Apoart from the points noted earlier, it's worth noting that most respondents don't favour incorporating anything beyond Crimea and the East, so if Putin decided to try to occupy all the way to Kyiv and even Lviv, he'd have a lot more domestic persuading to do, quite apart from the military challenge. In practice the negotiations are going to come down to (a) definitions of neutrality and security and (b) the future status of Crimea and the Donbas.
Maybe some sort of UN peacekeeping line as in Cyprus could make (b) negotiable (also thereby covering security), with final status kicked down the road for later resolution.
The shape of the ending peace deal seems pretty clear.
Ukraine gives up Crimea. Donbass/Luhansk have their status changed either through autonomy, devolution or referenda. Ukraine says it does not intend to join NATO but keeps open the right to join EU, or perhaps commits to not being a full member of the EU but not ruling out some form of closer links. Russia recognises Ukraine's right to exist and its right to have its own military. Sanctions start to be lifted, with reparations paid to Ukraine out of Russian assets frozen in the West.
Should be do-able quite quickly, think the war is over this time next month. It is a loss for Russia with them achieving virtually nothing they did not have before the (2022) invasion, but enough for Putin to claim a win back home given his control of state media and the false war objectives he told his home audience.
The trouble is that whilst that may bring an end to this episode it will encourage Putin into further adventures in places like Central Asia. I think that would be as bad, in its way, as the Versaille solution.
I agree. Giving Putin something in return for a quick end to this intense period of the conflict guarantees that he, or his successor, will be back for more of the same another time, whether in Ukraine or elsewhere.
At this point it's Ukraine's decision, and they may decide that they will be better placed to fight again later, rather than continue fighting now.
I don't think it gives Putin much of a win. I think it's open to the Ukrainians to accept.
It gives him a win because it allows him to get out of the war without punishment and having achieved at least some of his aims. So what does he have to lose trying exactly the same thing again in a year or two?
The costs Russia have already incurred far outweigh any potential gains. It would be a very strange choice to try and do it again to Ukraine, although he may well try with some of the smaller and weaker states around him.
The west needs to be very careful about allowing a country to gain territory by force/terrorism. You might argue that the costs outweigh the gains but it sticks in the craw. It's important for the west to acknowledge that any deal the Ukrainians strike will have been done with a gun to their heads. I would be in no mood to remove sanctions.
If you have a better way of getting the Russian's out of Ukraine anytime soon, please advise?
Providing weapons to Ukraine and the wholesale collapse of the Russian economy could prove quite effective.
We have done that, and have reached a stalemate. Very worthwhile as it improves the Ukrainian negotiating position, but it does not end the war.
I am not sure how you can conclude that the current situation is a stalemate. Sure, the front lines have been relatively static for a few days. But static front lines is a far cry from stalemate. As Germany in 1918 found out.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
Why not stay on summer time all year? Or better still, put the clocks forward another hour and be on European time? Does it matter if it’s still dark when people are going to work or school, and should be wide awake after a night’s sleep? Extra daylight in the evening, or when people are coming home from work, tired, would be much more useful. Where I live, it is dark at 3.30pm in December. It’s horrible and depressing!
Teenagers in general are not morning people: making them get up an hour earlier than they have to is probably not a great idea. As to European Time, my experience of France is that most of it actually runs on UK time: the shops open at about 10 and close about 6...
Yes. Shit. To link is good, but to read and understand the content linked to, prior to posting the link, is divine. I don't need to because I already knew that seeing the POUM close up was the single thing, short of working at the BBC, that turned Orwell into a hater of Stalinism.
Don't think so? POUM were the Trotskyists, persecuted by the Stalinists, no? My understanding was that Orwell positively liked the POUM, therefore disliked the Stalinists.
A lesson from all that was that the divisions and mutual hatred delivered the country to Franco, who then massacred evereyone he could get his hands on, on both sides of the argument. Very much as happened in Germany, where the Communists feuded with the Social Democrats until Hitler slaughtered them both.
More or less. If you recall from Homage, when he went out there he was pretty clueless about the internal politics of the Republican side and joined POUM pretty much by accident. Then spent months hanging about achieving precisely nothing, except gradually receiving a primer in Spanish left wing politics. When the Stalinists start turning on POUM (the anarchists) he is pretty appalled, and doubtless the way in which they behaved informed his subsequent writings. When he returns home he is on the edge of disillusion with it all; it’s probably fair to say that his sympathies were still with POUM but it is also clear that he concludes that his whole escapade has been pretty futile.
And of course it was written before he knew the outcome, although he could certainly see where things were heading.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
When I was in her company, we got stopped by the police, while driving, once every couple of weeks. Over a period of years.
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
The point surely is that Putin repeatedly said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine. And then he did.
Your support for Putin is as pathetically misguided as those Hilter and Mussolini apologists in the 30s. As ever, you are on the wrong side of history.
Oh, get a life. If you can find ANY statement where I ‘support Putin’ then knock yourself out and quote it. Otherwise do shut the fuck up. Thanks
It can be when it becomes 'my marginalised group is more marginalised than your marginalised group, in fact you're hardly marginalised at all.'
One of the annoyances I have with anti-racism campaigners is that it all too often becomes about 'their' race. In other words, a Pakistani man talking about racism against Pakistanis and ignoring other types of racism. A black woman talking only about racism against blacks; or a Jew only talking about anti-Semitism. It's fine for them to talk about their own experiences; but few seem to ever talk about the wider problem. It becomes divisive, trivialising a complex issues.
And it can extend into other forms of discrimination: for instance, a disabled person being verbally abused by an ethnic minority. It sadly does happen.
These groups have so much in common, but so few ever seem to talk about those commonalities.
Totally agree. It can sometimes be a deliberate tactic by opponents to try to put different groups against each other so as to obscure their common interest, but people do it even when not manipulated. The urge to identify onself with a particular group and despise other groups is still depressingly strong.
Yes. Shit. To link is good, but to read and understand the content linked to, prior to posting the link, is divine. I don't need to because I already knew that seeing the POUM close up was the single thing, short of working at the BBC, that turned Orwell into a hater of Stalinism.
Don't think so? POUM were the Trotskyists, persecuted by the Stalinists, no? My understanding was that Orwell positively liked the POUM, therefore disliked the Stalinists.
A lesson from all that was that the divisions and mutual hatred delivered the country to Franco, who then massacred evereyone he could get his hands on, on both sides of the argument. Very much as happened in Germany, where the Communists feuded with the Social Democrats until Hitler slaughtered them both.
I am not sure that POUM were Trotskyite so much as a further left wing splinter group. In Homage to Catalonia they seem fairly closely aligned with the Anarcho-Syndacalists and Trade Unions. He clearly loved the rather naive revolutionary spirit of Barcelona.
Animal Farm is obviously about Stalinism, but 1984 is as much about Britain and his time at the BBC (his model for the Ministry of Truth). Both are critical of Left Totalitarianism, but from a left wing perspective, not a right wing one.
Animal Farm famously ends: "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which"
So Napoleon (Stalin) is depicted as bad as the farmers. There is no suggestion that life was any better under the farmers, just no better under the pigs.
Apoart from the points noted earlier, it's worth noting that most respondents don't favour incorporating anything beyond Crimea and the East, so if Putin decided to try to occupy all the way to Kyiv and even Lviv, he'd have a lot more domestic persuading to do, quite apart from the military challenge. In practice the negotiations are going to come down to (a) definitions of neutrality and security and (b) the future status of Crimea and the Donbas.
Maybe some sort of UN peacekeeping line as in Cyprus could make (b) negotiable (also thereby covering security), with final status kicked down the road for later resolution.
The shape of the ending peace deal seems pretty clear.
Ukraine gives up Crimea. Donbass/Luhansk have their status changed either through autonomy, devolution or referenda. Ukraine says it does not intend to join NATO but keeps open the right to join EU, or perhaps commits to not being a full member of the EU but not ruling out some form of closer links. Russia recognises Ukraine's right to exist and its right to have its own military. Sanctions start to be lifted, with reparations paid to Ukraine out of Russian assets frozen in the West.
Should be do-able quite quickly, think the war is over this time next month. It is a loss for Russia with them achieving virtually nothing they did not have before the (2022) invasion, but enough for Putin to claim a win back home given his control of state media and the false war objectives he told his home audience.
The trouble is that whilst that may bring an end to this episode it will encourage Putin into further adventures in places like Central Asia. I think that would be as bad, in its way, as the Versaille solution.
I agree. Giving Putin something in return for a quick end to this intense period of the conflict guarantees that he, or his successor, will be back for more of the same another time, whether in Ukraine or elsewhere.
At this point it's Ukraine's decision, and they may decide that they will be better placed to fight again later, rather than continue fighting now.
I don't think it gives Putin much of a win. I think it's open to the Ukrainians to accept.
It gives him a win because it allows him to get out of the war without punishment and having achieved at least some of his aims. So what does he have to lose trying exactly the same thing again in a year or two?
The costs Russia have already incurred far outweigh any potential gains. It would be a very strange choice to try and do it again to Ukraine, although he may well try with some of the smaller and weaker states around him.
The west needs to be very careful about allowing a country to gain territory by force/terrorism. You might argue that the costs outweigh the gains but it sticks in the craw. It's important for the west to acknowledge that any deal the Ukrainians strike will have been done with a gun to their heads. I would be in no mood to remove sanctions.
If you have a better way of getting the Russian's out of Ukraine anytime soon, please advise?
Providing weapons to Ukraine and the wholesale collapse of the Russian economy could prove quite effective.
We have done that, and have reached a stalemate. Very worthwhile as it improves the Ukrainian negotiating position, but it does not end the war.
The weapons are still on their way. It may well become a stalemate but it's not there yet.
How is it a stalemate? Russian advances have been slowed down to a crawl, and there is evidence today of a Ukrainian advance on Kherson. Also every day gets us closer to "culmination". It's only a stalemate if the relative inactivity favours neither side rather then the other, and neither side can engineer an advantage from it.
Of course, every day kills more Ukrainian civilians, which itself will push Ukraine towards seeking a ceasefire.
David Cameron @David_Cameron · 2h For the last two years I've been volunteering each week at the Chippy Larder, a food project in my local town, which helps low income families with surplus food from supermarkets (and cuts food waste at the same time).
Laudable. But does he know he could have got rid of the need for all of these foodbanks with a few strokes of his First Lord of the Treasury pen back in the day?
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Jezza solution to P&O story, the government should seize their assets and take over running the ferry service.
That's up there with his, we will just get the NHS to make generic drugs whose IP is still protected.
Well the latter is what happens across the world.
Not in developed countries with strong rules on the protection of intellectual property they don't. If Jezza had actually tried that, hia government would have been served with legal proceedings in minutes.
India.
India solution is they don't award patents....that isnt "strong rules on protection of IP"... that's just ripping the system up. And UK that would tank the R&D sector that is a major employer.
As they tell me whenever I visit Pakistan, copyright means I have a right to copy.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
When I was in her company, we got stopped by the police, while driving, once every couple of weeks. Over a period of years.
While not in her company. Never.
I too have never been stopped by the police. Guess my race... (hint: I need factor 50 sun cream).
Actually the only time I have been in a car that was stopped by the police a white man was driving: as he was both speeding and was probably over the limit on wine (if there was such a thing in France at the time) I was not really surprised.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
David Cameron @David_Cameron · 2h For the last two years I've been volunteering each week at the Chippy Larder, a food project in my local town, which helps low income families with surplus food from supermarkets (and cuts food waste at the same time).
Laudable. But does he know he could have got rid of the need for all of these foodbanks with a few strokes of his First Lord of the Treasury pen back in the day?
Is it everyone non-white? Why not say ‘non-white’ which takes about an hour less?
it exactly the same as BAME just a bit different? Is it somehow meant to be less patronising to BGME folk? For them all to be lumped together as BGMES?
3/10. I predict it will last about 8 months before it is cancelled and they find the ‘next’ term
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
Why not stay on summer time all year? Or better still, put the clocks forward another hour and be on European time? Does it matter if it’s still dark when people are going to work or school, and should be wide awake after a night’s sleep? Extra daylight in the evening, or when people are coming home from work, tired, would be much more useful. Where I live, it is dark at 3.30pm in December. It’s horrible and depressing!
Yes, I'm annoyed by early morning light waking me up, and like lighter evenings.
Just wake up at four every morning, winter or summer, as I do. That fixes the problem.
Of course, it makes another problem at the end of the day ...
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
I think statistics suggesting disproportionate picking on of selected races is clear evidence of a systematic problem. But not every individual case is racist. Otherwise no black or other minority ethnic people can ever but subjected to this.
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
The point surely is that Putin repeatedly said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine. And then he did.
Your support for Putin is as pathetically misguided as those Hilter and Mussolini apologists in the 30s. As ever, you are on the wrong side of history.
Oh, get a life. If you can find ANY statement where I ‘support Putin’ then knock yourself out and quote it. Otherwise do shut the fuck up. Thanks
Whatever his views on "woke" surely Putin's views have to be discounted because of the process he has followed to come to that view. He is a homophobic bigot, a totalitarian dictator, a warmonger and a mass-murderer. The fact that he has come to a similar view to you on "woke" is irrelevant. There's only two possible views on Woke - for and against - so quite possible express a similar outcome as a result of widely divergent/deviant thinking.
Is it everyone non-white? Why not say ‘non-white’ which takes about an hour less?
it exactly the same as BAME just a bit different? Is it somehow meant to be less patronising to BGME folk? For them all to be lumped together as BGMES?
3/10. I predict it will last about 8 months before it is cancelled and they find the ‘next’ term
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
Well they probably didn't write down "I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY BUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
Is it everyone non-white? Why not say ‘non-white’ which takes about an hour less?
it exactly the same as BAME just a bit different? Is it somehow meant to be less patronising to BGME folk? For them all to be lumped together as BGMES?
3/10. I predict it will last about 8 months before it is cancelled and they find the ‘next’ term
As BGME is quite possibly pronounced "bugger me" it won't even last that long.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
Well they probably didn't write down "I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY PUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
True. But I would love to know what they did write.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
I think statistics suggesting disproportionate picking on of selected races is clear evidence of a systematic problem. But not every individual case is racist. Otherwise no black or other minority ethnic people can ever but subjected to this.
It seems you are saying that for a specific case, such as this one, the systematic evidence showing the systematic problem, should not be referred to? As we can't be certain?
That seems like an unreasonable position to me and will not lead to improvement in processes but gives cover for the police to carry on.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
I think statistics suggesting disproportionate picking on of selected races is clear evidence of a systematic problem. But not every individual case is racist. Otherwise no black or other minority ethnic people can ever but subjected to this.
It seems you are saying that for a specific case, such as this one, the systematic evidence showing the systematic problem, should not be referred to? As we can't be certain?
That seems like an unreasonable position to me and will not lead to improvement in processes but gives cover for the police to carry on.
No, it’s more that for one isolated case there may be more to it than appears at first sight. Remember the footy last summer? The hullabaloo about the racist graffiti that wasn’t? Not everything that seems racist, is.
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
The point surely is that Putin repeatedly said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine. And then he did.
Your support for Putin is as pathetically misguided as those Hilter and Mussolini apologists in the 30s. As ever, you are on the wrong side of history.
Oh, get a life. If you can find ANY statement where I ‘support Putin’ then knock yourself out and quote it. Otherwise do shut the fuck up. Thanks
Whatever his views on "woke" surely Putin's views have to be discounted because of the process he has followed to come to that view. He is a homophobic bigot, a totalitarian dictator, a warmonger and a mass-murderer. The fact that he has come to a similar view to you on "woke" is irrelevant. There's only two possible views on Woke - for and against - so quite possible express a similar outcome as a result of widely divergent/deviant thinking.
Disagree. Putin is all those horrible things but that doesn’t make everything he says ‘wrong’, or somehow ignorable, in fact given his ruthless political success (in his own terms) it’s highly likely he’s notably smart, so his words should sometimes interest - as well as appal
It’s a bit like the Wagner argument. Wagner was a truly venomous anti-Semite. I can see why he’s not played in Israel. But should his music be entirely cancelled and ignored?
Actually, Putin is a bit more like Gary Glitter, but you see what I mean
On the strip search issue - it is worth bearing in mind that we are now in an environment when any kind of inappropriate touching by a man towards a woman is liable to be considered sexual assault. Having a blase approach to invasive strip searches hardly feels consistent with this and we are also supposed to be a nation where policing is done by consent. Coppers don't even routinely carry guns. Why throw all this away?
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
Oh saint Patrick he drove out the snakes With his prayers but that's not all it takes For the snake symbolises An evil that rises And hides in your heart As it breaks And the evil that has risen my friends From the darkness that lives in some men But in sorrow and fear That's when saints can appear To drive out those old snakes once again And they struggle for us to be free From the psycho in our human family Ireland's sorrow and pain Is now the Ukraine And saint Patrick's name now Zelenskyy
Great lyrics! Is that from the Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby?
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
Hard to prove for any single case. The people doing or saying the thing in question always say not. But the widest and best definition of deniable racism is treating somebody as just that bit less worthy of respect on account of their skin colour. I think this happens a lot inc here in England. Any false accusations of it are imo dwarfed by its prevalence.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
I think statistics suggesting disproportionate picking on of selected races is clear evidence of a systematic problem. But not every individual case is racist. Otherwise no black or other minority ethnic people can ever but subjected to this.
It seems you are saying that for a specific case, such as this one, the systematic evidence showing the systematic problem, should not be referred to? As we can't be certain?
That seems like an unreasonable position to me and will not lead to improvement in processes but gives cover for the police to carry on.
No, it’s more that for one isolated case there may be more to it than appears at first sight. Remember the footy last summer? The hullabaloo about the racist graffiti that wasn’t? Not everything that seems racist, is.
Yes I accept that by saying this incident is racist, I will occasionally be wrong. I think that is far more useful than saying we cannot know if an incident involving the police is racist, unless the officer confirms it is.
One course of action prompts change and improvement, the other allows the racism within the police to perpetuate without much challenge.
Is it everyone non-white? Why not say ‘non-white’ which takes about an hour less?
it exactly the same as BAME just a bit different? Is it somehow meant to be less patronising to BGME folk? For them all to be lumped together as BGMES?
3/10. I predict it will last about 8 months before it is cancelled and they find the ‘next’ term
As BGME is quite possibly pronounced "bugger me" it won't even last that long.
‘Get on Zoopla. Doris, a bugger me has moved in next door’
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
On the strip search issue - it is worth bearing in mind that we are now in an environment when any kind of inappropriate touching by a man towards a woman is liable to be considered sexual assault. Having a blase approach to invasive strip searches hardly feels consistent with this and we are also supposed to be a nation where policing is done by consent. Coppers don't even routinely carry guns. Why throw all this away?
I had assumed the search was done by a female officer (which doesn't make it OK, but if it were a male officer that would be much worse).
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
What evidence would you accept as evidence of the search being racially motivated?
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
I think statistics suggesting disproportionate picking on of selected races is clear evidence of a systematic problem. But not every individual case is racist. Otherwise no black or other minority ethnic people can ever but subjected to this.
It seems you are saying that for a specific case, such as this one, the systematic evidence showing the systematic problem, should not be referred to? As we can't be certain?
That seems like an unreasonable position to me and will not lead to improvement in processes but gives cover for the police to carry on.
No, it’s more that for one isolated case there may be more to it than appears at first sight. Remember the footy last summer? The hullabaloo about the racist graffiti that wasn’t? Not everything that seems racist, is.
Yes I accept that by saying this incident is racist, I will occasionally be wrong. I think that is far more useful than saying we cannot know if an incident involving the police is racist, unless the officer confirms it is.
One course of action prompts change and improvement, the other allows the racism within the police to perpetuate without much challenge.
I’m more in favour of using the broad statistics, which I think are showing the problem, which needs to be addressed. Sadly it doesn’t look like it will be as most of the met doesn’t get that there is an issue. I don’t really want to fight over this one case, but I do think there should be evidence asides of the persons colour before an individual event is called racist. We probably disagree. Fair enough. I think we both want the met reformed.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
Hard to prove for any single case. The people doing or saying the thing in question always say not. But the widest and best definition of deniable racism is treating somebody as just that bit less worthy of respect on account of their skin colour. I think this happens a lot inc here in England. Any false accusations of it are imo dwarfed by its prevalence.
I am sure the officers involved in any individual incident can create a semi-credible or better case as to why they were not racist. But the aggregate statistics tell a very clear story of overall racist effect, regardless of the particulars of any one event.
That is why we should look at the particulars, but not just the particulars. We need to look at the whole, too.
Free speech is an illusion. Harassment, inciting violence, defamation etc are all quite severe limitations on freedom of speech. Laws about terrorism also place quite significant limits on freedom of inquiry and expression. I don't understand why people keep insisting there is something called "freedom of speech" that is 'under attack'. The freedom that we have is private and personal, you can think for your self, but it is dangerous to think that this extends to speech. This is a sad state of affairs, but it is reality, at least as I see it.
Agreed. But I don't find it sad that we've decided some things can't be said.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
I certainly wouldn't take anything he says at face value. You still haven't explained what you believe "woke" to be
It's a term of abuse to yell at non tories.
I don’t like the word “woke” just because it’s intended as a form of abuse and because the meaning varies, but I what I find interesting about the world we live in is that I used to be viewed as massively socially liberal (supported gay marriage 25 years ago to give one example) and yet these days I am seen as a social conservative for holding what I think are pretty mainstream views such as:
- I think everyone has a right to offend others, always, with no associated legal risk (the risk should be they get seen as a cock and barred from places by their owners).
- I oppose positive discrimination.
- If you have a sex change op then out of politeness I will address you as you want to be addressed, and mostly I will treat you as the gender you wish to be, but I think there are circumstances in which you cannot be treated as the gender you wish to be.
The fact that many of us feel we get demonised for thinking such thinks gives rise to the sense of a “woke mafia” that does so, I think.
"I think everyone has a right to offend others"
So, you'd be OK if the Daily Mail ran anti-Semitic cartoons like Der Stürmer?
Basically, yes, and the penalty would be to be viewed as the lowest of the low, and I’d hope lose all advertising and have no one prepared to print it. We can all agree that example is outrageous, but where do you draw the line?
Ah, so if we didn't like what The Daily Mail was doing, we could cancel it?
I know, I know - it's a tough one.
Because the problem is that there is a line. Incitement to violence (or shouting fire in a crowded theatre) is clearly over it.
But a steady drip drip of dehumanisation can have much the same effect.
I don't know the answer: clearly one should be able to speak freely, but we have to be incredibly vigilant about those who push falsehoods as fact.
I'm against the fetishization of free speech. Of course the constraints should be few, and thankfully most can be adequately policed by societal norms rather than the law, but there ought to be constraints. IMO more than there are. We'd really benefit from hearing less crap - as in lies and hate - and from people being strongly discouraged from emitting it.
It's not fetishization. It's a critical bedrock of free society. And free speech is only meaningful if it applies to speech you despise. If speech that is "crap", "lies" or "hate" is banned those are vague enough terms they can be used for banning pretty much anything uncomfortable for a governing ideology. The best recipe for dealing with bad speech is by countering it with good arguments.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
Well they probably didn't write down "I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY PUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
It was the official enquiry that decided that the girls race was probably a factor in the strip search. If that is the official conclusion, having looked at the evidence, why should we doubt it?
To quote from the report:
"Force data indicated that the numbers of strip searches were high and included many children and a significantly higher proportion of black and minority ethnic detainees compared against the overall throughput. We concluded that overall not all strip searches were warranted or properly justified.’"
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
Well they probably didn't write down "I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY PUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
It was the official enquiry that decided that the girls race was probably a factor in the strip search. If that is the official conclusion, having looked at the evidence, why should we doubt it?
To quote from the report:
"Force data indicated that the numbers of strip searches were high and included many children and a significantly higher proportion of black and minority ethnic detainees compared against the overall throughput. We concluded that overall not all strip searches were warranted or properly justified.’"
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
There are two words that indicate racist behaviour. They are “Metropolitan” and “Police”.
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
Bridgeable, surely, rather than fordable? But the basic principle is correct.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
We don't know the search was racist.
On the other hand, if black girls are being (wrongly) strip searched at a much greater rate than white ones, we should probably ask questions.
Over the same period, 25 children under the age of 18 were subject of ‘further searches’. 19 were male and 18 were handcuffed during the process. The reasons for search primarily related to suspicions about drugs (20), followed by weapons (4) and stolen property (1). 22 (88%) of the searches were negative with an outcome of no further action recorded in 20 (80%) of the cases. In terms of ethnicity, (as per the codes used by the police), 15 (60%) of the children searched were Black, 2 were White, 6 Asian and 2 Arab or North African.
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
The idea is that you take obscure terms from academic sociology, and use them on social media. Then, when people are confused, you tell them to “educate themselves” and talk down to them. It avoids having to actually engage an opposing view.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
I think it also broke *the law* on dealing with minors. And the school breached their duty to look after the safety of the girl.
But was it racist? Or is that in the imagination of the beholder?
Given my encounters with the police when in the company of black lady (a lawyer) who drove a nice car. And the complete lack of such encounters with the police otherwise..... Yes, it probably was racist.
Your experiences, while suggestive of issues with the police who stopped her, are not evidence in this case. There seems no question that the met needs taking apart and rebuilding, but I am reluctant to attribute everything to racism without evidence.
Of course there is no way of knowing for certain if this particular officer was racist or just stupid without them going all Constable Savage "I searched her for the offence of being black in a school". But when it happens repeatedly then objections such as yours just create a threshold that protects the police from reform and improvement.
We must be allowed to infer "likely racism" from the population data when we can't know what is inside each individuals head.
I hope I’m not coming across as defending racist behaviour. I just think in the absence of all the details, to ascribe an incident as realist like this is not based on evidence. There were a lot of things wrong here, not least the behaviour of the school staff. Black drivers getting stopped more often than white is almost certainly based on racial profiling. For the individuals involved it’s shocking, and you hear stories of black professionals getting stopped more in a year than a white driver is in their lifetime. But is the racial profiling wrong? Is it wrong to profile Pakistani men as being more likely to commit jihadi terrorist acts? These are genuine questions to ask. For some of you the answer will be never to racially profile.
When someone who is very obviously not doing anything wrong, just driving about in a safe and legal way, and they are stopped, that is definitely a failure of policing. If that happens disproportionately to some groups of people then it's as good a proof as anyone should need of institutional racism.
I assume they have to record details of the stops. Would be interesting to see what they wrote each time for @Malmesbury’s lawyer?
Well they probably didn't write down "I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY PUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
It was the official enquiry that decided that the girls race was probably a factor in the strip search. If that is the official conclusion, having looked at the evidence, why should we doubt it?
To quote from the report:
"Force data indicated that the numbers of strip searches were high and included many children and a significantly higher proportion of black and minority ethnic detainees compared against the overall throughput. We concluded that overall not all strip searches were warranted or properly justified.’"
Yes, my only point is that you can make racism nearly disappear just by considering single cases. In much the same way that you can go halfway up a mountain and pick up a stone and say "but this is just the same as the stones down in the valley, therefore there is no mountain."
On the strip search issue - it is worth bearing in mind that we are now in an environment when any kind of inappropriate touching by a man towards a woman is liable to be considered sexual assault. Having a blase approach to invasive strip searches hardly feels consistent with this and we are also supposed to be a nation where policing is done by consent. Coppers don't even routinely carry guns. Why throw all this away?
I had assumed the search was done by a female officer (which doesn't make it OK, but if it were a male officer that would be much worse).
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
Bridgeable, surely, rather than fordable? But the basic principle is correct.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Please name the bands better than U2.
U2 are a good band, and I could think of many that are better from my perspective, but first one would need to define "better" which is pretty difficult. If we meant musically better, in terms of musical virtuosity then just about every prog band that ever lived would be better, but in terms of there ability to produce "bangers" they are definitely up there. In terms of having the most pretentious twat as a lead singer they are unbeatable though.
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
We don't know the search was racist.
On the other hand, if black girls are being (wrongly) strip searched at a much greater rate than white ones, we should probably ask questions.
Over the same period, 25 children under the age of 18 were subject of ‘further searches’. 19 were male and 18 were handcuffed during the process. The reasons for search primarily related to suspicions about drugs (20), followed by weapons (4) and stolen property (1). 22 (88%) of the searches were negative with an outcome of no further action recorded in 20 (80%) of the cases. In terms of ethnicity, (as per the codes used by the police), 15 (60%) of the children searched were Black, 2 were White, 6 Asian and 2 Arab or North African.
88% of the searches were negative.
Ouch.
I remember a friend who looked so dodgy, that when we went to France from the Portsmouth ferry, he got strip searched going in. We took the Mickey for years.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
Why not stay on summer time all year? Or better still, put the clocks forward another hour and be on European time? Does it matter if it’s still dark when people are going to work or school, and should be wide awake after a night’s sleep? Extra daylight in the evening, or when people are coming home from work, tired, would be much more useful. Where I live, it is dark at 3.30pm in December. It’s horrible and depressing!
Teenagers in general are not morning people: making them get up an hour earlier than they have to is probably not a great idea. As to European Time, my experience of France is that most of it actually runs on UK time: the shops open at about 10 and close about 6...
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
No that we’ve left Europe, let’s move it to Oxenhope.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Explain for us what you believe "woke" is to be, and which bits of it you might find yourself agreeing with one of the most homicidal despots of our time on?
Stuff like this. I agree with Putin on this:
"Putin brought up Martin Luther King’s remarks about judging people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
“Countering acts of racism is a necessary and noble cause,” Putin said, “but the new ‘cancel culture’ has turned it into reverse discrimination, that is, reverse racism. The obsessive emphasis on race is further dividing people, when the real fighters for civil rights dreamed precisely about erasing differences and refusing to divide people by skin color.”"
Of course, he might have said all this just to stir trouble, and he doesn't mean it, yet we have all learned that when Putin says stuff - eg "I am going to invade Ukraine" - he often means it. So I take it at face value. And I agree with him
Well I'm happy to be on the other side of this argument from you and Putin. To be antiracist you have to think about race and this does have pitfalls. But it's better to do that, and try and avoid the pitfalls, than it is to bank on ingrained white supremacy being best eradicated by pretending it doesn't exist.
The BIB is the part I have a problem with. We would all be much better off if nobody ever thought about race. Let's set an example.
I know what you mean but it's facile. To take one of a million examples, the Met and the strip search of the schoolgirl. Not an isolated case but indicative of ingrained racism in powerful people and places. Our flagship police force, nearly 30 years after Stephen Lawrence. How do we combat this without thinking about race?
Do we know the strip search was ‘racist’?
Not a facetious point. I’ve not read the details. Her race might have been incidental (I genuinely don’t know)
Did they abuse her racially? Has this only ever happened to black girls?
I’m not diminishing the offence. My brief reading tells me this was a demeaning act
We don't know the search was racist.
On the other hand, if black girls are being (wrongly) strip searched at a much greater rate than white ones, we should probably ask questions.
Over the same period, 25 children under the age of 18 were subject of ‘further searches’. 19 were male and 18 were handcuffed during the process. The reasons for search primarily related to suspicions about drugs (20), followed by weapons (4) and stolen property (1). 22 (88%) of the searches were negative with an outcome of no further action recorded in 20 (80%) of the cases. In terms of ethnicity, (as per the codes used by the police), 15 (60%) of the children searched were Black, 2 were White, 6 Asian and 2 Arab or North African.
88% of the searches were negative.
Ouch.
Astonishing incompetence as well as disgraceful behaviour.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Please name the bands better than U2.
I thought the mere suggestion of there being a band better in any way than Radiohead was a sin bin offense.
Personally, of that era, I always preferred Simple Minds.
This is the sort of pitch that brings test cricket into disrepute. 12 wickets in nearly 3 days. Hopeless. Another boring draw.
Yes. People wonder why cricket is on the decline in the W Indies. This surely can't be helping. Precious little comment on here shows how this series is failing to grip.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Please name the bands better than U2.
Starting at A?
Assuming you’re thinking of the Average White Band, I’ll accept your A. Anything for B (apart from Bad Company and The Beatles)? Looking at my playlist, I could be on a loser, here!
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
I’d like to see them try and ford it now.
They wouldn’t dare attack Essex. @HYUFD has got a tank!
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
So Grant Shapps and Kwasi Kwarteng wrote a letter admonishing... the person who USED to be chairman of P&O?
They're useless and I hope Theresa May sacks both of them.
This could be P&O’s Ratner moment. It would be a shame if it also affected the unrelated P&O Cruises, especially since they saw their market as a floating Butlins.
I know it’s not a popular idea because of the long term probs it could cause but seeing Chechen troops in Ukraine I honestly wish the west would just drop every jihadist into Chechnya PDQ with arms.
Make those fuckers have to hot-foot it back from Ukraine.
My annual moan about daylight saving. Why can't we put the clocks forward on the first Sunday in March?
The dates are not symmetrical because of the shape of the Earth's orbit and the axial tilt, combined with our need in the modern world to make each day exactly 24 hours long rather than fudging it by a minute or so here and there.
Yeah, but it's not that much of a difference. Here are the changes this year:
Sunrise London 26 March 2022: 05:50 (GMT) Sunrise London 27 March 2022: 06:47 (BST)
Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 07:49 (BST) Sunrise London 29 October 2022: 06:50 (GMT)
So we let sunrise in London get as late as 07:49 on BST before we put it back. But we wait until it's 06:47 at the start of BST.
I suppose there might be an argument for not doing it too early as it might be a safety issue, but would the second Sunday in March really be that bad?
Sunrise London 12 March 2022: 06:22 (GMT) Sunrise London 13 March 2022: 07:19 (BST)
Feck London
It's on the fringes of the UK. As close to them southwards, actually closer, than Kirkwall is to the border of the UK northwards.
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
Chosen at least in part because of its easy access to Europe...
It’s the lowest place on the Thames where an army can ford. Or so the Romans decided, and they wanted to head north and attack Essex
I’d like to see them try and ford it now.
They wouldn’t dare attack Essex. @HYUFD has got a tank!
A tank would not be necessary. I think we can say with some confidence the local population, or at least one part of it, would refuse to accept defeat no matter the forces ranged against it.
‘Black and Global Majority Ethnic’ is an incredibly rare term. Just 167 hits on all of Google, many referencing this unhappy case
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
This academic says he got it from working for Islington council.
@Finn_Mackay Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
Makes a change from the Putin apologists of the right. We used to have one on here, who was an itinerant flint knapper.
With all due respect, doctor, fuck off
I have never been a "Putin apologist"
Is Putin right about Wokeness? Yes. Is he a fascist thug? Also yes
Hitler was good on cars and motorways; Stalin was a charismatic war leader; Fred West probably laid a fine patio. Life is full of paradoxes
You're trivializing it with those examples. Putin's reactionary views on social and cultural matters are integral to his politics and world view. It ought to give you - at the very very least - pause for thought that you share them.
No, it doesn't, Putin is right on this one subject: perhaps it takes a cold-hearted enemy to appraise us correctly.
Putin is also a war-mongering maniac who needs to be taken out
Meanwhile:
Pathetic. Within a minute I could find a dozen photos of the Queen meeting Putin. Does that make her a Putin apologist?
Personally, I'd be much more embarrassed being photographed with Bono than Putin.
At least Putin's evil will die with him; Bono's evil will curse humanity for decades.
Or Boneo, as we call him in our family.
The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby! are two of the greatest rock albums of all time.
You are so lucky. To have so much music that is better than U2 still in your future.
You have an extraordinary journey of discovery ahead of you.
Please name the bands better than U2.
Starting at A?
ACDC Allman Brothers Band
Anyone else?
Alison Krauss and Union Station. Best for country/blue grass.
So Grant Shapps and Kwasi Kwarteng wrote a letter admonishing... the person who USED to be chairman of P&O?
They're useless and I hope Theresa May sacks both of them.
This could be P&O’s Ratner moment. It would be a shame if it also affected the unrelated P&O Cruises, especially since they saw their market as a floating Butlins.
I said the same thing yesterday about their Ratner moment thats exactly as I see it.
Just received an accurate diagnosis of the technical issues with the floodlights at the Thorne Colliery FC VS Clay Cross Town football game.
"The electrician says their fucked Pal"
Always nice to get a detailed analysis.
Match postponed.
Ground 350 at steps 1 to 7 as well so am back to 349
You are brave going to Moorends!
Still, I don't suppose there's an army of scallies that turn out to demand money to "look after your car mate" given there's probably only 10 spectators.
Comments
As to European Time, my experience of France is that most of it actually runs on UK time: the shops open at about 10 and close about 6...
And of course it was written before he knew the outcome, although he could certainly see where things were heading.
While not in her company. Never.
Oh, get a life. If you can find ANY statement where I ‘support Putin’ then knock yourself out and quote it. Otherwise do shut the fuck up. Thanks
Animal Farm is obviously about Stalinism, but 1984 is as much about Britain and his time at the BBC (his model for the Ministry of Truth). Both are critical of Left Totalitarianism, but from a left wing perspective, not a right wing one.
Animal Farm famously ends: "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which"
So Napoleon (Stalin) is depicted as bad as the farmers. There is no suggestion that life was any better under the farmers, just no better under the pigs.
Of course, every day kills more Ukrainian civilians, which itself will push Ukraine towards seeking a ceasefire.
@David_Cameron
·
2h
For the last two years I've been volunteering each week at the Chippy Larder, a food project in my local town, which helps low income families with surplus food from supermarkets (and cuts food waste at the same time).
https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/1504871342319013910
===
Laudable. But does he know he could have got rid of the need for all of these foodbanks with a few strokes of his First Lord of the Treasury pen back in the day?
Actually the only time I have been in a car that was stopped by the police a white man was driving: as he was both speeding and was probably over the limit on wine (if there was such a thing in France at the time) I was not really surprised.
Is it solely an admission from the officer? Can you not see why that is problematic?
Is it everyone non-white? Why not say ‘non-white’ which takes about an hour less?
it exactly the same as BAME just a bit different? Is it somehow meant to be less patronising to BGME folk? For them all to be lumped together as BGMES?
3/10. I predict it will last about 8 months before it is cancelled and they find the ‘next’ term
Of course, it makes another problem at the end of the day ...
"I OBSERVED THE FEMALE ACTING IN A NORMAL WAY BUT THE COLOUR OF HER SKIN MADE ME SUSPICIOUS THAT SHE MIGHT BE CONCEALING DRUGS IN HER KNICKERS"
That seems like an unreasonable position to me and will not lead to improvement in processes but gives cover for the police to carry on.
Remember the footy last summer? The hullabaloo about the racist graffiti that wasn’t? Not everything that seems racist, is.
It’s a bit like the Wagner argument. Wagner was a truly venomous anti-Semite. I can see why he’s not played in Israel. But should his music be entirely cancelled and ignored?
Actually, Putin is a bit more like Gary Glitter, but you see what I mean
One course of action prompts change and improvement, the other allows the racism within the police to perpetuate without much challenge.
Yes, I foresee immediate problems
Stupid sods choosing a capital of the UK that is out on a limb. Keswick would be so much more central, or perhaps Oxenholme. Which has a main line railway.
I don’t really want to fight over this one case, but I do think there should be evidence asides of the persons colour before an individual event is called racist. We probably disagree. Fair enough. I think we both want the met reformed.
That is why we should look at the particulars, but not just the particulars. We need to look at the whole, too.
Seems to have emerged from niche academe about 2 years ago. Fascinating to see if it catches
To quote from the report:
"Force data indicated that the numbers of strip searches were high and included many children and a significantly higher proportion of black and minority ethnic detainees compared against the overall throughput. We concluded that overall not all strip searches were warranted or properly justified.’"
https://chscp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Child-Q-PUBLISHED-14-March-22.pdf
https://www.thedailybeast.com/vladimir-putins-dystopian-mega-rally-in-moscow-is-a-whole-new-level-of-crazy
@Finn_Mackay
Fellow White people - in my teaching I don't use the acronym BAME or use it as a noun. I use Black & Global Majority Ethnic people/groups in the UK etc. I got this term from the team working on racial equality in Islington council when I worked there in 2004.
https://twitter.com/Finn_Mackay/status/1271013954253398016
Ouch.
Dr Finn Mackay Adult Human Queermale, a sociology lecturer at Bristol Uni. Superb. Apparently not a parody
How can this NOT be a parody?
Personally, of that era, I always preferred Simple Minds.
This surely can't be helping.
Precious little comment on here shows how this series is failing to grip.
They're useless and I hope Theresa May sacks both of them.
"The electrician says their fucked Pal"
Always nice to get a detailed analysis.
Match postponed.
Ground 350 at steps 1 to 7 as well so am back to 349
Allman Brothers Band
“The acronym is BAGMEPIUK, with unfortunate but obvious pronunciation of “Bag Me Puke”. 😳 I’m not sure that really sends the right message.”
“If catches on it will be turned into an acronym. I worry that the terminology might backfire.”
https://twitter.com/sohocomedy/status/1271745277670625280?s=21
Jim Hacker: She's a sociology student, Bernard!
Make those fuckers have to hot-foot it back from Ukraine.
The latter is just completely unacceptable and is, frankly, an open goal for racists
Still, I don't suppose there's an army of scallies that turn out to demand money to "look after your car mate" given there's probably only 10 spectators.