The North is everything above the Severn-Wash line (I'm afraid that puts the Midlands into the North).
I've always liked the massive Motoway signs simply for 'The North'. Britain has fantastically silly place and region names and yet we've settled on such a basic one there.
You still get signs saying "The North" on the A9 north of Inverness...
I posted this before but anyway...
This is a constituency map with the population split into thirds, using the northing of each constituency centroid.
Shading is population density.
Whether most of Wales would appreciate being in the Midlands I'm not sure...
North Wales is more Cheshire Lancashire than the Midlands
I agree. I think the lines should probably be drawn by distance from Piccadilly Circus. Cornwall would probably end up in the North, though.
What the map does show that Birmingham is very much the centre point of the UK population.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
From a Northern perspective, London extends to somewhere around Northampton.
The London contactless train fare system extends as far west as Reading and as far north as Luton Airport now, and has gone as far south as Gatwick for a good few years. In the east you can go contactless as far as Grays and Dartford.
Northern have introduced a contactless card for the part time season tickets. I have obtained a card, but never used it because WFH.
London's contactless network. I have visited every station marked on the map:
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Do you mind if I ask which hotel you're staying at?
I promise not to fly over and stalk you. I just love details
Loyal, anyway. A lot of people would have said nothing.
Loyalty is notoriously the virtue bigged up by Lord Lucan's mates, and what people make oaths about when signing to the Hitler youth and similar. Hard to see it as a virtue in the abstract at all, it depends what you are loyal to.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Having read some fascinating Barrister memoirs recently it is amazing how prosectors will go to trial, and juries convict, on some pretty thin evidence sometimes. But if Blunt is going out that strong he needs to base it more than he is, and he damn well better be right.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
Do you not find carpaccio bland? - I mean the meat itself not the gubbins with it. Perhaps I have been having low-quality carpaccio…
I have had rather bland carpaccio before, but this had really good flavour even without the onions and capers. I suspect it might have been from a local mountain cow, like the ones I saw yesterday.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
I dislike a categorical statement of a miscarriage of justice without enough detail to allow me to come to a view as to whether I agree. It reminds me of the protestations made in defence of various convicted criminals by members of their family - it feels as though the defence is because of his friendship with the individual and not the facts of the case.
But we'll see. The appeal will no doubt be made and the details reported.
There's quite a long tradition of MPs supporting campaigns related to miscarriages of justice, but not normally involving the conviction of a fellow MP.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Having read some fascinating Barrister memoirs recently it is amazing how prosectors will go to trial, and juries convict, on some pretty thin evidence sometimes. But if Blunt is going out that strong he needs to base it more than he is, and he damn well better be right.
Which is my point, albeit badly expressed. If there is evidence that invalidates the verdict, fine. Otherwise I’d keep my mouth shut on the day of the verdict and support my friend in private.
" “This is going to be a large scale battle with hundreds of tanks and fighting vehicles — it’s going to be extremely brutal,” said Franz-Stefan Gady, a research fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London."
"Frederick W. Kagan, the director of the Critical Threats project at the American Enterprise Institute:
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
I'm normally a defender of MPs. My instinctive belief is that they are by and large above-average humans doing a difficult job. But good grief they seem determined to test this belief. A greater proportion than you would expect seem to be distinctly flawed or distinctly weird or both.
There are aspects to this. I'd like to think of myself as fairly (not abnormally) intelligent, fairly open-minded, and fairly open to new ideas. Which is why I'm on PB. I'm also *amazingly* attractive, and can surpass Gimpo (*) in the bedroom department.
I'd like to think I'd make a good MP. I don't have a particular love of money, and no particular ideology (aside from a general feeling of let people be what they want to be, as long as they do not hurt others.)
But there is no way I'd ever become an MP. And for that reason I have an instinctive admiration for those who put themselves forward for the role. But I do fear that it does attract an above-average proportion of ner-do-wells on either side of the political divide. It's a power thing.
(*) Of KLF fame.
In some ways I'd love to contribute to politics, now that I actually know stuff & have some knowledge and experience to offer. But I'd hate the effect on my family and, frankly, it's all hypothetical because (a) I can barely find a party to vote for let alone represent and (b) there is NFW any party would take a bolshie woman like me.
I could almost certainly be more useful elsewhere.
When I studied politics at university the students were roughly divided into those who took it seriously and went into politics (they were all weird in some way and some you'd cross the road to avoid so odd were they) and others who were just interested in it intellectually. Whenever I see politicians trying to show how like us they are, I always remember the weird loons from uni days and go ..... hmmm....
Not sure how we get better ones. But on the day that David Amess's murderer is convicted, it is worth remembering that many MPs are, however odd they may be, in it to serve the public.
May the poor man rest in peace and his family find some consolation in justice finally having been done.
Which is why I've always said I quite admire those who stand to be an MP, of whatever party. I wouldn't want myself - or my family - put through that scrutiny. And I don't have anything particularly to hide (and I believe the same for my family).
However, I do think that power can attract both angels and demons, and politics is, in a way, the ultimate power. I can see why politics might appeal to ner-do-wells, as much as it does to the angels.
I'd also add that IME at uni the lawyers were the weird loons. Even worse than architects (fx: shudders at mentioning the word...) And I say that as someone who studied engineering...
I know it seems odd, but what struck me in Parliament was how normal almost everyone was. OK, I have my quirky streaks, but my colleagues in all parties were mostly more like everyone else that I knew outside politics. Many were a bit taken aback to be there at all (it was 1997 so lots of us hadn't expected to win) but we settled down and had fun in the early years with a sense of achievement at getting in and helping what we felt was a good cause.
Unusually interested in politics, obviously, some drinkers, and the usual mix of good, bad and so-so home lives, but very few actual weirdos.
I can see that. But the problem is that both the angels and demons can hide themselves well. I bet no-one in parliament - not a single one of his colleagues of whatever party - knew about Imran Khan's crimes. It would not surprise me if none had any idea of his predilections.
This is made worse by two factors: even demons can do good acts, especially if the acts self-serve their own interests. A classic example being Jimmy Saville's charity works. And the fact that partisanship means it is easy to think good of people in your own party, or bad of those in your opposition A trait, I must add, you do not generally fall into.
I have a lot of time for someone who quietly does charity work, which you only find out about after you have known them for a while. I get concerned about people who, when you first meet them, shout: "I DO ALL THIS GOOD WORK!"
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Juries can get it wrong. Cf the Birmingham Six
Reading Blunt's statement he feels something very bad happened en route to this trial
"I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare"
Now, I have no idea if he has some insider info. Or he is just an angry gay Tory MP misguidedly protesting the conviction of another gay Tory MP
The theme is in the title - Melanchon voters weighing up what to do, not quite sure. But every single one of the Melanchon voters interviewed says that of COURSE they'll now vote for Macron. I'm used to journalists deciding their theme before they do the interviews, but this is really extreme.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Juries can get it wrong. Cf the Birmingham Six
Reading Blunt's statement he feels something very bad happened en route to this trial
"I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare"
Now, I have no idea if he has some insider info. Or he is just an angry gay Tory MP misguidedly protesting the conviction of another gay Tory MP
But Blunt is entitled to his view
He is, but I’d question if tonight is the time to air it.
I'm normally a defender of MPs. My instinctive belief is that they are by and large above-average humans doing a difficult job. But good grief they seem determined to test this belief. A greater proportion than you would expect seem to be distinctly flawed or distinctly weird or both.
There are aspects to this. I'd like to think of myself as fairly (not abnormally) intelligent, fairly open-minded, and fairly open to new ideas. Which is why I'm on PB. I'm also *amazingly* attractive, and can surpass Gimpo (*) in the bedroom department.
I'd like to think I'd make a good MP. I don't have a particular love of money, and no particular ideology (aside from a general feeling of let people be what they want to be, as long as they do not hurt others.)
But there is no way I'd ever become an MP. And for that reason I have an instinctive admiration for those who put themselves forward for the role. But I do fear that it does attract an above-average proportion of ner-do-wells on either side of the political divide. It's a power thing.
(*) Of KLF fame.
In some ways I'd love to contribute to politics, now that I actually know stuff & have some knowledge and experience to offer. But I'd hate the effect on my family and, frankly, it's all hypothetical because (a) I can barely find a party to vote for let alone represent and (b) there is NFW any party would take a bolshie woman like me.
I could almost certainly be more useful elsewhere.
When I studied politics at university the students were roughly divided into those who took it seriously and went into politics (they were all weird in some way and some you'd cross the road to avoid so odd were they) and others who were just interested in it intellectually. Whenever I see politicians trying to show how like us they are, I always remember the weird loons from uni days and go ..... hmmm....
Not sure how we get better ones. But on the day that David Amess's murderer is convicted, it is worth remembering that many MPs are, however odd they may be, in it to serve the public.
May the poor man rest in peace and his family find some consolation in justice finally having been done.
Which is why I've always said I quite admire those who stand to be an MP, of whatever party. I wouldn't want myself - or my family - put through that scrutiny. And I don't have anything particularly to hide (and I believe the same for my family).
However, I do think that power can attract both angels and demons, and politics is, in a way, the ultimate power. I can see why politics might appeal to ner-do-wells, as much as it does to the angels.
I'd also add that IME at uni the lawyers were the weird loons. Even worse than architects (fx: shudders at mentioning the word...) And I say that as someone who studied engineering...
I know it seems odd, but what struck me in Parliament was how normal almost everyone was. OK, I have my quirky streaks, but my colleagues in all parties were mostly more like everyone else that I knew outside politics. Many were a bit taken aback to be there at all (it was 1997 so lots of us hadn't expected to win) but we settled down and had fun in the early years with a sense of achievement at getting in and helping what we felt was a good cause.
Unusually interested in politics, obviously, some drinkers, and the usual mix of good, bad and so-so home lives, but very few actual weirdos.
I can see that. But the problem is that both the angels and demons can hide themselves well. I bet no-one in parliament - not a single one of his colleagues of whatever party - knew about Imran Khan's crimes. It would not surprise me if none had any idea of his predilections.
This is made worse by two factors: even demons can do good acts, especially if the acts self-serve their own interests. A classic example being Jimmy Saville's charity works. And the fact that partisanship means it is easy to think good of people in your own party, or bad of those in your opposition A trait, I must add, you do not generally fall into.
I have a lot of time for someone who quietly does charity work, which you only find out about after you have known them for a while. I get concerned about people who, when you first meet them, shout: "I DO ALL THIS GOOD WORK!"
(Again, not including you in that.)
Sure (and thank you) - I wouldn't claim to know much about most of my former colleagues' private lives. Everyone scooted back to their constituencies on Thursday night, and Mon-Thur I was too busy to socialise much.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Yes. Wilberforce thought owning slaves overseas was wrong, though legal. Is Blunt saying that 15 year olds are fair game, despite being not legal? Not saying that's an untenable position, 15 y.o. me was having sex with greater-than-15 y.o.s and not feeling exploited then or now, but it's a brave position for him to be taking. Or is he saying that the evidence was wrong and this is a miscarriage of justice under existing law?
The theme is in the title - Melanchon voters weighing up what to do, not quite sure. But every single one of the Melanchon voters interviewed says that of COURSE they'll now vote for Macron. I'm used to journalists deciding their theme before they do the interviews, but this is really extreme.
I am fascinated by the inability of Sarkozy’s old party to grasp almost this whole agenda, but have no historic link to Nazis, and in fact link themselves to DeGaul. There’s clearly a French desire to vote some some of this agenda, just probably not from her.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Looks like mackerel with mustard is definitely a thing!
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Juries can get it wrong. Cf the Birmingham Six
Reading Blunt's statement he feels something very bad happened en route to this trial
"I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare"
Now, I have no idea if he has some insider info. Or he is just an angry gay Tory MP misguidedly protesting the conviction of another gay Tory MP
But Blunt is entitled to his view
Of course, but as others have said, it would have been good to hear some solid basis for his confidence that there has been a miscarriage of justice.
If Blunt feels he can only provide details at a later appropriate point, a more measured statement at this time would have been better.
The theme is in the title - Melanchon voters weighing up what to do, not quite sure. But every single one of the Melanchon voters interviewed says that of COURSE they'll now vote for Macron. I'm used to journalists deciding their theme before they do the interviews, but this is really extreme.
I am fascinated by the inability of Sarkozy’s old party to grasp almost this whole agenda, but have no historic link to Nazis, and in fact link themselves to DeGaul. There’s clearly a French desire to vote some some of this agenda, just probably not from her.
But you can't persuade DeStriker not to think about DeGaul.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Do you mind if I ask which hotel you're staying at?
I promise not to fly over and stalk you. I just love details
You're in Banyuls, yes?
I don’t mind at all! And you’d have to be quick to stalk me - I’m leaving first thing tomorrow and haven’t decided exactly where I’m headed yet.
It’s called the Le Catalan, and yes in Banyuls. Its restaurant is Le Miradou.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Looks like mackerel with mustard is definitely a thing!
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Yes. Wilberforce thought owning slaves overseas was wrong, though legal. Is Blunt saying that 15 year olds are fair game, despite being not legal? Not saying that's an untenable position, 15 y.o. me was having sex with greater-than-15 y.o.s and not feeling exploited then or now, but it's a brave position for him to be taking. Or is he saying that the evidence was wrong and this is a miscarriage of justice under existing law?
My reading of this is that Blunt (who does seem to have some serious knowledge of the case) feels that there might be a conspiracy at work, to bring down a gay Muslim MP (not a hard thing to do)
Again I have zero idea if Blunt is right, or wrong, or whatever. Presumably there will be an appeal and hopefully it will all be aired
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Yes. Wilberforce thought owning slaves overseas was wrong, though legal. Is Blunt saying that 15 year olds are fair game, despite being not legal? Not saying that's an untenable position, 15 y.o. me was having sex with greater-than-15 y.o.s and not feeling exploited then or now, but it's a brave position for him to be taking. Or is he saying that the evidence was wrong and this is a miscarriage of justice under existing law?
The latter: he is "utterly appalled and distraught at the dreadful miscarriage of justice"
The theme is in the title - Melanchon voters weighing up what to do, not quite sure. But every single one of the Melanchon voters interviewed says that of COURSE they'll now vote for Macron. I'm used to journalists deciding their theme before they do the interviews, but this is really extreme.
I am fascinated by the inability of Sarkozy’s old party to grasp almost this whole agenda, but have no historic link to Nazis, and in fact link themselves to DeGaul. There’s clearly a French desire to vote some some of this agenda, just probably not from her.
But you can't persuade DeStriker not to think about DeGaul.
That’s a really weird typo. Im blaming autocorrect. I have no evidence but it’s 2022 so I just have to say it lots, and with increasing volume, and it becomes true.
Weirdly I thought the omicron wave was sharply declining in the states?
Thay are being hit with the Omicron BA2 Sub-Variant, at them moment, I think
No sign on worldometers though. A very local outbreak?
I think its hitting different areas at defend times, some are still on the down slop of BA1, other the up slop of BA2 and yet others on the down slop on BA2, all of which are offsetting each other.
The NYT state coved tracker is useful if you want to follow it: states Varey form +66% to -70% in a fortnight, but have little correlation to the rules in force in those states.
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
"We need to think about a Le Pen presidency France’s far-right candidate could still defeat Macron, plunging Nato and the EU into turmoil Gideon Rachman" [via google search]
Clickbait. There has only ever been one winner of this election. Any statement to the contrary is to drive likes and/or traffic.
Okay. Ignore the polls that show an average of 52/48.
Wouldn't you have to be somewhat selective to get polls 'that show an average of 52/48'? What average do all the 2nd round polls from say 1st April provide?
No, it's not selective, although since I posted my comment a poll has been published with 55/45 which has improved Macron's position slightly.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Do you mind if I ask which hotel you're staying at?
I promise not to fly over and stalk you. I just love details
You're in Banyuls, yes?
I don’t mind at all! And you’d have to be quick to stalk me - I’m leaving first thing tomorrow and haven’t decided exactly where I’m headed yet.
It’s called the Le Catalan, and yes in Banyuls. Its restaurant is Le Miradou.
Checking TripAdvisor I see it has the "traveller's choice" mark, and they are often really reliable - it means you will get something good, whatever the price bracket. And the punters love the restaurant in the feedback
I know nearby Collioure really well. We used to have weird family holidays there when I was but a lad. I loved the swim to the castle
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
Time to sink the Black Sea Fleet?
No. But we should certainly be providing weapons to stop Russia blockading Odessa.
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
Time to sink the Black Sea Fleet?
No. But we should certainly be providing weapons to stop Russia blockading Odessa.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Looks like mackerel with mustard is definitely a thing!
The news at 10 about violence against women in Ukraine is utterly horrific.
The people doing this are savages.
I feel helpless. Intellectually I know why the UK can’t do much more than it is doing, but emotionally when you see some of this stuff and the hint of chemical weapons? It’s tempting to say “sod it”.
I decided to stay at my hotel to eat. Well.. I didn’t really decide; I fell asleep after my beer earlier and woke up to not many options nearby. I was just in time to get into the hotel restaurant. I had to go for the set menu which worked out rather well.
Started with beef carpaccio, onions and capers. The main course was mackerel and another white fish (the lovely Italian waitress and I couldn’t work out what it’s called in English even with the help of our phones) with black rice and a creamy mustard sauce. Dessert (which I’m still eating!) is a sort of chocolate granola with roasted pear, a rich chocolate mousse and mascarpone. I’ve been washing it all down with a rather splendid bottle of local Roussillon white.
That looks like an excellent dinner
Beef carpaccio, red onions and capers. Mmm. Deliciously simple
Not sure about creamy mustard sauce AND mackerel? Two strong flavours there. But if it works it works!
The mustard flavour wasn’t overpowering at all. Just enough to notice it.
Looks like mackerel with mustard is definitely a thing!
Olga Tokariuk @olgatokariuk · 1h The only source reporting this so far is the Azov regiment. No independent/credible journalists are working in Mariupol now, so very difficult to verify. There were a lot of warnings earlier over Russia's potential use of chemical weapons in Ukraine
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Hang on though, wasn't Khan found guilty by a jury?
Yes. Wilberforce thought owning slaves overseas was wrong, though legal. Is Blunt saying that 15 year olds are fair game, despite being not legal? Not saying that's an untenable position, 15 y.o. me was having sex with greater-than-15 y.o.s and not feeling exploited then or now, but it's a brave position for him to be taking. Or is he saying that the evidence was wrong and this is a miscarriage of justice under existing law?
The latter: he is "utterly appalled and distraught at the dreadful miscarriage of justice"
Sure but I don't see what the point being made is
"I sat through some of the trial. The conduct of this case relied on lazy tropes about LGBT+ people that we might have thought we had put behind us decades ago."
What is the lazy trope? That LBGT Muslims are capable of trying to seduce 15 year olds of the same sex as them, when actually that is inherently impossible? It may be that the complainant is in fact a liar, but I don't see that believing what he says is evidence of being anti gay or anti Muslim
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
Time to sink the Black Sea Fleet?
No. But we should certainly be providing weapons to stop Russia blockading Odessa.
Amounts to much the same thing.
Hypothetically, how would you go about doing that? Air launched anti-ship missiles?
Ok are we even going to see a by-election in Wakefield? Reading the facts of the case, it doesn’t quite seem imprisonable, certainly if it’s a first offence.
Crispin Blunt MP attended the defence and summing up of Imran Ahmad Khan's trial.
He was not present to see any of the prosecution witnesses. The victim and his parents broke down in tears on several occasions when giving evidence about the assault and the impact it's had.
I am utterly appalled and distraught at the dreadful miscarriage of justice that has befallen my friend and colleague Imran Ahmad Khan, MP for Wakefield since December 2019. His conviction today is nothing short of an international scandal, with dreadful wider implications for millions of LGBT+ muslims around the world.
I sat through some of the trial. The conduct of this case relied on lazy tropes about LGBT+ people that we might have thought we had put behind us decades ago.
As a former Justice Minister I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare start to his Parliamentary career.
I hope for the return of Imran Ahmad Khan to the public service that has exemplified his life to date. Any other outcome will be a stain on our reputation for justice, and an appalling own goal by Britain as we try to take a lead in reversing the Victorian era prejudice that still disfigures too much of the global statute book.
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
Time to sink the Black Sea Fleet?
No. But we should certainly be providing weapons to stop Russia blockading Odessa.
Amounts to much the same thing.
I think NATO sinking the entire Black Sea Fleet would be seen as direct military engagement with Russia, no?
Crispin Blunt MP attended the defence and summing up of Imran Ahmad Khan's trial.
He was not present to see any of the prosecution witnesses. The victim and his parents broke down in tears on several occasions when giving evidence about the assault and the impact it's had.
I am utterly appalled and distraught at the dreadful miscarriage of justice that has befallen my friend and colleague Imran Ahmad Khan, MP for Wakefield since December 2019. His conviction today is nothing short of an international scandal, with dreadful wider implications for millions of LGBT+ muslims around the world.
I sat through some of the trial. The conduct of this case relied on lazy tropes about LGBT+ people that we might have thought we had put behind us decades ago.
As a former Justice Minister I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare start to his Parliamentary career.
I hope for the return of Imran Ahmad Khan to the public service that has exemplified his life to date. Any other outcome will be a stain on our reputation for justice, and an appalling own goal by Britain as we try to take a lead in reversing the Victorian era prejudice that still disfigures too much of the global statute book.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
What do you mean *if it is proven*? You sound like Jeremy Corbyn.
It is in Ukraine's interest to get the West evermore deeply involved in this war
AND this is the Azov Battalion reporting this, AIUI (not the nicest people)
So there is very good reason to be cautious. That said, I can well believe this has happened, the Russians in Donbas were urging on this precise tactic this morning, to be used against the last hold-outs in Mariupol. No one has denied those reports
Therefore I fear this is likely true. We shall see
I was always a little sceptical about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, for those reasons. For the rebels proven chemical weapons use was gold dust, as it gets the west involved. I don’t know enough to say that this is bollocks, which it probably is. The Russians seem capable of anything right now.
It's not just that the Russians have escaped any bounds of morality, it's also that the use of Nuke/Bio/Chem weapons is in their interest
It strikes fear It wins battles It might cause Ukraine to surrender, or make a painful peace It goads the west, which Putin wants, so he can then turn this disastrous war into something existential It makes Russia the centre of attention, the country that must be supplicated
If you have abandoned any scruple, as Putin seems to have done, then this is entirely logical. What does he have to lose? We will not launch nukes at him, pre-emptively
Frankly it is time to take the gloves off. Anti-ship missiles and Migs to Ukraine. Europe needs to massively cut the gas too. Forecast for the Russian economy contraction this year now 11%. That's nowhere near enough. We should be aiming for 20-30%.
Time to sink the Black Sea Fleet?
No. But we should certainly be providing weapons to stop Russia blockading Odessa.
Amounts to much the same thing.
Hypothetically, how would you go about doing that? Air launched anti-ship missiles?
I was surprised it wasn’t mined to buggery in the run up to the invasion. Or maybe it was, and they just had no way to interdict the mine sweepers.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
I’m not calling for him to be punished, I just don’t think he’s helping tonight.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
I’m not calling for him to be punished, I just don’t think he’s helping tonight.
Yeah I was talking about Montie’s call to withdraw the whip.
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Whatever the truth of the matter, Tim Montgomerie is well out of order
If Blunt thinks there has been a miscarriage of justice, let him say so, and campaign for it to be reversed. That is not a sin, let alone a crime. What is this "withdraw the whip" nonsense?
People are allowed to find convictions unsafe, in their own eyes - especially MPs, who have the power to change minds. The Birmingham Six were wrongly convicted, and MPs campaigned to have that reversed, and they were rightly successful, in the end
There's history there. Blunt kick started the downfall of IDS, Monty's great patron.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Weirdly I thought the omicron wave was sharply declining in the states? Edit - worldometers supports that view.
BA.2 is taking over.
Maybe, but not much evidence in the case rates, or that masks will make any difference.
Having just had covid (I assume BA2) my sense was that people STILL don’t understand the changed rules here, almost certainly because of the shiteness of government comms. It’s all - rightly - now symptoms based. If you feel poorly, stay in, otherwise carry on as normal. But lots of people don’t seem to grasp this.
In any case, I’m glad I was late to covid and thus in the no-restrictions era, because it was all over in three and a half days, a moderate cold followed by a day (but only a day) of weird exhaustion. Then gone. No issues with destroyed taste or unstoppable coughs.
Is BA2 much different to any other Omicron strain?
I genuinely have no idea. Is there some query over this conviction?!
Golly
Doesn't seem to appreciate that 15 years old is off limits irrespective of orientation
Crispin Blunt doesn't strike me as a nutter, however. Eccentric but principled? He is saying this is an outrageous miscarriage of justice
What a mess. Who knows
He’d be better off keeping his thoughts to himself and helping his friend in private. It does no one favours for politicians to cast doubt on convictions in this way.
Absolutely not. The job of an MP is to take a stand where they believe it matters, surely? Otherwise they are just lobby-fodder. You might as well elect 650 versions of GPT3 to approve of anything the government does
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
I dislike a categorical statement of a miscarriage of justice without enough detail to allow me to come to a view as to whether I agree. It reminds me of the protestations made in defence of various convicted criminals by members of their family - it feels as though the defence is because of his friendship with the individual and not the facts of the case.
But we'll see. The appeal will no doubt be made and the details reported.
There's quite a long tradition of MPs supporting campaigns related to miscarriages of justice, but not normally involving the conviction of a fellow MP.
I have to agree with Leon here - he has a right to express the opinion if he genuinely believes there has been a miscarriage of justice, and the idea of withdrawing the whip just for that is absurd.
He may well prove deeply misguided - and his constituency party, or his constituents, have the opportunity to deliver their own verdict in due course.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
He was not convicted at the time, until a verdict is given then there should be no problem whatsoever in character references from those who know the accused in any civilised legal system
It's a response to the verdict: Statement on the Conviction of Imran Ahmad Khan MP
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
He was not convicted at the time, until a verdict is given then there should be no problem whatsoever in character references from those who know the accused in any civilised legal system
Mr Blunt didn't give a character reference as a witness in the trial, so "character reference" is not relevant.
Also, to condemn the trial before the conviction as a travesty etc. would be contempt, whether in court or outside, so your logic doesn't make sense.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
He is entitled to his view in a free country, just the jury took a different one with its verdict
There has been too much blather, to put it mildly, in this supposedly free country from the Tories on the courts giving wrong decisions = decisions they don't like in recent years. So you should not be surprised by people becoming sensitive to Tory MPs saying straight off like that that conviction x, whether in a judge or jury trial, is dud.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
He is entitled to his view in a free country, just the jury took a different one with its verdict
There has been too much blather, to put it mildly, in this supposedly free country from the Tories on the courts giving wrong decisions = decisions they don't like in recent years. So you should not be surprised by people becoming sensitive to Tory MPs saying straight off like that that conviction x, whether in a judge or jury trial, is dud.
In a free country you have the right to disagree with the legal judgement of a judge on the law or the verdict of a jury on the facts in a court of law.
However you also have to accept that is the court's and the law's decision on the outcome unless an appeal is successful
The news at 10 about violence against women in Ukraine is utterly horrific.
The people doing this are savages.
I’m afraid it’s been clear for some time that widespread atrocities have been committed, for which their leaders are fully responsible. Brutality towards men women and children, and mass murder, are deliberate policy.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Perhaps a crazy comparator, but was Chris Mullins sending a terrible message when he campaigned for the Birmingham 6?
He was an admirable MP (even though I disagreed with his political views) and a very nice man. I vaguely recall he had a very small cameo role as a vicar in the tv adaption of one of his books.
Weirdly I thought the omicron wave was sharply declining in the states? Edit - worldometers supports that view.
BA.2 is taking over.
Maybe, but not much evidence in the case rates, or that masks will make any difference.
Having just had covid (I assume BA2) my sense was that people STILL don’t understand the changed rules here, almost certainly because of the shiteness of government comms. It’s all - rightly - now symptoms based. If you feel poorly, stay in, otherwise carry on as normal. But lots of people don’t seem to grasp this.
In any case, I’m glad I was late to covid and thus in the no-restrictions era, because it was all over in three and a half days, a moderate cold followed by a day (but only a day) of weird exhaustion. Then gone. No issues with destroyed taste or unstoppable coughs.
Is BA2 much different to any other Omicron strain?
I had a look at the NHS guidance rules today as an acquaintance came down with the plague and we debated on txt what was going to happen.
The text is appalling. At the end of reading it I had no better idea of what someone who has symptoms or tests + should do. In fact, I had less idea. It is all over the place: stay at home, carry on, don't stay at home, keep away from vulnerables, but you can carry on as normal if you don't feel unwell, you might isolate for five days, then again perhaps it should be ten and so on and on.
I’ve stayed a member of the APPG on Global LGBT Rights against my better judgment mainly because I was determined not to be bullied out as a gender critical lesbian but chair Crispin Blunt’s statement tonight is the last straw. I’ll be resigning tomorrow....
Some politicians really need to learn they cannot substitute their own judgment for that of the verdict of a jury who have heard all the evidence.
If a Labour MP defended a convicted MP there would be outrage.
And there was, when Webbe was given a reference by Corbyn.
The evidence presented in the Webbe case was more cut and dried.
Were you at both trials? If not, how can you be sure?
At both trials a jury listened to all the evidence and found the defendants guilty. Absent a successful appeal or a mistrial, I don't see how we can decide that one trial had 'better' evidence than the other.
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
If a Labour MP defended a convicted MP there would be outrage.
And there was, when Webbe was given a reference by Corbyn.
The evidence presented in the Webbe case was more cut and dried.
Were you at both trials? If not, how can you be sure?
At both trials a jury listened to all the evidence and found the defendants guilty. Absent a successful appeal or a mistrial, I don't see how we can decide that one trial had 'better' evidence than the other.
Yup. Not for any of us to judge. He was found guilty by a jury of his peers. The Court of appeal will or will not be persuaded to take another look, but there’s checks and balances in place.
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
Crispin Blunt’s statement defending Imran Khan is leading to a mass resignation from the APPG on LGBT which he chairs - including @RhonddaBryant@StewartMcDonald and @joannaccherry
I would have lost money betting against Peter Bottomley being a member. Blimey.
Edit - By which I mean good on him.
Maybe he just joins anything. I seem to recall a story about him joining a new APPG, which was vital because they are required to have cross party support and he was the only non Labour figure.
Crispin Blunt may be an idiot, but I think we should be very careful about punishing people who speak out for others, even if such speaking out seems v daft.
The jury sat through a trial & passed judgement on Imran Ahmad Khan. This is an intervention from a law-maker defending a convicted child sex offender.
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
Perhaps a crazy comparator, but was Chris Mullins sending a terrible message when he campaigned for the Birmingham 6?
I think people are overreacting a tad, since I think others are right you are allowed to comment particularly as courts and juries are not infallible, so the more strident commentary doesn't quite hit the mark for me.
How he has commented, so fulsomely and without setting out any particulars of why he feels that way about from rather vague allusions, is more problematic than that he has commented at all, as it makes it look like just angrily defending a mate rather than some identification of a procedural or legal flaw in the case or of its evidence.
Comments
What the map does show that Birmingham is very much the centre point of the UK population.
British history is littered with examples of individual MPs who went against the grain and eventually won, even if others found them shrill, annoying or uncomfortable
This dates from the origins of the English Civil War through to Wilberforce helping to Abolish Slavery
If Blunt feels this way - and he claims he sat through some of the trial (which is more than anyone here did) - let him say what he likes (within the law), loud and clear
I would argue this is morally right whatever the cause, even if it is one I disagree with. It's like jury trials. I detested that acquittal of the statue-topplers, but I had to accept it. That's how juries work. Ditto MPs
Was a tad puzzled when I started evaluating his set-course dinner. Esp. as I was matching pix to text in wrong order . . .
I promise not to fly over and stalk you. I just love details
You're in Banyuls, yes?
https://twitter.com/medriva/status/1513579838342377473
But we'll see. The appeal will no doubt be made and the details reported.
There's quite a long tradition of MPs supporting campaigns related to miscarriages of justice, but not normally involving the conviction of a fellow MP.
"Frederick W. Kagan, the director of the Critical Threats project at the American Enterprise Institute:
“In my mind, it’s a tossup.” "
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/04/11/world/ukraine-russia-war-news
This is made worse by two factors: even demons can do good acts, especially if the acts self-serve their own interests. A classic example being Jimmy Saville's charity works. And the fact that partisanship means it is easy to think good of people in your own party, or bad of those in your opposition A trait, I must add, you do not generally fall into.
I have a lot of time for someone who quietly does charity work, which you only find out about after you have known them for a while. I get concerned about people who, when you first meet them, shout: "I DO ALL THIS GOOD WORK!"
(Again, not including you in that.)
Reading Blunt's statement he feels something very bad happened en route to this trial
"I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare"
Now, I have no idea if he has some insider info. Or he is just an angry gay Tory MP misguidedly protesting the conviction of another gay Tory MP
But Blunt is entitled to his view
FT View: It has been a long time since Britain had a foreign-policy success. Boris Johnson’s trip to Kyiv should be seen as marking one...
https://twitter.com/FinancialTimes/status/1513615430681653249
Feel free to humiliate me by explaining.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/11/melenchon-fans-in-his-paris-bastion-weigh-up-their-options
The theme is in the title - Melanchon voters weighing up what to do, not quite sure. But every single one of the Melanchon voters interviewed says that of COURSE they'll now vote for Macron. I'm used to journalists deciding their theme before they do the interviews, but this is really extreme.
Edit - worldometers supports that view.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/5093174/russian-soldier-rapes-baby-ukraine-war-arrested/
SEND MORE WEPONS, SEND THEM NOW, AND KEEP SENDING THEM
https://www.tracklements.co.uk/recipes/a-recipe-by-mark-hix-grilled-mackerel-with-tracklements-robust-wholegrain-mustard/
Lots of recipes. My suspicions are dispelled. Now I want to try it
If Blunt feels he can only provide details at a later appropriate point, a more measured statement at this time would have been better.
It’s called the Le Catalan, and yes in Banyuls. Its restaurant is Le Miradou.
This is the hotel website https://www.hlecatalan.com/
Again I have zero idea if Blunt is right, or wrong, or whatever. Presumably there will be an appeal and hopefully it will all be aired
The NYT state coved tracker is useful if you want to follow it: states Varey form +66% to -70% in a fortnight, but have little correlation to the rules in force in those states.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html
Average last 20 polls:
Macron 52.75%
Le Pen 47.25%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2022_French_presidential_election#Macron_vs._Le_Pen
Checking TripAdvisor I see it has the "traveller's choice" mark, and they are often really reliable - it means you will get something good, whatever the price bracket. And the punters love the restaurant in the feedback
I know nearby Collioure really well. We used to have weird family holidays there when I was but a lad. I loved the swim to the castle
The people doing this are savages.
I am idiot!
@olgatokariuk
·
1h
The only source reporting this so far is the Azov regiment. No independent/credible journalists are working in Mariupol now, so very difficult to verify. There were a lot of warnings earlier over Russia's potential use of chemical weapons in Ukraine
https://twitter.com/olgatokariuk/status/1513602545025011715
"I sat through some of the trial. The conduct of this case relied on lazy tropes about LGBT+ people that we might have thought we had put behind us decades ago."
What is the lazy trope? That LBGT Muslims are capable of trying to seduce 15 year olds of the same sex as them, when actually that is inherently impossible? It may be that the complainant is in fact a liar, but I don't see that believing what he says is evidence of being anti gay or anti Muslim
Crispin Blunt MP attended the defence and summing up of Imran Ahmad Khan's trial.
He was not present to see any of the prosecution witnesses. The victim and his parents broke down in tears on several occasions when giving evidence about the assault and the impact it's had.
https://twitter.com/harry_horton/status/1513623057771937799
Can’t see how he keeps the whip without withdrawing this.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1513625015895441413
I am utterly appalled and distraught at the dreadful miscarriage of justice that has befallen my friend and colleague Imran Ahmad Khan, MP for Wakefield since December 2019. His conviction today is nothing short of an international scandal, with dreadful wider implications for millions of LGBT+ muslims around the world.
I sat through some of the trial. The conduct of this case relied on lazy tropes about LGBT+ people that we might have thought we had put behind us decades ago.
As a former Justice Minister I was prepared to testify about the truly extraordinary sequence of events that has resulted in Imran being put through this nightmare start to his Parliamentary career.
I hope for the return of Imran Ahmad Khan to the public service that has exemplified his life to date. Any other outcome will be a stain on our reputation for justice, and an appalling own goal by Britain as we try to take a lead in reversing the Victorian era prejudice that still disfigures too much of the global statute book.
https://www.blunt4reigate.com/news/statement-conviction-imran-ahmad-khan-mp
https://twitter.com/CrispinBlunt/status/1513603624164859918
Aside from anything else, it sends a terrible message to any victim yet to get justice in the UK - of which there are many
https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1513614205974466566
If a Labour MP defended a convicted MP there would be outrage.
And there was, when Webbe was given a reference by Corbyn.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/may/01/conservatives.uk
In any case, I’m glad I was late to covid and thus in the no-restrictions era, because it was all over in three and a half days, a moderate cold followed by a day (but only a day) of weird exhaustion. Then gone. No issues with destroyed taste or unstoppable coughs.
Is BA2 much different to any other Omicron strain?
He may well prove deeply misguided - and his constituency party, or his constituents, have the opportunity to deliver their own verdict in due course.
Statement on the Conviction of Imran Ahmad Khan MP
https://www.blunt4reigate.com/news/statement-conviction-imran-ahmad-khan-mp
Also, to condemn the trial before the conviction as a travesty etc. would be contempt, whether in court or outside, so your logic doesn't make sense.
I don’t know Imran Khan from Adam.
Indeed, the fact that he’s a Brexity Tory MP disposes me to think he’s thick as fuck and not suited to public life.
I just think it’s weird that Crispin Blunt (another person I am minded to despise) apparently can’t express an opinion on the case.
I may have missed some very pertinent detail here.
However you also have to accept that is the court's and the law's decision on the outcome unless an appeal is successful
Brutality towards men women and children, and mass murder, are deliberate policy.
The text is appalling. At the end of reading it I had no better idea of what someone who has symptoms or tests + should do. In fact, I had less idea. It is all over the place: stay at home, carry on, don't stay at home, keep away from vulnerables, but you can carry on as normal if you don't feel unwell, you might isolate for five days, then again perhaps it should be ten and so on and on.
Some politicians really need to learn they cannot substitute their own judgment for that of the verdict of a jury who have heard all the evidence.
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1513633869429358597
At both trials a jury listened to all the evidence and found the defendants guilty. Absent a successful appeal or a mistrial, I don't see how we can decide that one trial had 'better' evidence than the other.
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1513636441770897416
https://www.appglgbt.org/members
Edit - By which I mean good on him.
How ungrateful they are!
How he has commented, so fulsomely and without setting out any particulars of why he feels that way about from rather vague allusions, is more problematic than that he has commented at all, as it makes it look like just angrily defending a mate rather than some identification of a procedural or legal flaw in the case or of its evidence.