a performance. Above par shows you have done well, below par shows you have done badly.
Therefore, in golf under par is above par, and over par is below par.
I hope that clears it up for you.
You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that’s in the side that’s in goes out and when he’s out comes in and the next man goes in until he’s out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
When they are all out, the side that’s out comes in and the side that’s been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.
Sometimes there are men still in and not out.
There are men called umpires who stay out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
Depending on the weather and the light, the umpires can also send everybody in, no matter whether they’re in or out.
When both sides have been in and all the men are out (including those who are not out), then the game is finished.
As much as Putin and his apologists try to rewrite history, the biggest problem with nineties Russia isn't the actions of "oligarchs". It is that post Soviet Russia was quite literally a failed state.
Failed states do tend to have corruption and some people can make a (somewhat dodgy) killing out of failed states ... but they're not responsible for the fact the state is failed.
The reason that Russia was a failed state is due to the failure and collapse of Putin's beloved Soviet Union.
The post Soviet republics all were failed states in the early nineties and some struggled more than others. But the ones that have succeeded are those that have embraced democracy, capitalism and most importantly the rule of law. Not those that have embraced kleptocratic hard men like Putin.
That some Putin apologists wish to turn Putin's atrocities into an excuse to persecute Putin's enemies whom British (and other) courts have been sheltering from Putin rather than to face up to the failures of Putin and the Soviets/Russians is an utter disgrace.
Quite right. We must do everything we can to preserve the interests of the Conservative Party and their donors and patrons.
"The High Court has ruled against four claimants who brought a claim against the DWP for failing to give them the same £20 uplift that was given to universal credit (UC) claimants during the pandemic.
The four legacy benefits claimants argued that the failure to give them the same uplift was discriminatory.
The High Court accepted that there were a greater proportion of disabled people on legacy benefits and that disabled claimants on legacy benefits were in the same position as disabled claimants on UC.
However, the judge held that the difference in treatment was justified."
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
And if the Germans confiscated the Russian money, the front of DB would fall over like that house in the Buster Keaton movie.....
Deutsche Bahn is a front for Russian money?
They went off the rails when they started running buses.
If you're trying to make this another punning session, you must have a loco motive.
Punning is my station in life.
Does that mean you are going to stop doing it?
No, I'll carriage on.
That was below par. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it hit bogie.
Always wondered about the phrases above and below par. Isn't below par good in golf?
You have under par and over par. Under par is good, over par is normal bad.
But you also have above par and below par, which is how you measure a performance. Above par shows you have done well, below par shows you have done badly.
Therefore, in golf under par is above par, and over par is below par.
I hope that clears it up for you.
You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that’s in the side that’s in goes out and when he’s out comes in and the next man goes in until he’s out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
When they are all out, the side that’s out comes in and the side that’s been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.
Sometimes there are men still in and not out.
There are men called umpires who stay out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
Depending on the weather and the light, the umpires can also send everybody in, no matter whether they’re in or out.
When both sides have been in and all the men are out (including those who are not out), then the game is finished.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric, than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
To keep this mildly on topic if there's a problem with oligarchs in London just think of the South of France. Confiscate Russian owned mansions in and around Cap Ferrat and the place will be a ghost town.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
And if the Germans confiscated the Russian money, the front of DB would fall over like that house in the Buster Keaton movie.....
That would be good considering it didn't injure anyone. Go for it.
The slight problem is that DB has given money to *everyone* in German politics. Every single party, right to left is involved with them. If they go down, there will be no-one left standing.
Why do you think the Bank Of England and the other regulators parked investigation of DB when BREXIT came up?
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
AFAIK, the government has refused to divulge the cost details for lateral flow tests, giving the usual excuse of "commercial confidentiality".
Basically they don't want the public to know.
The Flowflex tests that have been sent out were £5 per test when bought in packs of seven if you sourced them commercially. The cheapest LFTS I saw were around £3 each if you ordered huge numbers, literally tens of thousands. I don't know what tests Boots have to get down to £12 for 5.
Given the amount of bits, sterilisation, sealing etc in the LFT kits, I would expect that getting the *cost* below £3 a test would be quite a challenge.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile, ill-advised and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032
More blood and soil racism?
Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.
And the billions made in in the Russian oligarchy suddenly become lovely, pure British billions? So that’s what money laundering means.
Yes.
People made billions in the nineties under Yeltsin. What are we supposed to do to reverse that?
Twenty years later, it's happened already. It is, what it is.
Lovely freshly laundered billions of British money...
The Russians that lived immiserated lives and died early because of the raping of their economy by oligarchs would have lived immiserated lives and died early anyway.
Summary of entire russian history?
When I was teaching Russian history, a student asked me what the Ukrainian peasantry actually wanted.
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
Even that depends on when you're talking about. The individual ownership of land was not something that was that popular, and the land reforms instituted by Stolypin were as much a failure as success, in part because many peasants didn't actually want that.
Not really. The failure with the kulaks (the real ones under Stolypin, not the ones that Stalin thought were kulaks) was that they took land from the other peasants, at a time when rapid population growth meant there wasn't enough to go round anyway. Which was definitely unpopular.
The peasantry as a whole certainly did want the land they farmed, as they proved by trying and failing to seize it by force in 1861-62 and rather more successfully in 1917-18.
But that didn't suit Stalin as it meant they were outside his control and growing what they wanted to eat not what he wanted to sell. Hence collectivisation and all that flowed from it.
This is way before Stalin. The Stolypin reforms fell flat. Many didn't take up the offer, some did purely to sell up and move away. It's much fairer to say that they wanted freedom from petty local tyrants, but land ownership was not a universal concern. Indeed, one of the reasons some peasants avoided applying for ownership was because of pressure from their peers to keep the management of land within communal control. The ones exerting that pressure cannot be characterised as your description, and were not small in number. It's fair to say that opinion was somewhat mixed.
Confiscating assets from those thought to be mates of Putin is a really crazy idea. If they're going to do something like it should comply with a law that applies to everyone. This sounds like a seriously banana republic idea. I know a British production company that opened in Russia. If the Russians confiscated that as a reprisal who could blame them and where will it end?
We have that law - an Account Freezing Order under the Criminal Financing Act 2017. Our government and our police forces can freeze assets which they believe to be suspect to stop them from being spent / removed whilst they investigate.
As there is an ocean of Russian money being washed through London there is an awful lot that we could look into. Its not stealing their money and assets. Its asking them to justify them. If we declare that Russia is a rogue state and is up to no good, then doing so would be entirely justified. If the money was made independently of Putin and the state then the assets are unfrozen.
But we can't do that. Because it makes too much money for Tory donors and patrons.
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
Frankly, Putin's 'Ukraine is not a real country' speech seemed tailor made to undercut anyone or any nation who was clinging to the suggestion that Russia had legitimate concerns that needed to be taken on board.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
Historian of Holocaust and Holodomor Timothy Snyder comments....
"When you deny that another nation exists, as in Putin's myth about Ukraine, you're making a claim that it's okay to destroy that other nation. This kind of language is something we have to pay attention to because it usually precedes atrocious actions."
To be fair, England winning the toss and batting in a Test match precedes atrocious actions but it is best not to pay attention.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile, ill-advised and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
They weren't intended to be public comments.
"The unguarded comments came as the cabinet minister chatted with serving military personnel at the Horse Guards building in Westminster."
He was obviously just having a bit of banter with some soldiers. He was one himself, of course.
BTW - I chanced to hear to a very interesting profile of Wallace on Radio 4 a few days ago. Presume it would be available on IPlayer. Worth a listen. Ken Clarke was full of praise of him - Wallace was his PPS - and obviously very pleased that he was in this job in the cabinet.
If Boris is defenestrated Wallace would be a very safe pair of hands as PM - a demonstrably competent minister. I think he would also go down well with members who, of course, make the final decision.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile, ill-advised and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
They weren't intended to be public comments.
"The unguarded comments came as the cabinet minister chatted with serving military personnel at the Horse Guards building in Westminster."
He was obviously just having a bit of banter with some soldiers. He was one himself, of course.
BTW - I chanced to hear to a very interesting profile of Wallace on Radio 4 a few days ago. Presume it would be available on IPlayer. Worth a listen. Ken Clarke was full of praise of him - Wallace was his PPS - and obviously very pleased that he was in this job in the cabinet.
If Boris is defenestrated Wallace would be a very safe pair of hands as PM - a demonstrably competent minister. I think he would also go down well with members who, of course, make the final decision.
That does make is a bit better in fairness. He's not attacking opponents a la Rayner at the bar, but a bit of bravado with some soldiers is not much to be worked up about.
Not that it should be a standard, but the public shitposting from some regimes diplomatically is just pathetic.
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
Frankly, Putin's 'Ukraine is not a real country' speech seemed tailor made to undercut anyone or any nation who was clinging to the suggestion that Russia had legitimate concerns that needed to be taken on board.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
Historian of Holocaust and Holodomor Timothy Snyder comments....
"When you deny that another nation exists, as in Putin's myth about Ukraine, you're making a claim that it's okay to destroy that other nation. This kind of language is something we have to pay attention to because it usually precedes atrocious actions."
Snyder is spot on, as per normal. Incidentally, this is why I have a beef with those who reflexively dismiss nationalism. Nationalism is still one of the best antidotes we have to imperialism, and without it a good number of crimes of aggression and crimes against whole ethnic groups would be easier to implement. Ukrainians who are prepared to fight against Russian imperialism are right to do so, not for the sake of the abstraction of Ukranian-ness, but for the concrete reality that life under the Russian boot will nastier, more brutish, and dramatically shorter. Nationalism is capable of creating great and senseless suffering, but also it is capable of marshalling a population to shield themselves from great and senseless suffering.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric, than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
What a tit.
I heard Tugendat say something similar. I think they must be ex soldiers or even worse wannabe ex soldiers who had a mess culture similar to the police.
As much as Putin and his apologists try to rewrite history, the biggest problem with nineties Russia isn't the actions of "oligarchs". It is that post Soviet Russia was quite literally a failed state.
Failed states do tend to have corruption and some people can make a (somewhat dodgy) killing out of failed states ... but they're not responsible for the fact the state is failed.
The reason that Russia was a failed state is due to the failure and collapse of Putin's beloved Soviet Union.
The post Soviet republics all were failed states in the early nineties and some struggled more than others. But the ones that have succeeded are those that have embraced democracy, capitalism and most importantly the rule of law. Not those that have embraced kleptocratic hard men like Putin.
That some Putin apologists wish to turn Putin's atrocities into an excuse to persecute Putin's enemies whom British (and other) courts have been sheltering from Putin rather than to face up to the failures of Putin and the Soviets/Russians is an utter disgrace.
Quite right. We must do everything we can to preserve the interests of the Conservative Party and their donors and patrons.
I think you are being foolish to try and turn this into party political point scoring. Russia has it's tentacles into large parts of Western political life. The Tories have been foolish in taking dodgy money, but perhaps not quite as foolish or downright treacherous as those useful idiots like Corbyn and Salmond who have knowingly taken Kremlin money and been part of its propaganda campaign by appearing on RT.
The first really unwise comment I've seen from Ben Wallace, who's done reasonably well for most of the rest of this crisis. More like a return to facile, ill-advised and dangerous Brexit-era rhetoric than grown-up statesmanship.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
They weren't intended to be public comments.
"The unguarded comments came as the cabinet minister chatted with serving military personnel at the Horse Guards building in Westminster."
He was obviously just having a bit of banter with some soldiers. He was one himself, of course.
BTW - I chanced to hear to a very interesting profile of Wallace on Radio 4 a few days ago. Presume it would be available on IPlayer. Worth a listen. Ken Clarke was full of praise of him - Wallace was his PPS - and obviously very pleased that he was in this job in the cabinet.
If Boris is defenestrated Wallace would be a very safe pair of hands as PM - a demonstrably competent minister. I think he would also go down well with members who, of course, make the final decision.
That does make is a bit better in fairness. He's not attacking opponents a la Rayner at the bar, but a bit of bravado with some soldiers is not much to be worked up about.
Not that it should be a standard, but the public shitposting from some regimes diplomatically is just pathetic.
The problem though, for him, is that it's now gone on record. If I was Tory MP in this situation, I would genuinely question whether that would affect the wisdom of electing him leader, in the current situation.
Vladimir Putin has destroyed several decades of German foreign policy consensus, including the foundational assumption that you have to understand Russia’s position. It had been the cross-party consensus in German politics that peace in Europe can only exist in co-operation with Russia, not in opposition to it. Even Scholz was clinging on to this notion until recently, when he was still pushing for the Minsk process. Putin ended up deceiving those who wanted to build a bridge the most……
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
Frankly, Putin's 'Ukraine is not a real country' speech seemed tailor made to undercut anyone or any nation who was clinging to the suggestion that Russia had legitimate concerns that needed to be taken on board.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
Historian of Holocaust and Holodomor Timothy Snyder comments....
"When you deny that another nation exists, as in Putin's myth about Ukraine, you're making a claim that it's okay to destroy that other nation. This kind of language is something we have to pay attention to because it usually precedes atrocious actions."
To be fair, England winning the toss and batting in a Test match precedes atrocious actions but it is best not to pay attention.
A shame to trivialise what was a very well made and serious post.
Comments
"Noble"?
Are you really sure about that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre etc?
By the way, my family is partly from Ukraine. The ones that Stalin didn't kill, Hitler murdered. So.....
And then kept on throwing bags of money over the wall on easy terms.
They would still have voted down May's Brexit deal but even if the Conservatives + DUP had not had a majority May would still likely have stayed a PM if Labour + SNP also did not have a majority. However she would still obviously not have been able to deliver Brexit. Only the Tory majority Boris won in 2019 got Brexit delivered
A decision on whether to keep LFTs going for longer depends to an extent on whether they're £400m a month (20% of the total) or £100m a month (5%).
It feels as though the debate is being manipulated by having relevant information restricted. I really don't like that, even though I support the general idea of putting the pandemic behind us as much as possible.
..... Villa Nellcote where The Stones made 'Exile on Main Street ' now owned by a Russian. Supposing they confiscate property from everyone from a country with a corrupt unprincipled venal leader....oh my God!
https://www.tenementtv.com/news/new-rolling-stones-biopic-focus-exile-main-street-era/
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. For balance though if you want to describe some guests e.g. Paul Staines as right wing, then you must do the same for left wing commentators.
Economic orthodoxy has moved on now, somewhat, but the damage to Russia is done.
The Russians chose to privatise in the manner they did.
There was a deliberate policy of not telling the Russians what to do - that their civil institutions got some advice, but that was it.
Note that the same approach was taken with China - just open trade with them and hope.
Fantastic news for you in The Guardian. Ministers plans to reduce student loans on the basis of higher A level grades, which should help restrict the numbers of poorer students going to University. Wealthy parents paying for private tuition to get wealthy students bigger non repayable grants! Happy days.
Levelling up in action!
Dontya love Johnson Tories?
So I can understand being a bit touchy about being labelled for that reason
Or are you suggesting that all past actions should not be criticised? Does that mean we need to put some statutes back?
To be optimistic the shift in thinking that's happening in Germany appears to be the most positive sign at the moment. Putin had a lot of influence within the SDP but we could be seeing a major shift now.
As for the UK the general consensus is that our own sanctions are thus far weak. Is that because we're holding back on bigger stuff? Maybe but I'm as concerned as anyone else by the Tory funding position and whether they are really prepared to challenge high net worth individuals. Think of the high end London property market! I suspect Truss has made a rod for her own back with her comments about Russian donors 'not necessarily being friends of Putin'. Necessarily being the key word that poses more questions than it answers.
For those who are not happy with the government's approach they need to start pointing out what specific sanctions they wish to see. Otherwise it's a bit like people arguing for more regulation of the banks. Rather an empty statement on its own.
Russian state TV is now following up on Putin's speech with a graphic diagramming territorial "gifts" to Ukraine from Russian Czars, Stalin, Lenin and Khrushchev. The yellow bit in the middle is labeled "Ukraine."
https://twitter.com/antontroian/status/1496426736925483012
The key is to restrict offers to courses which do not offer a good chance of a graduate job after. Thus helping poorer students avoid high levels of student debt for courses which are unlikely to get them a graduate level job anyway
They should also encourage more pupils to consider apprenticeships or other non university level qualifications instead
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-60491719
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-honouring-a-fascist-at-each-opening-of-westminster-and-holyrood
But perhaps more important than the shift among the German policy elites is this morning's headline in Bild:
"Were we too nice to the Kremlin?"
https://www.eurointelligence.com/
I'm assuming Le Pen will get the nomination signatures by March 4.
Pecresse might have been value at 3-1, 2-3 months ago but that is no longer the case.
I was referring, of course, to Douche Bank.
They might retake the House in November, maybe even the Senate, though a few anti Trump GOP Senators like Romney are also still firmly anti Putin too
Righties seem to like selecting Iron Curtain Winston to Up Stalin’s Arse Winston from the Churchill selection box, I prefer acknowledging the existence of soft and hard centres even though I’m not a great fan of chocolates.
I think that's optimistic.
- He says "genocide" => mass graves appear
- He says LPR/DPR are threatened => multiple attacks are "foiled"
- He says Kyiv out to get Russian church => attack by "neo-nazis" is foiled….
=> So imagine the kind of concerns his claim that "Ukraine does not exist" should raise given how he tends to be "proven right" after the fact.
https://twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1496446503212224513
That means we have nearly three years to prepare for the security implications that would have for us. We should do something useful with that time.
If she does she will be close to 50% and Macron will need to get high turnout of Melenchon voters for him as well as Socialist and Green voters to be re elected.
Macron would get about 60% against Zemmour and 55% against Le Pen though yes, as Pecresse voters would generally vote for Macron over them. Though a few Melenchon voters might vote for Le Pen over Macron
What happened was one of the greatest transfers of wealth in history. That wealth was meant to go from the state to the people, but it ended up instead in the hands of the few.
If Trump wins in 2024 he will probably bring along the Senate too (hence Democrats need a younger centrist candidate like Buttigieg to hold him off).
However regardless yes all European nations need to increase defence spending and co ordination through NATO.
The US can be relied on to work with other western nations to contain Communist China, both Biden and Trump are clear on that, Trump would probably even go to war with China if it invaded Taiwan unlike Biden who would only impose sanctions as he would if Putin invaded Ukraine.
However the US cannot be relied on to contain Putin's Russia. Biden would take military action against Russia if a NATO European nation was invaded, Trump would probably not even do that as he considers Putin a fellow anti woke warrior
They've got sleepers everywhere
Isn't below par good in golf?
Failed states do tend to have corruption and some people can make a (somewhat dodgy) killing out of failed states ... but they're not responsible for the fact the state is failed.
The reason that Russia was a failed state is due to the failure and collapse of Putin's beloved Soviet Union.
The post Soviet republics all were failed states in the early nineties and some struggled more than others. But the ones that have succeeded are those that have embraced democracy, capitalism and most importantly the rule of law. Not those that have embraced kleptocratic hard men like Putin.
That some Putin apologists wish to turn Putin's atrocities into an excuse to persecute Putin's enemies whom British (and other) courts have been sheltering from Putin rather than to face up to the failures of Putin and the Soviets/Russians is an utter disgrace.
Every day at 9am there's an auto-email summarising lineages from the 8-10 thousand SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced in the previous 24 hours @sangerinstitute. The Delta number has been bouncing around in single digits, and today was the first day with zero. 🎺☠️
https://twitter.com/jcbarret/status/1496440950108868608?s=21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWTFG3J1CP8
'Some land to call their own, a cow and horse, the right to distill vodka, and to be left in peace,' I replied.
'Did they ever get it?' she asked.
'No.'
The whole tragedy of the Russian and Soviet empire for its people summed up in four sentences.
Basically they don't want the public to know.
So down like a lead balloon makes perfect sense. It's like saying chocolate fireguard.
New study: Omicron BA.2 reinfections are rare but can occur relatively shortly after a BA.1 infection. The majority of the infected were young and unvaccinated, and most experienced mild symptoms during their infections. Read more on: en.ssi.dk/news/news/2022…
https://twitter.com/ssi_dk/status/1496053271068397569?s=21
Gawd, free at last of the oppressive influence of the greatest Briton who ever lived (©Jezza Hunt) ruling my life.
Go for it.
normalbad.But you also have above par and below par, which is how you measure a performance. Above par shows you have done well, below par shows you have done badly.
Therefore, in golf under par is above par, and over par is below par.
I hope that clears it up for you.
Denying Ukraine in that way revealed everything else re security as a pretext - the problem was it exists at all.
As such, being nice is pretty pointless as his his concerns are not something that can be diplomatically addressed.
"Wallace said his old regiment had “kicked the backside” of the tsar in the Crimea, in 1853, and “we can always do it again”.
The peasantry as a whole certainly did want the land they farmed, as they proved by trying and failing to seize it by force in 1861-62 and rather more successfully in 1917-18.
But that didn't suit Stalin as it meant they were outside his control and growing what they wanted to eat not what he wanted to sell. Hence collectivisation and all that flowed from it.
"When you deny that another nation exists, as in Putin's myth about Ukraine, you're making a claim that it's okay to destroy that other nation. This kind of language is something we have to pay attention to because it usually precedes atrocious actions."
The common people pray for rain, health and a summer that never ends. They dont care what games the high lords play.
Edit - no you didn't, I just missed it!
The four legacy benefits claimants argued that the failure to give them the same uplift was discriminatory.
The High Court accepted that there were a greater proportion of disabled people on legacy benefits and that disabled claimants on legacy benefits were in the same position as disabled claimants on UC.
However, the judge held that the difference in treatment was justified."
Benefits & Work news item
Why do you think the Bank Of England and the other regulators parked investigation of DB when BREXIT came up?
As there is an ocean of Russian money being washed through London there is an awful lot that we could look into. Its not stealing their money and assets. Its asking them to justify them. If we declare that Russia is a rogue state and is up to no good, then doing so would be entirely justified. If the money was made independently of Putin and the state then the assets are unfrozen.
But we can't do that. Because it makes too much money for Tory donors and patrons.
"The unguarded comments came as the cabinet minister chatted with serving military personnel at the Horse Guards building in Westminster."
He was obviously just having a bit of banter with some soldiers. He was one himself, of course.
BTW - I chanced to hear to a very interesting profile of Wallace on Radio 4 a few days ago. Presume it would be available on IPlayer. Worth a listen. Ken Clarke was full of praise of him - Wallace was his PPS - and obviously very pleased that he was in this job in the cabinet.
If Boris is defenestrated Wallace would be a very safe pair of hands as PM - a demonstrably competent minister. I think he would also go down well with members who, of course, make the final decision.
Not that it should be a standard, but the public shitposting from some regimes diplomatically is just pathetic.
Incidentally, this is why I have a beef with those who reflexively dismiss nationalism. Nationalism is still one of the best antidotes we have to imperialism, and without it a good number of crimes of aggression and crimes against whole ethnic groups would be easier to implement. Ukrainians who are prepared to fight against Russian imperialism are right to do so, not for the sake of the abstraction of Ukranian-ness, but for the concrete reality that life under the Russian boot will nastier, more brutish, and dramatically shorter.
Nationalism is capable of creating great and senseless suffering, but also it is capable of marshalling a population to shield themselves from great and senseless suffering.
Gets my vote.