I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
Heath! Wow.
Thanks very much for a post that has made me think your Decreporship
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is easily the worst PM ever. (I'm a Tory)
(Actually Brown was worse, but I'd sort of forgotten him, as we all should.)
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
Not sure we can get that in the UK, not that I've looked. I'm not a huge sparkling wine drinker and now that my wife can't drink we don't tend to get the stuff.
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is easily the worst PM ever. (I'm a Tory)
Probably true: but he was the better candidate in 2019.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
That was being reported from the start.
If they are matching triangulated transmissions with data from JSTARS radar aircraft, etc, then the US has a real-time map of who, what, where and when for the Russians.
As tragic as the situation is, it is nice to be finally able to get one over Putin.
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
At that price I can take it or leave it.
I don’t know, at that price overindulgence won’t lead you to rack and ruinart.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is easily the worst PM ever. (I'm a Tory)
Probably true: but he was the better candidate in 2019.
Yes. Boris is not so bad as he appears. Nothing forgives Corbyn.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is sui generis and near-impossible for me to rank with other Prime Ministers.
He has a complete disregard for facts. It's not even lying half the time. Some of it does not even reach the status of bullshit. Take his two recent football gaffes which would sink the UK/Ireland hosting bid and eliminate Scotland. He must know there will be consequences to his suggestions but cannot be bothered to think them through. The man seems oblivious to any objective reality.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
According to C4 News, Russian state television had helpfully shown pictures of the exact location of the supply ship before the Ukrainians blew it up.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is easily the worst PM ever. (I'm a Tory)
Probably true: but he was the better candidate in 2019.
Yes. Boris is not so bad as he appears. Nothing forgives Corbyn.
No, he is definitely as bad as he appears. He just isn't quite as bad as Corbyn.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
You are absolutely right, on one hand Boris is absolutely too slack, on the other he can be quite forceful.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is sui generis and near-impossible for me to rank with other Prime Ministers.
He has a complete disregard for facts. It's not even lying half the time. Some of it does not even reach the status of bullshit. Take his two recent football gaffes which would sink the UK/Ireland hosting bid and eliminate Scotland. He must know there will be consequences to his suggestions but cannot be bothered to think them through. The man seems oblivious to any objective reality.
We've had people who failed at being PM before. May, definitely. Brown, pretty much. Major towards the end. The enormity and impossibility of the job broke them. (Something similar may be happening to Sunak at No 11 right now).
Then there are PMs who had a plan that was a bad one. Depending on your views, Heath or Cameron.
But at some level, they all believed in and achieved something. And it wasn't totally crazy that they got to the summit.
But Johnson? Completely different, and far worse, category.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is easily the worst PM ever. (I'm a Tory)
Probably true: but he was the better candidate in 2019.
Yes. Boris is not so bad as he appears. Nothing forgives Corbyn.
No, he is definitely as bad as he appears. He just isn't quite as bad as Corbyn.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
You are absolutely right, on one hand Boris is absolutely too slack, on the other he can be quite forceful.
Was that taken at swearing in event for the Azov brigade? And why Boris was so keen to go to Ukraine himself?
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
The best Californian sparklers are good, but they lack the delicacy of good champagne. England produces just about the only sparkling wines which are genuinely up there with the best.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
Theresa May commands enormous sums would you believe
It’s not just ex-PMs. An industry group I know hired Naga Munchety to be their guest speaker at an event recently.
Firstly she’s dull as shit. Secondly she has absolutely nothing remotely that you could say she could impart to the guests of interest. Third she cost an absolute fortune.
It’s absolutely amazing how people will spend serious money to have a “name” speak at an event when there is absolutely no benefit apart from the hope that some sad individuals are excited by seeing someone off the television in their presence.
When you could have me with a fund of stories entertainingly told and at a much more reasonable price ......
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
Yes, I agree. I'm no fan of the man. But many people seem so constantly furious with him that they reflexively assume everything he does must be wrong. Like most PMs, he gets more right than wrong. And he's definitely been right on the issues you say. I'd also add removing covid restrictions. Even if he was ultimately forced into it.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
It's for services rendered whilst in post isn't it? Would be fairly easy to see whether the companies booking former politicos for these gigs had been the recipient of Government largesse during their tenure. Nice British way of doing things. It's the people who have to be in the audience that I feel sorry for. Though at least Boris would probably give value for money.
Mostly our PMs have been poor since the end of ww2.
The best regarded have I guess been Atlee and Thatcher.
Blair will in my view get a much better press, as will Cameron. Brown, Wilson, Heath, Callaghan - hopeless to a man.
(I know I'm missing a couple, but I have no view on them)
Cameron worse, for his reverse Midas touch on Europe, Scotland, NHS, UC; Brown better, for leading the response to the GFC; Wilson, possibly better, for OU, abortion, hanging, Vietnam, though he is often derided as a tactician rather than strategist. But Ted Heath, by taking us into Europe, is arguably the most consequential of all those.
And until Johnson also the worst.
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
Boris is sui generis and near-impossible for me to rank with other Prime Ministers.
He has a complete disregard for facts. It's not even lying half the time. Some of it does not even reach the status of bullshit. Take his two recent football gaffes which would sink the UK/Ireland hosting bid and eliminate Scotland. He must know there will be consequences to his suggestions but cannot be bothered to think them through. The man seems oblivious to any objective reality.
We've had people who failed at being PM before. May, definitely. Brown, pretty much. Major towards the end. The enormity and impossibility of the job broke them. (Something similar may be happening to Sunak at No 11 right now).
Then there are PMs who had a plan that was a bad one. Depending on your views, Heath or Cameron.
But at some level, they all believed in and achieved something. And it wasn't totally crazy that they got to the summit.
But Johnson? Completely different, and far worse, category.
I go back as far as Wilson and Heath and in my voting life time I consider the worst three to be Boris, May and Brown.
Have to say, have never spent any time on twitter before the last couple of days following news from Ukraine. And my verdict - some of the comments are priceless
For example, following the attack on the ships at Berdyansk: "Ukrainian fisherman to Ukrainian farmer: 'Hold onto my beer, mate'."
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
Theresa May commands enormous sums would you believe
It’s not just ex-PMs. An industry group I know hired Naga Munchety to be their guest speaker at an event recently.
Firstly she’s dull as shit. Secondly she has absolutely nothing remotely that you could say she could impart to the guests of interest. Third she cost an absolute fortune.
It’s absolutely amazing how people will spend serious money to have a “name” speak at an event when there is absolutely no benefit apart from the hope that some sad individuals are excited by seeing someone off the television in their presence.
When you could have me with a fund of stories entertainingly told and at a much more reasonable price ......
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
Some people are quite funny about sanctions. The fact they haven't yet affected Putin's decision making doesn't mean they are a bad idea. He has shown himself to be a grave threat to world peace and his regime needs to be weakened as much as possible. In time the sanctions will certainly cripple his ability to fight wars and pay for his own protection. So people in plenty of other countries can sleep easier (not much solace for Ukrainians I know). Are they enough? Well we are sending weapons to Ukraine. The rest comes down to what chances you are prepared to take with a nuclear armed power. Some people probably interpret the current crisis through the lens of 1940 (aka we will never surrender) whereas for others it feels more like 1962 and Cuba.
Another point on the sanction don't work myth. They failed to topple Saddam in Iraq. Well yes if you believe that was the purpose of the sanctions there. However they did weaken him, stop him launching more wars and building a WMD programme. As we found out in 2003. Whether on a cost benefit analysis the sanctions were for the better is a harder question to answer.
One of the problems of sanctions is that they strengthen the position of those who control the scarce resources.
A key point is Russian dependency on Western technology and integration of their manufacturing with global supply chains. If the sanctions are implemented properly then their manufacturing will seize up. There has already been one report that tank manufacturing has had to be halted.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 14m Replying to @iainmartin1 I came out of meetings earlier, opened Twitter again and it was widespread "OMG, Boris has been snubbed, the shame, it's a humiliating national metaphor" (puts on hysterical London media voice)...
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 11m Thousands of people shouting... And a few hours later the full video emerges. It's nothing of the sort from a different angle minus editing. Standard summit milling about fare...
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 7m What's odd, or worrying, is what this stuff is doing to allegedly sophisticated people whose whole schtick is "we're the politically sophisticated anti-populists". In reality over immersion in the digital universe and its memes has turned them into versions of what they hate...
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
That was being reported from the start.
If they are matching triangulated transmissions with data from JSTARS radar aircraft, etc, then the US has a real-time map of who, what, where and when for the Russians.
Even a few days in there were reports on this happening. It's not just locating people — you can locate a mobile phone to about a 100 metres in a network for a urban environment purely from the signalling necessary to move from cell to cell — the people poring over the data will know the IMEI (equipment) and IMSI (subscriber) and undoubtably be looking for those with a non-Ukrainian origin. There will be a database of Russian phones and SIMs, and any other ones that look suspicious, as well as metadata and communication content, that is being systematically turned into a graph showing the flow of communications to identify high value targets and the structure of the forces and their movement.
I honestly believe that the US intelligence agencies have a better view of the where the Russians are in Ukraine than the Russians do.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Haven't pretty much all the French companies - except Total - now seen the light in Russia? We've seen BNP, CA, Schlumberger, and Renault all exit it in the last 48 hours.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Interesting.
But "The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see."
She seems to not know that the whole originating purpose of the EU was to keep France and Germany from going to war with each other ever again.
Clearly no cost of living crisis among flint knapper of the world....
I can concur it good stuff.
The best pink fizz in the world? Gotta be up there.
Also it consistently surprises. You give it to friends and the older and less up-to-speed presume it is French or maybe Italian or even American, but it is British and English and ours and it is exquisite. Pricey, however
One of the best moments we had at the office pre-COVID was a blind testing of sparkling wines across Europe and our French unit director picking Nytimber over the Champagne option (which was in the £50-60 range iirc). He's never been able to live it down.
Nyetimber is fantastic.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
The best Californian sparklers are good, but they lack the delicacy of good champagne. England produces just about the only sparkling wines which are genuinely up there with the best.
I would agree that Nyetimber is genuinely outstanding. But it's also 4-5x the price of Chandon, Mumm Napa or Roederer Estate.
I think the Western approach should be to covertly encourage regime change in Russia. Make it clear big economic help post-war if they have a clear-out of leadership and turn away from ultra-nationalism. We must guard against short termism and fools who think that a deal can be struck with Putin. If a deal to pause or stop the conflict has to be struck with Putin for humanitarian reasons West must continue the struggle by other means to oust him.
I expect he will have retired to the International lecture circuit and received the freedom of Ukraine before then
I do find it incredible that ex-PMs are rewarded so well for such things. There are very few politicians that I'd care to spend time listening to.
Theresa May commands enormous sums would you believe
It’s not just ex-PMs. An industry group I know hired Naga Munchety to be their guest speaker at an event recently.
Firstly she’s dull as shit. Secondly she has absolutely nothing remotely that you could say she could impart to the guests of interest. Third she cost an absolute fortune.
It’s absolutely amazing how people will spend serious money to have a “name” speak at an event when there is absolutely no benefit apart from the hope that some sad individuals are excited by seeing someone off the television in their presence.
When you could have me with a fund of stories entertainingly told and at a much more reasonable price ......
God yes, unless you are Naga’s partner in crime Charlie Stayt, in disguise…
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
The trouble is what to believe and what not to believe. The Today programme the other day stated that Russian soldiers were not allowed to have, let alone use, mobile phones. That seemed unlikely to me, but if true makes the above impossible.
I think the Western approach should be to covertly encourage regime change in Russia. Make it clear big economic help post-war if they have a clear-out of leadership and turn away from ultra-nationalism. We must guard against short termism and fools who think that a deal can be struck with Putin. If a deal to pause or stop the conflict has to be struck with Putin for humanitarian reasons West must continue the struggle by other means to oust him.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Haven't pretty much all the French companies - except Total - now seen the light in Russia? We've seen BNP, CA, Schlumberger, and Renault all exit it in the last 48 hours.
This was last night and in Mexico where the news runs a day behind at least. Total really need to act now or face sanctions.
I also didn't like that Renault are going to attempt to profit from their stake in the Russian car manufacturer rather than do what BP and She'll did. They really can't see beyond their own balance sheet.
I wonder how many women @Leon has shouted at today
That’s an unpleasant tone to set for the discussion
In the way they attacked my mental health issues, frankly they deserve it
‘Oh I think you’ve come to the wrong forum, you are looking for pointless slagging off people you don’t like, next door’... Chill out man, plenty of interesting stuff to post about, without just trying to wind people up. What’s your take on the level pegging poll? Churn? War effect?
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
That was being reported from the start.
If they are matching triangulated transmissions with data from JSTARS radar aircraft, etc, then the US has a real-time map of who, what, where and when for the Russians.
Even a few days in there were reports on this happening. It's not just locating people — you can locate a mobile phone to about a 100 metres in a network for a urban environment purely from the signalling necessary to move from cell to cell — the people poring over the data will know the IMEI (equipment) and IMSI (subscriber) and undoubtably be looking for those with a non-Ukrainian origin. There will be a database of Russian phones and SIMs, and any other ones that look suspicious, as well as metadata and communication content, that is being systematically turned into a graph showing the flow of communications to identify high value targets and the structure of the forces and their movement.
I honestly believe that the US intelligence agencies have a better view of the where the Russians are in Ukraine than the Russians do.
I don't think I'd fully appreciated this. They're communicating with mobile phones? Using the Ukrainian networks?! Really? I'm no comms paranoid but I think I'd find a more secure method than that. It's not as if they're using a language which is particularly obscure to the enemy. Ukraine is teeming with people who speak Russian.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Haven't pretty much all the French companies - except Total - now seen the light in Russia? We've seen BNP, CA, Schlumberger, and Renault all exit it in the last 48 hours.
This was last night and in Mexico where the news runs a day behind at least. Total really need to act now or face sanctions.
I also didn't like that Renault are going to attempt to profit from their stake in the Russian car manufacturer rather than do what BP and She'll did. They really can't see beyond their own balance sheet.
I suspect BP and Shell will end up getting something for their Russian stakes.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
The trouble is what to believe and what not to believe. The Today programme the other day stated that Russian soldiers were not allowed to have, let alone use, mobile phones. That seemed unlikely to me, but if true makes the above impossible.
It's entirely possible that (a) they're not allowed to have/use mobile phones; and (b) a meaningful subset of them have mobile phones.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
Of course the minster will have been responsible for the day to day operation, but that will have only happened based after the "big dog" agreeing this is the strategy. He is still overall a useless leader, but on this the right call appears to have been made in January (albeit I would have thought all previous PMs would have made the same decision, but Corbyn wouldn't have).
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
Haven't pretty much all the French companies - except Total - now seen the light in Russia? We've seen BNP, CA, Schlumberger, and Renault all exit it in the last 48 hours.
This was last night and in Mexico where the news runs a day behind at least. Total really need to act now or face sanctions.
I also didn't like that Renault are going to attempt to profit from their stake in the Russian car manufacturer rather than do what BP and She'll did. They really can't see beyond their own balance sheet.
I suspect BP and Shell will end up getting something for their Russian stakes.
Potentially but 100% of the value has already been written off. The recoveries will be pennies on the dollar as well.
I don't think I'd fully appreciated this. They're communicating with mobile phones? Using the Ukrainian networks?! Really? I'm no comms paranoid but I think I'd find a more secure method than that. It's not as if they're using a language which is particularly obscure to the enemy. Ukraine is teeming with people who speak Russian.
Yes there have been numerous reports of them doing such stuff. Even having a Russian phone switched on, or a Russian SIM in a phone, in Ukraine is dangerous. So if some conscript with a mobile is sat in a vehicle in a convoy trundling down some Ukrainian road it's highly likely that somebody knows instantly that "Russians are there". Of course that doesn't mean Ukrainian forces can act, but the risk is there.
John 'make BBC like netflix' Whittingdale as head of Ofcom?
That John?
Its hard to imagine right now the BBC becoming as good as Netflix, but why cap their ambitions?
If the BBC think they can rival Netflix in the future, good luck to them, if they can find the subscribers.
On current trend, give it a few more years, and Netflix will become as good as the BBC.
In a relatively few years, the BBC will cease non-internet broadcasting. The frequencies will be reused for other purposes.
The BBC will be a streaming service, delivering all content by that mechanism.
Yes, just as BT are abandoning phone lines, so we will to abandon traditional TV
Are they? They just installed fibre via our nearby telephone pole.
The copper phone lines will be gone within 10 years. Too expensive to maintain and no marginal utility for landline phones once the current generation of oldies die off.
Landlines are fantastic. I don't know why they get such a bad press. And they work in a power cut, as an added bonus.
May I put in a plug for (not in) old-school pay phones?
Which nobody ever thinks about these days . . . except when your car breaks down AND you discover you cell has drained its charge . . .
When I was a kid, you could make unlimited long-distance call for a dime. Or less: when I moved to Louisiana, I was delighted to discover that in the Pelican State, pay-phone calls were only a nickel!
By that time (or shortly after), the drop at phone booths in other 49 states had gone up to a quarter, where it pretty much stayed until . . . the demise of the phone booth in the US. RIP
Tell us about Captain Crunch.
Never my favorite cereal, but did admire this old seadog!
The cereal box characters I recall most fondly (besides Bruce Jenner for Wheaties) were Quisp and Quake. Two intrepid aliens from god-knows-where. Who battled for the votes of kids across America.
I had an interesting conversation with a Polish guy last night at the cheap wine bar. He said that the UK has proven it's commitment to a free Ukraine and wider Eastern Europe with actions while the EU has given nothing but cheap words. He also picked up on the Renault/Total stuff and a French girl in the wider group was definitely pretty sheepish, especially about Total continuing to profit from Russian gas and allowing Russia to continue pumping out oil and gas to fund the war effort.
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
This sounds like an advert Roger might have made for Renault. Naughty French papa gets up to no good, Nicole looks at the Renault (for that is where the sneaky behind backs affair happened) and looks sheepish.
Emmanuel, sorry papa, looks at Nicole and winks, Nicole crié “papa”, papa lovingly says “Nicohhhle” and they laugh and wink as if nothing ever happened, pretending to ignore the bloody half-dead Ukrainian gardener wedged in the front of the Clio where the bumper used to be.
Meanwhile camera pans out to a pile of cash spilling out of the open boot of the Renault.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
The trouble is what to believe and what not to believe. The Today programme the other day stated that Russian soldiers were not allowed to have, let alone use, mobile phones. That seemed unlikely to me, but if true makes the above impossible.
It's entirely possible that (a) they're not allowed to have/use mobile phones; and (b) a meaningful subset of them have mobile phones.
One report I read was there has been occasions where they have looted phones because first their secure comms didn't work. There is also definitely Russian footage / photos clearly caught via mobile i.e. the old portrait mode.
Just had a fascinating, in-depth, 2-hour interview with a Ukrainian MiG-29 pilot. Story coming soon, but bottom line up front: Ukrainian pilots have stayed in the fight due to creativity, guts, & talent. History books will be written about what they've done. https://twitter.com/nolanwpeterson/status/1507040799393001478/photo/1
The most fascinating part of this news clip from Putin’s 2003 visit to London, (where he was hosted by the Queen and greeted with a 41-gun salute), is the rare video of him speaking in English.
According to NYT bit I linked, not only are the Russian foot soldiers using unsecure radio and normal cell phones, apparently even General are communicating via this method. They claim that one of those killed was as a direct result of being tracked via cell phone communications.
If the NYT can get this info, the likes of the US / UK intelligence services must be having a field day with it. No wonder the Ukranian SoF lot appear to know a hell of a lot about when and where to hit things.
The trouble is what to believe and what not to believe. The Today programme the other day stated that Russian soldiers were not allowed to have, let alone use, mobile phones. That seemed unlikely to me, but if true makes the above impossible.
It's entirely possible that (a) they're not allowed to have/use mobile phones; and (b) a meaningful subset of them have mobile phones.
One report I read was there has been occasions where they have looted phones because first their secure comms didn't work. There is also definitely Russian footage / photos clearly caught via mobile i.e. the old portrait mode.
If they didn't deserve to lose already, taking footage of ground based activities in portrait gives me another reason to want to see the Russians pounded into the earth. Use LANDSCAPE.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
The most fascinating part of this news clip from Putin’s 2003 visit to London, (where he was hosted by the Queen and greeted with a 41-gun salute), is the rare video of him speaking in English.
That’s really interesting. I think we can all now safely abuse him with some quite complex insults in English, secure in the knowledge he’ll understand them.
John 'make BBC like netflix' Whittingdale as head of Ofcom?
That John?
Its hard to imagine right now the BBC becoming as good as Netflix, but why cap their ambitions?
If the BBC think they can rival Netflix in the future, good luck to them, if they can find the subscribers.
On current trend, give it a few more years, and Netflix will become as good as the BBC.
In a relatively few years, the BBC will cease non-internet broadcasting. The frequencies will be reused for other purposes.
The BBC will be a streaming service, delivering all content by that mechanism.
Yes, just as BT are abandoning phone lines, so we will to abandon traditional TV
Are they? They just installed fibre via our nearby telephone pole.
The copper phone lines will be gone within 10 years. Too expensive to maintain and no marginal utility for landline phones once the current generation of oldies die off.
Landlines are fantastic. I don't know why they get such a bad press. And they work in a power cut, as an added bonus.
May I put in a plug for (not in) old-school pay phones?
Which nobody ever thinks about these days . . . except when your car breaks down AND you discover you cell has drained its charge . . .
When I was a kid, you could make unlimited long-distance call for a dime. Or less: when I moved to Louisiana, I was delighted to discover that in the Pelican State, pay-phone calls were only a nickel!
By that time (or shortly after), the drop at phone booths in other 49 states had gone up to a quarter, where it pretty much stayed until . . . the demise of the phone booth in the US. RIP
Tell us about Captain Crunch.
Never my favorite cereal, but did admire this old seadog!
The cereal box characters I recall most fondly (besides Bruce Jenner for Wheaties) were Quisp and Quake. Two intrepid aliens from god-knows-where. Who battled for the votes of kids across America.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
Of course the minster will have been responsible for the day to day operation, but that will have only happened based after the "big dog" agreeing this is the strategy. He is still overall a useless leader, but on this the right call appears to have been made in January (albeit I would have thought all previous PMs would have made the same decision, but Corbyn wouldn't have).
The most fascinating part of this news clip from Putin’s 2003 visit to London, (where he was hosted by the Queen and greeted with a 41-gun salute), is the rare video of him speaking in English.
Fascinating. I fear we probably did fuck up our relations with Russia. There was a window where we could have been allies, perhaps
Ach, so sad
This does not exonerate the Mad Putin of today, he must lose and be seen to lose;
Then, if all is well, we can scrutinise our very real failings
I think even by 2003 it was already too late, though maybe this wasn't fully appreciated in the west. Even back then, in retrospect, this was a regime which if it operated within superficially democratic norms did so only because it was temporarily convenient to do so; and which thought it had a right to pick the leaders of it neighbours.
Jeezo, those old favourites, English sparkling wine and scrabbling through the vomit of BJ’s pm-ship for the delicious bits. It’s like PB’s been eating raw onions and kippers.
Imagine being the top 7 batsmen getting out for peanuts and 2 blokes who would struggle to bat much higher than bottom half in local league cricket can build innings.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
If only Boris had appointed a "near perfect" Chancellor
Sunday night, C4, The Falklands War, the untold story. Probably worth a watch. Clip from trailer:
The head of the SAS in the Falklands, Sir Michael Rose, speaks publicly for the first time about the war, and how the British task force came close to defeat.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
If only Boris had appointed a "near perfect" Chancellor
Yes, the one he did appoint is proving inadequate.
Jeezo, those old favourites, English sparkling wine and scrabbling through the vomit of BJ’s pm-ship for the delicious bits. It’s like PB’s been eating raw onions and kippers.
The most fascinating part of this news clip from Putin’s 2003 visit to London, (where he was hosted by the Queen and greeted with a 41-gun salute), is the rare video of him speaking in English.
Fascinating. I fear we probably did fuck up our relations with Russia. There was a window where we could have been allies, perhaps
Ach, so sad
This does not exonerate the Mad Putin of today, he must lose and be seen to lose;
Then, if all is well, we can scrutinise our very real failings
I think even by 2003 it was already too late, though maybe this wasn't fully appreciated in the west. Even back then, in retrospect, this was a regime which if it operated within superficially democratic norms did so only because it was temporarily convenient to do so; and which thought it had a right to pick the leaders of it neighbours.
Even if it was too late by 2003 it was f-ing obvious which way it was going with regards to “democracy” in 2008 when they did the old Putin/Medvedev switcheroo and yet many still thought we could do business with Putin on a peer to peer basis.
There is lots to dislike about Boris (mendacity, laziness, etc.).
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
What did he get right about Ukraine?
Oh come on, the UK has been at the absolute forefront of supporting the Ukrainians with useful weapons. Now, one can argue that this relationship goes back to Cameron, but nevertheless, under Johnson's premiership the UK has led the way.
He hasn't positively shat the bed, sure, but there's been no major decision that he could have made differently. Other than not airlifting a bunch of pets (that we know of)
January, the UK were making lots of supply flights to Ukraine when other European countries weren't in the picture. I doubt Boris was personally scheduling flights, but i would have thought he have to give the nod to make such a move. This meant when the war broke out, especially SoF were very well armed.
Very fortunately, we happened to have Ben Wallace at Defence at the right time. I suppose we have to give Boris some credit for that, but, looking at his other appointments, it's probably just pure luck.
If only Boris had appointed a "near perfect" Chancellor
Tbf, Osborne would be doing a much better job right now IMO.
Comments
Thanks very much for a post that has made me think your Decreporship
Edit. Actually I will revise that. Until May also the worst. But Johnson is worse than all of them.
I would also like to suggest the US champagnes made by the French houses in Napa - not least because they are excellent value. Mumm Napa is about 15 quit.
(Actually Brown was worse, but I'd sort of forgotten him, as we all should.)
He has a complete disregard for facts. It's not even lying half the time. Some of it does not even reach the status of bullshit. Take his two recent football gaffes which would sink the UK/Ireland hosting bid and eliminate Scotland. He must know there will be consequences to his suggestions but cannot be bothered to think them through. The man seems oblivious to any objective reality.
But he also - instinctively - got three things absolutely correct: the need to cauterize Brexit as an issue, by - you know - actually Brexiting; vaccines; and Ukraine.
Then there are PMs who had a plan that was a bad one. Depending on your views, Heath or Cameron.
But at some level, they all believed in and achieved something. And it wasn't totally crazy that they got to the summit.
But Johnson? Completely different, and far worse, category.
I'm no fan of the man.
But many people seem so constantly furious with him that they reflexively assume everything he does must be wrong.
Like most PMs, he gets more right than wrong. And he's definitely been right on the issues you say. I'd also add removing covid restrictions. Even if he was ultimately forced into it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H8HyRIeKL8
Slightly concerned by the use of tarpaulin. I assume no beta or gamma emitters inside!
For example, following the attack on the ships at Berdyansk: "Ukrainian fisherman to Ukrainian farmer: 'Hold onto my beer, mate'."
The Polish guy suggested that maybe the EU were wrong to push the UK towards the exit door and many, many more concessions should have been given to the UK on immigration and benefits to keep the UK in the tent. He blames Donald Tusk who he said sold Eastern European countries a dream where the UK would never leave the EU and to keep a hard line on migrant benefits. The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see.
I think France's duplicity wrt companies doing business in Russia is being noticed across Eastern Europe and those Macron/Putin phone calls are less appreciated than the French like to think. I think in Eastern Europe they think Macron is itching to sell them out so he can present a big peace plan before the election and rehabilitate Putin internationally. There was an Estonian-Danish girl who said the same as well, European trust in Macron is way lower than the British press likes to imply.
@iainmartin1
·
14m
Replying to
@iainmartin1
I came out of meetings earlier, opened Twitter again and it was widespread "OMG, Boris has been snubbed, the shame, it's a humiliating national metaphor" (puts on hysterical London media voice)...
Iain Martin
@iainmartin1
·
11m
Thousands of people shouting... And a few hours later the full video emerges. It's nothing of the sort from a different angle minus editing. Standard summit milling about fare...
Iain Martin
@iainmartin1
·
7m
What's odd, or worrying, is what this stuff is doing to allegedly sophisticated people whose whole schtick is "we're the politically sophisticated anti-populists". In reality over immersion in the digital universe and its memes has turned them into versions of what they hate...
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1507086442744492034
I honestly believe that the US intelligence agencies have a better view of the where the Russians are in Ukraine than the Russians do.
But "The look of horror on the French girl's face when he was saying that the EU would have been better off dumping France and keeping the UK was great to see."
She seems to not know that the whole originating purpose of the EU was to keep France and Germany from going to war with each other ever again.
I also didn't like that Renault are going to attempt to profit from their stake in the Russian car manufacturer rather than do what BP and She'll did. They really can't see beyond their own balance sheet.
Chill out man, plenty of interesting stuff to post about, without just trying to wind people up.
What’s your take on the level pegging poll? Churn? War effect?
It's not as if they're using a language which is particularly obscure to the enemy. Ukraine is teeming with people who speak Russian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldon_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Just as well we've got our first choice attack then.
You would have got pretty good odds on that before the game.
The cereal box characters I recall most fondly (besides Bruce Jenner for Wheaties) were Quisp and Quake. Two intrepid aliens from god-knows-where. Who battled for the votes of kids across America.
I was for Quake, but Quisp won. Story of my life!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisp
Emmanuel, sorry papa, looks at Nicole and winks, Nicole crié “papa”, papa lovingly says “Nicohhhle” and they laugh and wink as if nothing ever happened, pretending to ignore the bloody half-dead Ukrainian gardener wedged in the front of the Clio where the bumper used to be.
Meanwhile camera pans out to a pile of cash spilling out of the open boot of the Renault.
https://twitter.com/nocontextbrits/status/1506729812882341891?s=21
This one was posted a few days ago (by Francis U?) and thanks for that; dates to Jan 2022
https://mwi.usma.edu/mwi-podcast-how-capable-is-ukraines-military/
This podcast is about ten days old
https://mwi.usma.edu/what-will-the-battle-of-kyiv-look-like/
Re: last, unfortunately analyst thinks answer will be similar to three
WW2 battles:
> Battle of Stalingrad
> Battle of Manila
> Battle of Berlin
Also thinks Kyiv is THE strategic objective, and that Russian
attacks elsewhere are intended to divert UKR forces away from Kyiv.
Ach, so sad
This does not exonerate the Mad Putin of today, he must lose and be seen to lose;
Then, if all is well, we can scrutinise our very real failings
Use LANDSCAPE.
'Boston Consulting Group sues GameStop claiming $30mn in unpaid fees'
https://www.ft.com/content/f77d1ddb-32d3-4e28-ae1e-27f7938f25b0
The contract specified fees derived from 'projected revenue improvement'! My god.
It’s like PB’s been eating raw onions and kippers.
Sunday night, C4, The Falklands War, the untold story. Probably worth a watch. Clip from trailer:
The head of the SAS in the Falklands, Sir Michael Rose, speaks publicly for the first time about the war, and how the British task force came close to defeat.
Trott never hit a six in test cricket !!
www.scottishsparklingwinedebate.com
and
www.scottishjustbasicpolitcalbettingwhywontanyonesanetalktome.com
Weirdly, you don't .Why is that? You hate the UK, why don't you fuck off and do a Scottish site all of your own? why?
There again I was a Middlesex member and therefore immune to watching crap.
Either the pitch has materially changed or we need a firing squad.