Good morning! Keeping well here thanks, looking forward to the Eid holiday next week, although we are going to get some rare late spring rain in the next couple of days.
Thankfully the Ukraine situation appears better from a personal point of view, with the fighting now mostly confined to the south and east regions away from friends and family. We all need to not lose focus though, and keep the military aid flowing.
How are things with you?
Doing okay here, off the anti-depressants and back playing cricket!
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I agree David but I think the response has been careful and measured and will continue to be so. NATO could have just waded in and beat the shit out of the Russian Army but that would have increased the risk of nuclear response. Instead it is orchestrating the steady degrading of Russia's military capability, and the trashing of the Russian brand generally.
That seems sensible to me, even if it is tough on the Ukranians, who are on the sharp end.
Of course there is always the risk that Putin resorts in desperation to nukes, but that is always a risk as long as nukes exists and there are unstable and unwise leaders in the world, i.e. forever. You don't eliminate that risk however by backing off. That just encourages Putin and his like to press on and threaten whover they like.
So it's steady as she goes, but keep going.
I'm not sure that's right - we seem to be escalating step by step - from "only defensive weapons and intelligence" to "well, and some artillery" to "and some second-hand tanks" to "and maybe aircraft", while our political stance has changed from "defend Ukraine from the invasion" to "help them recover Donbas and Crimea", including the dubious claim from Wallace today that the Russians have broken the Minsk agreement (the Ukrainians never delivered the promised regionalisation, arguing that the agreement was made under duress). I appreciate that there are posters hear who feel that's exactly what we want, but countries like Germany and even France probably don't.
I've been in favour of helping Ukraine fight off the crazy czarist invasion from the start. But the overt gloating and increasing engagement and extending the war to the last Ukrainian and Russian is likely to lead to splits in the western alliance. We should commit as much as is needed to halt the continued slow Russian advance in the east, so Putin realises he's getting nowhere. Beyond that may be counterproductive, and boasting about it particularly so. In particular, it's odd that we're so keen to advertise our huge intelligence superiority. Isn't that better kept secret?
On the intelligence stuff - this is a deliberate policy, from before the the war started.
The reverse of the WMD Iraq secret squirrel stuff. Openly state what you know.
It has been very successful in making Putin & Co look like prats. And it must put a cold finger on the spines of various people in his system - they know the the specifics of what *they* do is being seen by unfriendly eyes.
Since the material is being given to the Ukrainians - why try and hide it?
I think this is different: They were initially releasing what they knew about Russia's intentions, which was extremely effective because Russia's plan was based on a bunch of false flag incidents, which were completely defeated by saying what was going to happen in advance.
What we've been seeing lately is the US/UK taking credit for successful *Ukrainian* attacks, including ones that seem like they probably didn't actually happen. If this is true it's not really obvious how it's helpful (beyond impressing journalists about how great a job their government is doing), although maybe there's some cunning misinformation game going on, or maybe since everybody knows it anyway there's no downside and you may as well be honest with the voters.
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I'm not massively worried about this on-brand bit of Truss talk (I doubt what she says plays heavily into the calculus of the Kremlin or Washington) but I would like to hear less from her on Ukraine. She seems to be driven largely by self-promotion for next Con leader, which isn't what you want when there's a war on.
Good morning! Keeping well here thanks, looking forward to the Eid holiday next week, although we are going to get some rare late spring rain in the next couple of days.
Thankfully the Ukraine situation appears better from a personal point of view, with the fighting now mostly confined to the south and east regions away from friends and family. We all need to not lose focus though, and keep the military aid flowing.
How are things with you?
Doing okay here, off the anti-depressants and back playing cricket!
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
As much as we want Russia pushed out of all Ukraine it’s not going to happen . No way will Putin accept anything less than total control of those eastern breakaways aswell as the land bridge to Crimea .
All efforts should be in protecting Odessa and that coastal fringe to the south west and securing the rest of Ukraine with more ability to stop missile attacks .
This might sound defeatist but seems IMO to be the reality of the situation.
Putin wasn't going to accept anything less than the fall of Kyiv.
What makes you think Putin gets a say in the matter? And please don't say nukes.
Bloody weird case. Seriously weird. I indulged a flight of fancy the other day about Boris defecating on the despatch box during PMQs and brazening it out while Sue Gray investigated, and this is a bit like that. It is eeeeuw behaviour but it isn't by most standards particularly immoral. It's not illegal (unless it is extreme porn in which case he is obv toast) and in fact contrasts rather favourably with his colleagues who molest actual women (unless he has been at that too). If he does go or get pushed, it's going to put Boris's failure to go under the spotlight.
I've had it with politics and public life. The way women are treated in the Commons, the language, the use of porn, the misogyny and lack of basic decency, 56 MPs from all parties accused of sexual harassment, the failure to do anything at all after the Dame Laura Cox report etc. I am just utterly fed up and disgusted with this constant brutish oafishness which far too many people in politics, in the police, in finance and elsewhere seem to think normal and acceptable.
I agree with @Cyclefree here. We have a real problem with this sort of misogyny in a number of spheres of public life, but Parliament does need to set an example, as indeed did MPs breaching covid rules.
The only rider that I would add is that we should not assume that all 56 cases are male on female harrassment. There may well be some female on male harrassment, and highly likely to be some homosexual harrassment in the 56 cases. Finally, of course some of the cases may well not be found to be authentic.
This MP was under a police caution when he was appointed to this panel. Why on earth did anyone think that he was even remotely acceptable as a member of this? Were those making the decision completely unaware of all the reports on child abuse IICSA have been writing? And what was in those reports?
We seem to have lost our moral compass as a society. Worse, we seem to think that the very idea of moral compasses is appallingly old-fashioned. That "I want, I get" is the only guide to follow.
Perhaps I overstate. But the idea of trying to do one's best, owning up when one gets it wrong and apologising for your own actions not for how others are feeling or making excuses and trying to do better the next time seems strangely quaint. And appealing. To me anyway. Could we try bringing it back perhaps?
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I agree David but I think the response has been careful and measured and will continue to be so. NATO could have just waded in and beat the shit out of the Russian Army but that would have increased the risk of nuclear response. Instead it is orchestrating the steady degrading of Russia's military capability, and the trashing of the Russian brand generally.
That seems sensible to me, even if it is tough on the Ukranians, who are on the sharp end.
Of course there is always the risk that Putin resorts in desperation to nukes, but that is always a risk as long as nukes exists and there are unstable and unwise leaders in the world, i.e. forever. You don't eliminate that risk however by backing off. That just encourages Putin and his like to press on and threaten whover they like.
So it's steady as she goes, but keep going.
I'm not sure that's right - we seem to be escalating step by step - from "only defensive weapons and intelligence" to "well, and some artillery" to "and some second-hand tanks" to "and maybe aircraft", while our political stance has changed from "defend Ukraine from the invasion" to "help them recover Donbas and Crimea", including the dubious claim from Wallace today that the Russians have broken the Minsk agreement (the Ukrainians never delivered the promised regionalisation, arguing that the agreement was made under duress). I appreciate that there are posters hear who feel that's exactly what we want, but countries like Germany and even France probably don't.
I've been in favour of helping Ukraine fight off the crazy czarist invasion from the start. But the overt gloating and increasing engagement and extending the war to the last Ukrainian and Russian is likely to lead to splits in the western alliance. We should commit as much as is needed to halt the continued slow Russian advance in the east, so Putin realises he's getting nowhere. Beyond that may be counterproductive, and boasting about it particularly so. In particular, it's odd that we're so keen to advertise our huge intelligence superiority. Isn't that better kept secret?
The sanctions etc should end when Russia with out of Ukrainian soil. Yes that includes all of the Donbas and Crimea.
We have always recognised all of the Donbas and Crimea as Ukrainian. Putin started the war, but we should help Ukraine finish it and that should mean Russia retreating out of all territory they've occupied including Crimea and certainly including all of the Donbas.
Why should we accept anything less than Russia out of all of Ukraine? Putin started this, but that doesn't mean he gets to risk-free try to seize territory and we won't help push him back to his own borders.
The real danger, surely, is when authoritarians believe their own propaganda about the lack of resolve of the West, it's short-termism, and its "decadence." Example after example in history. Hitler, Galtieri, Putin.
We need to do everything possible to break this apprehension otherwise we will never be safe.
Putin has to lose, and be seen to lose. It's the less risky option, although not without risk.
And the idea of "spheres of influence", ie, regions of the world where countries have no right to self-determination, because the local big-bully deems it inconvenient, needs to be disavowed. Otherwise they will always be trouble-spots, liable to blow up. So a pragmatic as well as a moral argument.
Liz Truss's speech is entirely justifiable. It had to be said. No more "business as usual" for all our sakes.
Bloody weird case. Seriously weird. I indulged a flight of fancy the other day about Boris defecating on the despatch box during PMQs and brazening it out while Sue Gray investigated, and this is a bit like that. It is eeeeuw behaviour but it isn't by most standards particularly immoral. It's not illegal (unless it is extreme porn in which case he is obv toast) and in fact contrasts rather favourably with his colleagues who molest actual women (unless he has been at that too). If he does go or get pushed, it's going to put Boris's failure to go under the spotlight.
I've had it with politics and public life. The way women are treated in the Commons, the language, the use of porn, the misogyny and lack of basic decency, 56 MPs from all parties accused of sexual harassment, the failure to do anything at all after the Dame Laura Cox report etc. I am just utterly fed up and disgusted with this constant brutish oafishness which far too many people in politics, in the police, in finance and elsewhere seem to think normal and acceptable.
I agree with @Cyclefree here. We have a real problem with this sort of misogyny in a number of spheres of public life, but Parliament does need to set an example, as indeed did MPs breaching covid rules.
The only rider that I would add is that we should not assume that all 56 cases are male on female harrassment. There may well be some female on male harrassment, and highly likely to be some homosexual harrassment in the 56 cases. Finally, of course some of the cases may well not be found to be authentic.
This MP was under a police caution when he was appointed to this panel. Why on earth did anyone think that he was even remotely acceptable as a member of this? Were those making the decision completely unaware of all the reports on child abuse IICSA have been writing? And what was in those reports?
We seem to have lost our moral compass as a society. Worse, we seem to think that the very idea of moral compasses is appallingly old-fashioned. That "I want, I get" is the only guide to follow.
Perhaps I overstate. But the idea of trying to do one's best, owning up when one gets it wrong and apologising for your own actions not for how others are feeling or making excuses and trying to do better the next time seems strangely quaint. And appealing. To me anyway. Could we try bringing it back perhaps?
Which leads to the conclusion. There are no enhanced DBS checks to sit on that panel. One rule for them... Red tape is for the little people.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
does this, and the fact Brazil are giving over 300,000 rounds of ammunition to the Ukrainians for the German-provided Gepard tanks, show a weakening of Russia's BRIC hopes?
That looks like quite a significant move.
I also think the decision of the Chinese drone manufacturer to stop selling in Russia and Ukraine is more important than many have realised. If the Chinese no longer want to sell civilian drones to Russia, because of their use in the war, then any prospect of them providing support in the form of military equipment would appear to be finished.
I think China can see the writing on the wall and value their western customers more than Russia write now.
Besides the war and the inflation it's causing probably isn't good for China either. China is a major energy and raw resource importer not exporter, so with the way Russia is losing, why get involved helping them?
I wouldn't assume that much: Making Russia dependent on Chinese stuff because their western competitors unilaterally withdrew works great for China, and gives them a chance to develop industries that might not initially been able to beat the international competition. I think this just shows that if individual companies decide they'd rather sell to Russia through middlemen or not at all to avoid getting wrecked by western sanctions, the Chinese government isn't going to force them to do it for some geopolitical reason.
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I'm not massively worried about this on-brand bit of Truss talk (I doubt what she says plays heavily into the calculus of the Kremlin or Washington) but I would like to hear less from her on Ukraine. She seems to be driven largely by self-promotion for next Con leader, which isn't what you want when there's a war on.
That depends very much on what your book looks like for next Con leader.....
Bloody weird case. Seriously weird. I indulged a flight of fancy the other day about Boris defecating on the despatch box during PMQs and brazening it out while Sue Gray investigated, and this is a bit like that. It is eeeeuw behaviour but it isn't by most standards particularly immoral. It's not illegal (unless it is extreme porn in which case he is obv toast) and in fact contrasts rather favourably with his colleagues who molest actual women (unless he has been at that too). If he does go or get pushed, it's going to put Boris's failure to go under the spotlight.
I've had it with politics and public life. The way women are treated in the Commons, the language, the use of porn, the misogyny and lack of basic decency, 56 MPs from all parties accused of sexual harassment, the failure to do anything at all after the Dame Laura Cox report etc. I am just utterly fed up and disgusted with this constant brutish oafishness which far too many people in politics, in the police, in finance and elsewhere seem to think normal and acceptable.
I agree with @Cyclefree here. We have a real problem with this sort of misogyny in a number of spheres of public life, but Parliament does need to set an example, as indeed did MPs breaching covid rules.
The only rider that I would add is that we should not assume that all 56 cases are male on female harrassment. There may well be some female on male harrassment, and highly likely to be some homosexual harrassment in the 56 cases. Finally, of course some of the cases may well not be found to be authentic.
This MP was under a police caution when he was appointed to this panel. Why on earth did anyone think that he was even remotely acceptable as a member of this? Were those making the decision completely unaware of all the reports on child abuse IICSA have been writing? And what was in those reports?
We seem to have lost our moral compass as a society. Worse, we seem to think that the very idea of moral compasses is appallingly old-fashioned. That "I want, I get" is the only guide to follow.
Perhaps I overstate. But the idea of trying to do one's best, owning up when one gets it wrong and apologising for your own actions not for how others are feeling or making excuses and trying to do better the next time seems strangely quaint. And appealing. To me anyway. Could we try bringing it back perhaps?
The ghost of Sir Thomas Dugdale (later Lord Crathorne) of Crichel Down fame, says hello!
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I agree David but I think the response has been careful and measured and will continue to be so. NATO could have just waded in and beat the shit out of the Russian Army but that would have increased the risk of nuclear response. Instead it is orchestrating the steady degrading of Russia's military capability, and the trashing of the Russian brand generally.
That seems sensible to me, even if it is tough on the Ukranians, who are on the sharp end.
Of course there is always the risk that Putin resorts in desperation to nukes, but that is always a risk as long as nukes exists and there are unstable and unwise leaders in the world, i.e. forever. You don't eliminate that risk however by backing off. That just encourages Putin and his like to press on and threaten whover they like.
So it's steady as she goes, but keep going.
I'm not sure that's right - we seem to be escalating step by step - from "only defensive weapons and intelligence" to "well, and some artillery" to "and some second-hand tanks" to "and maybe aircraft", while our political stance has changed from "defend Ukraine from the invasion" to "help them recover Donbas and Crimea", including the dubious claim from Wallace today that the Russians have broken the Minsk agreement (the Ukrainians never delivered the promised regionalisation, arguing that the agreement was made under duress). I appreciate that there are posters hear who feel that's exactly what we want, but countries like Germany and even France probably don't.
I've been in favour of helping Ukraine fight off the crazy czarist invasion from the start. But the overt gloating and increasing engagement and extending the war to the last Ukrainian and Russian is likely to lead to splits in the western alliance. We should commit as much as is needed to halt the continued slow Russian advance in the east, so Putin realises he's getting nowhere. Beyond that may be counterproductive, and boasting about it particularly so. In particular, it's odd that we're so keen to advertise our huge intelligence superiority. Isn't that better kept secret?
The sanctions etc should end when Russia with out of Ukrainian soil. Yes that includes all of the Donbas and Crimea.
We have always recognised all of the Donbas and Crimea as Ukrainian. Putin started the war, but we should help Ukraine finish it and that should mean Russia retreating out of all territory they've occupied including Crimea and certainly including all of the Donbas.
Why should we accept anything less than Russia out of all of Ukraine? Putin started this, but that doesn't mean he gets to risk-free try to seize territory and we won't help push him back to his own borders.
The real danger, surely, is when authoritarians believe their own propaganda about the lack of resolve of the West, it's short-termism, and its "decadence." Example after example in history. Hitler, Galtieri, Putin.
We need to do everything possible to break this apprehension otherwise we will never be safe.
Putin has to lose, and be seen to lose. It's the less risky option, although not without risk.
And the idea of "spheres of influence", ie, regions of the world where countries have no right to self-determination, because the local big-bully deems it inconvenient, needs to be disavowed. Otherwise they will always be trouble-spots, liable to blow up. So a pragmatic as well as a moral argument.
Liz Truss's speech is entirely justifiable. It had to be said. No more "business as usual" for all our sakes.
Yes. Although there is a counter-example which is the end of the Second World War. Germany had to be seen to lose. There had to be unconditional surrender, not just an armistice as had ended the First World War. The net result was half of Europe consigned to communist dictatorships, and the cold war.
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
Yep and the Tories didn't want to do anything about it until Conservatory candidates started appearing. The same guy stood the Winchester by election.
Have we done this? Can someone please rid us of this turbulent loosed lipped prat?
A former head of the Polish army has accused Boris Johnson of “tempting evil” by revealing that Ukrainian soldiers were being trained in Poland in how to use British anti-aircraft missiles before returning with them to Ukraine.
Gen Waldemar Skrzypczak, also a former junior defence minister, complained that a loose-lipped prime minister had revealed too much to the Russians and that his remarks risked the safety of the soldiers involved.
Speaking to Polish tabloid Fakt, Skrzypczak said that Johnson had revealed “a military secret” and that “bad words are on the lips” when he gave details of the Ukrainian training plan on a trip to India last week.
“Military training is a matter of the army, in such a situation secret. Let a man restrain himself and think before he says such things,” said the former general to the newspaper, which described his tone as irritated in an article from Friday.
“The prime minister may not be aware of it, but with such statements he puts the success of the entire military operation at risk, as well as the safety of the soldiers,” Skrzypczak said. “Such statements are tempting evil.”
On the visit, Johnson had revealed that Ukrainians were being taught how to use Nato-standard weapons in both Poland and the UK. “I can say that we are currently training Ukrainians in Poland in the use of anti-aircraft defence, and actually in the UK in the use of armoured vehicles,” he said.
Do you really think that the Russians don't know this?
It seems to me that the risk of this war spreading beyond Ukraine are increasing almost daily. NATO countries initially gave "defensive" weapons which proved surprisingly effective, mainly due to Russian incompetence. Now they are supplying heavy weapons and potentially even aircraft to help Ukraine recover lost territory. We have had the economic warfare of sanctions and the retaliation yesterday of cutting off gas supplies. We have the possibility of violence spreading to Moldova. We have military build ups on all the bordering NATO countries and the nordic countries wanting access to NATO's nuclear shield. We may even have special forces in theatre, the Russians certainly think we do.
Step by step we are being dragged into direct conflict with Russia. The betting is that a rational opponent, even one facing defeat on the battlefield, will not go nuclear just as the US didn't in Vietnam. But we do not seem to be dealing with a rational opponent. We are dealing with a paranoid, evil, potentially sick lunatic and I think we need to be a bit more careful about what we say and do than we are at the moment.
If somebody were going to write a novel about how a nuclear war wipes out civilisation then the events of Feb 24th to date are a fucking good Chapter 1.
Succinctly put!
The difference between this and Vietnam is despite the cold warrior nonsense from Dulles and the like Vietnam was not a threat to the integrity of the US. Russia very much believes that it is not only under threat but being actively threatened by countries with contiguous land borders.
It has been demonstrated that their "reformed" army is good at beating up those who can't shoot back but absolutely hopeless against NATO equipped forces.They feel defenceless, hence the reference to nukes. The same logic that got the Americans to bomb and destroy Cambodia applies to Poland and other NATO countries. We are gravely underestimating the risks here.
If you feel defenceless, the last thing you do is lose a chunk of the defences you do have on a disastrous attack on a neighbouring state.
They are right to feel more threatened. But only in the way that you would feel more threatened if you went and glassed one of the fighters at a WWF convention....
They have made horrific mistakes and acted in a vile and evil way. I am no apologist for Putin, he is a psychopathoc monster. They massively overestimated their capability and underestimated how much the Ukrainian army had improved, in no small part due to us.
But this is still a very, very dangerous situation and in our understandable desire to punish Russia for its mistakes we are in danger of sleep walking into a much wider war. We need a careful, measured response. Truss's speech, in my view, was unnecessarily inflamatory and unwise.
I agree David but I think the response has been careful and measured and will continue to be so. NATO could have just waded in and beat the shit out of the Russian Army but that would have increased the risk of nuclear response. Instead it is orchestrating the steady degrading of Russia's military capability, and the trashing of the Russian brand generally.
That seems sensible to me, even if it is tough on the Ukranians, who are on the sharp end.
Of course there is always the risk that Putin resorts in desperation to nukes, but that is always a risk as long as nukes exists and there are unstable and unwise leaders in the world, i.e. forever. You don't eliminate that risk however by backing off. That just encourages Putin and his like to press on and threaten whover they like.
So it's steady as she goes, but keep going.
I'm not sure that's right - we seem to be escalating step by step - from "only defensive weapons and intelligence" to "well, and some artillery" to "and some second-hand tanks" to "and maybe aircraft", while our political stance has changed from "defend Ukraine from the invasion" to "help them recover Donbas and Crimea", including the dubious claim from Wallace today that the Russians have broken the Minsk agreement (the Ukrainians never delivered the promised regionalisation, arguing that the agreement was made under duress). I appreciate that there are posters hear who feel that's exactly what we want, but countries like Germany and even France probably don't.
I've been in favour of helping Ukraine fight off the crazy czarist invasion from the start. But the overt gloating and increasing engagement and extending the war to the last Ukrainian and Russian is likely to lead to splits in the western alliance. We should commit as much as is needed to halt the continued slow Russian advance in the east, so Putin realises he's getting nowhere. Beyond that may be counterproductive, and boasting about it particularly so. In particular, it's odd that we're so keen to advertise our huge intelligence superiority. Isn't that better kept secret?
The sanctions etc should end when Russia with out of Ukrainian soil. Yes that includes all of the Donbas and Crimea.
We have always recognised all of the Donbas and Crimea as Ukrainian. Putin started the war, but we should help Ukraine finish it and that should mean Russia retreating out of all territory they've occupied including Crimea and certainly including all of the Donbas.
Why should we accept anything less than Russia out of all of Ukraine? Putin started this, but that doesn't mean he gets to risk-free try to seize territory and we won't help push him back to his own borders.
The real danger, surely, is when authoritarians believe their own propaganda about the lack of resolve of the West, it's short-termism, and its "decadence." Example after example in history. Hitler, Galtieri, Putin.
We need to do everything possible to break this apprehension otherwise we will never be safe.
Putin has to lose, and be seen to lose. It's the less risky option, although not without risk.
And the idea of "spheres of influence", ie, regions of the world where countries have no right to self-determination, because the local big-bully deems it inconvenient, needs to be disavowed. Otherwise they will always be trouble-spots, liable to blow up. So a pragmatic as well as a moral argument.
Liz Truss's speech is entirely justifiable. It had to be said. No more "business as usual" for all our sakes.
The big weaknesses of dictatorships are that (a) the people at the top are getting bad information. No one dares tell them that their armed forces are actually crap, or the people are starving, (b) they rely upon corruption to stay in power, but that means that money that ought to go on weaponry is being used to buy yachts and overseas homes (c) show is confused with substance - thousands of soldiers goose-stepping in unison look very impressive but are meaningless on the battlefield, (d) thinking for oneself is considered a form of mutiny.
It's the free flow of information, and the ability to criticise our leaders that makes democracies formidable when it comes to waging war.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
As much as you repeat your last sentence, his mps will be the arbiters of not only his future but theirs and the next few weeks may well be pivotal in the career of Boris Johnson
Posted this the other day. Elmbridge Conservatives are in meltdown from all I hear.
Not good for Raab or JohnO who is standing again next week
It would be interesting to here from @JohnO as I am only hearing stuff 3rd hand and what I hear isn't unbiased, although I suspect he won't want to comment on negative issues before the election. When John commented on his chances he was typicality modest here, but I got the impression he was fairly safe.
Goodness, this is a boring SCC Conservative Group Zoom meeting….
….Better I refrain from commenting on a former colleague but all is emphatically not what it might appear! There are certainly many vigorously contested wards this year with most Con defences as we had a spectacularly successful 2018. Here in Hersham, we are the only ones doing anything, including literature. But acutely aware of what hubris can bring in its wake, I’ll be cautious in predicting the outcome. Putative paper candidates can be mystically transformed into actual Councillors.
Good of you to respond @JohnO . It must be frustrating hearing us pontificating with significantly less knowledge than yourself on local issues (in my case 3rd hand LD sources who aren't exactly unbiased).
Once it is all over it would be good to hear a report from you on the Elmbridge election.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
I actually think you're right. The combination of economic bad times and a PM who cannot really be defended could (I say "could" not "would" as you never know with Boris) be fatal.
If the local elections are not too bad, I can imagine Tory MPs making a fateful mistake.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
As much as you repeat your last sentence, his mps will be the arbiters of not only his future but theirs and the next few weeks may well be pivotal in the career of Boris Johnson
True Big G.
But I think if they bottle this then they're in real trouble at the election.
If they do oust him they could still turn this around. I'm not sure there's that much 'love' for Starmer. Not like there was for Blair anyway.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
As much as you repeat your last sentence, his mps will be the arbiters of not only his future but theirs and the next few weeks may well be pivotal in the career of Boris Johnson
And then we get Truss
After her performance in the last 24 hours I would genuinely prefer Johnson
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
I thought it was flashy but far-fetched. Sophie was herself confessing to a criminal offence (perverting the course of justice) at the end. And, it was most unlikely that (a) the barrister would accept a case where there was such a massive conflict of interest and (b) not be recognised as Holly.
As to the government, it is not unusually unpopular. The Conservatives are polling about 8% better than in equivalent period of the 1992-97 Parliament, so I think a crushing defeat is unlikely.
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
Yep and the Tories didn't want to do anything about it until Conservatory candidates started appearing. The same guy stood the Winchester by election.
He stood in both 1997 Winchester elections. Wikipedia has him as Liberal Democrat Top Choice for Parliament in the GE and as Literal Democrat in the by-election. My recollection is that he was Literal Democrat both times. If his 640 votes the first time had gone to Mark Oaten, Malone would probably have given in a little more gracefully than he eventually had to!
We are worried about the Northern Ireland situation, we think this agreement could cause problems. We are worried too, but this agreement is the best solution available. Not sure we can sign this due to the risk of problems. If you don't sign this, then we can not have any agreement at all. How about a safeguarding clause? The deal gets implemented but if the problems we are worried about come to pass, then we can take appropriate safeguarding measures. If you can take safeguarding measures, then we will need the ability to do the same. That is reasonable. *Article 16 is added to the Protocol* OK with the safeguarding article in the Protocol we are happy with this agreement. So are we. *Deal is signed*
Scene: Present Those problems we were worried about are coming to pass, we may need to implement the safeguarding Article that was put in the Protocol in case this happened.
FBPE style Twitter etc: WHAT!? HOW DARE YOU!? YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW!? DID YOU NOT FORESEE THESE PROBLEMS WHEN YOU SIGNED THE AGREEMENT?
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
1997 was the peak for this.
Conservatory party Liberal Democrat Top Choice for Parliament standing against Liberal Democrats Bloke called Peter Rubery-Hayward changed his name by deed poll to Sir Nicholas Lyell to stand against err, Sir Nicholas Lyell Another man changed his name to Alice Mahon, to stand against Alice Mahon New Labour (nothing to do with Labour) standing against Labour
As much as we want Russia pushed out of all Ukraine it’s not going to happen . No way will Putin accept anything less than total control of those eastern breakaways aswell as the land bridge to Crimea .
All efforts should be in protecting Odessa and that coastal fringe to the south west and securing the rest of Ukraine with more ability to stop missile attacks .
This might sound defeatist but seems IMO to be the reality of the situation.
Putin wasn't going to accept anything less than the fall of Kyiv.
What makes you think Putin gets a say in the matter? And please don't say nukes.
Why is my car seemingly held down by some very powerful (though not irresistible) force to the tarmac on which it is parked? And please don't give me some yada, yada about "gravity."
Bloody weird case. Seriously weird. I indulged a flight of fancy the other day about Boris defecating on the despatch box during PMQs and brazening it out while Sue Gray investigated, and this is a bit like that. It is eeeeuw behaviour but it isn't by most standards particularly immoral. It's not illegal (unless it is extreme porn in which case he is obv toast) and in fact contrasts rather favourably with his colleagues who molest actual women (unless he has been at that too). If he does go or get pushed, it's going to put Boris's failure to go under the spotlight.
I've had it with politics and public life. The way women are treated in the Commons, the language, the use of porn, the misogyny and lack of basic decency, 56 MPs from all parties accused of sexual harassment, the failure to do anything at all after the Dame Laura Cox report etc. I am just utterly fed up and disgusted with this constant brutish oafishness which far too many people in politics, in the police, in finance and elsewhere seem to think normal and acceptable.
I agree with @Cyclefree here. We have a real problem with this sort of misogyny in a number of spheres of public life, but Parliament does need to set an example, as indeed did MPs breaching covid rules.
The only rider that I would add is that we should not assume that all 56 cases are male on female harrassment. There may well be some female on male harrassment, and highly likely to be some homosexual harrassment in the 56 cases. Finally, of course some of the cases may well not be found to be authentic.
This MP was under a police caution when he was appointed to this panel. Why on earth did anyone think that he was even remotely acceptable as a member of this? Were those making the decision completely unaware of all the reports on child abuse IICSA have been writing? And what was in those reports?
We seem to have lost our moral compass as a society. Worse, we seem to think that the very idea of moral compasses is appallingly old-fashioned. That "I want, I get" is the only guide to follow.
Perhaps I overstate. But the idea of trying to do one's best, owning up when one gets it wrong and apologising for your own actions not for how others are feeling or making excuses and trying to do better the next time seems strangely quaint. And appealing. To me anyway. Could we try bringing it back perhaps?
Which leads to the conclusion. There are no enhanced DBS checks to sit on that panel. One rule for them... Red tape is for the little people.
When the Labour government tried to introduce ID cards, complete with a database of all* personal information, they had a small problem.
The great and good (such as themselves) weren't up for the risk of having their data stolen. So their data was to be sequestered in a special database - not available to the police without specific authorisation.
*And completely accessible by anyone with authorisation. So a local council worker investigating recycling not being done properly could access all your personal data - easily enough to clone ID, commit fraud etc.
Incidentally @Nigelb as far as the Indo Pacific is concerned, yes us having military equipment there as deterrence and to protect allies there is equally a strategic UK policy and not something made on the hoof.
Did you miss the last Strategic Defence Review?
It seems some people are unhappy with Truss because they want the UK to have different objectives, not because Truss isn't furthering our stated objectives.
Was that the plan signed off by Ben Wallace to cut yet another 10,000 soldiers and invest in the white heat of the technological revolution filtered through whatever book Dominic Cummings had last read?
Seems to me through this conflict that British military technology is working pretty well and is far more use than x amount of soliders.
Russia has far more soldiers in this conflict than we do, but our technology like NLAWs are doing very well. What good would 10,000 soldiers be right now?
Technology and logistics is how 21st century wars are won or lost.
Our technology has worked extremely well because very brave Ukrainians have been willing to risk and lose their lives to use it. There will come a time when machines take over the battlefield but we are a long way from that yet and our army is currently too small in numbers to achieve much on its own.
It's also worked "well" because the weapons are being expended at a profligate rate. The Ukrainians have used tens of thousands of (free) ATGMs to kill 500+ Russian tanks.
Isn't that what generally happens in wars? You fire lots of expensive kit at the other guy's really expensive kit.
There was a picture doing the rounds on twitter the other day of the smoking remains of a tyre fitters somewhere in Lviv, with the comment that the owner should feel a certain pride that his shop was such a valuable target the Russians had felt the need to use a million dollars worth of cruse missile on it...
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
1997 was the peak for this.
Conservatory party Liberal Democrat Top Choice for Parliament standing against Liberal Democrats Bloke called Peter Rubery-Hayward changed his name by deed poll to Sir Nicholas Lyell to stand against err, Sir Nicholas Lyell Another man changed his name to Alice Mahon, to stand against Alice Mahon New Labour (nothing to do with Labour) standing against Labour
Nothing beats Auberon Waugh running as a Dog Lover, against Jeremy Thorpe, in 1979.
Life was shit. And then we got vaccines. And now life isn't shit. We can do things I honestly never thought we would again - gigs, parties, live sport. Because of vaccines. They don't stop you catching covid, but they do stop you dying.
Cookie - did you really think we would never do gigs, parties, live sport etc again? I assumed most people would catch covid and recover and have immunity. So a pattern similar to spanish flu, or even horrifically hte Black Death. I did have more faith that one infection would confer immunity for a fair while though and that the vaccines would be better at preventing spread. Covids current rate of evolution is huge, but it will be limited to some extent by the available workable mutations. You cannot infinitely change the spike protein and have it retain its function, for instance. Its also interesting that omicron is much more an upper respiratory tract disease than previous variants. Much more cold like (not saying its just a cold).
It looks like cases in the UK are crashing now (caveat - fewer tests going on) as the wave recedes and summer returns. Biggest questions will be do we all need boosters in the autumn and against what? A specific omicron or a broader spectrum, or even just original covid?
In hospital and admissions are heading down, quite quickly.
And at least half of those admissions are not primarily for covid either, something which dropped off the narrative a bit. Looks good for a while, pressure hopefully easing on the hospitals and the staff to get some decent time off over summer.
In an example of NHS rapid response to the Covid crisis, my mum (who has been in hospital for ~ 6 weeks, last three weeks on a rehab unit with physio-focus) was this week given a leaflet telling her that due to high Covid levels, if there is an increase then she might be booted out, either back home or to a care home. Caused a bit of unecessary stress...
Local cases there are also dropping well, as are hospital numbers, so I assume the leaflet is the delayed fruit of a decision to launch and publicise a contingency plan agreed probably a month or more ago and, now the crisis has largely passed, ready for action.
I can't imagine what the point of that leaflet is. Is she supposed to get better faster as a result? What action did they expect from her?
Indeed, it was really weird. Haven't seen a copy, but was reported in detail by my dad. All it did was shake her up a bit, she's had a rough few weeks being bounced round different units as it is, finally got to a place that seemed to be helping and was told (for no reason, at this point in time) that she might be kicked out at short notice. My dad spent most of the visit that day calming he down and quoting Covid stats at her to show that there was no reason for the ward to be comandeered for Covid patients.
I can see some point (in the event of it actually happening being a realistic possibility) in giving it to next of kin so that they can plan a bit, take measures at home etc to make home return viable (at this point for my parents this would be adding some hand rails and likely arranging some help) and share with the patient if they think it is useful. But to give it to the patients themselves not really helpful in that situation.
If she's speaking the UK's official position that's fine. But the Foreign Secretary can't spout her own views for attention on such a serious matter. It's contemptible.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
Yes it is a good drama I am 4 episodes into although the Bullingdon Club, which is what the Libertines is based on, has effectively gone defunct in the age of Woke and MeToo at top universities.
Should be pointed out though Blair was also a privileged posh boy who misled Parliament on WMD, they are not only Tories
Glad to see that I am not alone in my concerns about Liz Truss' trash talk. The Ukrainian war is too important and too dangerous to play with for internal Tory party political reasons. Truss is not participating in a radio phone in, she is our top diplomat.
It will be kite flying for the US policy - Britain can't make up foreign policy; even Truss is bright enough to know that.
If she's speaking the UK's official position that's fine. But the Foreign Secretary can't spout her own views for attention on such a serious matter. It's contemptible.
What makes you think that its not the UK's official position? The PM has said the same thing since the beginning of the conflict, what makes anything Truss said personal?
As much as we want Russia pushed out of all Ukraine it’s not going to happen . No way will Putin accept anything less than total control of those eastern breakaways aswell as the land bridge to Crimea .
All efforts should be in protecting Odessa and that coastal fringe to the south west and securing the rest of Ukraine with more ability to stop missile attacks .
This might sound defeatist but seems IMO to be the reality of the situation.
The idea that Ukraine/NATO are going to push Russia back to the 2014 border and Putin will just say, "LOL, k thx." is both risible and dangerous.
In a tight fight between the LD and Tories another candidate who is not a member of the Green party had their description of 'Independent Green' rejected. They are now standing as an Independent. Who is their proposer? The Tory Candidate!
I mean if you are going to try and split the LD vote, don't use your candidate to propose a competitive candidate. It is idiotic and guess what the LDs will expose you to the electorate as being devious.
@Sandpit at least we do it well. I mean it was utterly incompetent. No complaints with what they did.
@Sandpit This of course is one of the many flaw of FPTP. I wasn't critical of the Tories doing this. I was critical of their incompetence and boy was it incompetent. How useless do you have to be to use your candidate to propose. Having said that it is hypocritical that they defend FPTP and then exploiting a flaw in it that they deny is an issue. I didn't know about the LD stuff. Rather impressed, although I would prefer none of this happened and happy they are all exposed.
None can ever surpass the skullduggery of the "literal democrat" candidate in the euro election of 84 i think, in Devon I think.
1997 was the peak for this.
Conservatory party Liberal Democrat Top Choice for Parliament standing against Liberal Democrats Bloke called Peter Rubery-Hayward changed his name by deed poll to Sir Nicholas Lyell to stand against err, Sir Nicholas Lyell Another man changed his name to Alice Mahon, to stand against Alice Mahon New Labour (nothing to do with Labour) standing against Labour
As much as we want Russia pushed out of all Ukraine it’s not going to happen . No way will Putin accept anything less than total control of those eastern breakaways aswell as the land bridge to Crimea .
All efforts should be in protecting Odessa and that coastal fringe to the south west and securing the rest of Ukraine with more ability to stop missile attacks .
This might sound defeatist but seems IMO to be the reality of the situation.
The idea that Ukraine/NATO are going to push Russia back to the 2014 border and Putin will just say, "LOL, k thx." is both risible and dangerous.
It isn't up to Putin. If he loses the war, he loses it. He's our enemy not our ally.
By 2014 border you mean Russia's own border. Yes its entirely appropriate for Ukraine to push Russia back to their own border, with our aid. Indeed if Putin doesn't then surrender and end his war, it'd be appropriate for Ukraine if they so chose to push into Russia itself, with our support, until Russia surrenders. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
Should be pointed out though Blair was also a privileged posh boy who misled Parliament on WMD, they are not only Tories
Totally agree.
I never liked Tony Blair, and not because I'm one of those far Left loons. I always thought he was a bit phoney to be honest. If you listen to his speeches there's no real substance at all, and he undoubtedly had the luck to build on the stunning economic legacy of the Conservatives.
Just recently Blair seems to be talking a lot of sense which has unnerved me
While across Europe there are determined attempts to restrict the flow of energy from Russia, here in Estonia we have just seized over 2 tonnes of Cocaine headed the other way. The shutters have come done pretty solidly on all forms of trade and connections into Russia, it seems.
The comment from Liz Truss about their being a potential for a long war was greeted with a shrug here. "What exactly are the Russians going to fight with?" Their primary weapon of longer range artillery will now be matched by longer range, laser guided Ukrainian artillery. The Ukrainians now have not only more tanks but also, likely, more troops in theatre. The sense of panic in Russia is beginning to grow, and although the logical conclusion of the first use of nuclear weapons by Russia, i.e. that the attacking forces are quite likely to receive the same treatment is not discussed, I beleive is nevertheless now increasingly understood by the Russian kleptocrats. The ramping up of nuclear rhetoric is a clear sign that many in the Kremlin increasingly know that it is on the brink of conventional defeat. The attempt to provoke unrest in Transnistria was another shrug. "Only Russia, Transnistria and Gabon use these grenades, and we are not looking for any Gabonese". The Tiraspol government is not interested in losing the lucative smuggling business to Russian overlordship, and there is virtually no way that the heavily mauled Russian armed forces can get forces to their puppet state. Any serious attempt to attack Odesa is also looking beyond current Russian capabilities.
The massive nervous breakdown that has hit the ruling thugs in Russia is being compounded by a growing sense that Putin is actually too ill to care what happens next. The vicious brutality of the Russian forces is dissolving into a rabble as the butchers of Bucha are placed in points of maximum danger in order to eliminate the evidence. There is serious pressure on the Ukrainians, but they are generally holding firm and increasingly time is on their side, as they get new equipment and fresh, well trained troops. Even if Putin announced conscription on May 9th, that is more likely to provoke serious unrest in European Russia, where casualties have so far been very low.
We are not complacent and the next two-three weeks could well see dramatic Russian escalation, but the sense we are getting here is of a growing panic in Moscow. Estonia intends to hold firm and if NATO does too, then the numbers game does not favour the Kremlin regime.
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
As much as you repeat your last sentence, his mps will be the arbiters of not only his future but theirs and the next few weeks may well be pivotal in the career of Boris Johnson
True Big G.
But I think if they bottle this then they're in real trouble at the election.
If they do oust him they could still turn this around. I'm not sure there's that much 'love' for Starmer. Not like there was for Blair anyway.
I am not sure how this will play out and I just wonder if Rishi's poor budget comes from his real knowledge of just how bad the economy is
We are going into the late spring and then summer when heating can be turned off and while it is not inflation busting many will see increases in their wage packets from this month, and those earning upto £34,000 a reduction in their taxes from the 1st July
Rishi will be very conscious that the energy cap is to rise again in the autumn when intervention will be necessary, and by being prudent now he may have provided a contingency to enable him to use it then
This does not change Boris position, but if he survives the next few weeks, and remember I have forecast he will be out of office by the 31st May, then a cabinet reshuffle and a genuine blitz on the cost of living crisis in the autumn may change the narrative, but the constant problem in all of this is the war in Ukraine and Europe with still many unknowns and potentially very serious consequences
As for Starmer he is uninspiring and I simply have no idea how either he or labour will make the hard unpopular decisions that all governments, not just the UK, will face in 24 and going forward
My preference in all this is for Boris to be replaced and the conservative party resets itself, but at the same time I think we would be unwise if we discount the possibility that Boris may well win GE24 and with a majority
As much as we want Russia pushed out of all Ukraine it’s not going to happen . No way will Putin accept anything less than total control of those eastern breakaways aswell as the land bridge to Crimea .
All efforts should be in protecting Odessa and that coastal fringe to the south west and securing the rest of Ukraine with more ability to stop missile attacks .
This might sound defeatist but seems IMO to be the reality of the situation.
The idea that Ukraine/NATO are going to push Russia back to the 2014 border and Putin will just say, "LOL, k thx." is both risible and dangerous.
It isn't up to Putin. If he loses the war, he loses it. He's our enemy not our ally.
By 2014 border you mean Russia's own border. Yes its entirely appropriate for Ukraine to push Russia back to their own border, with our aid. Indeed if Putin doesn't then surrender and end his war, it'd be appropriate for Ukraine if they so chose to push into Russia itself, with our support, until Russia surrenders. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.
I've played 430 hours of Civilization VI and this how Ukraine can beat Russia. 🧵👉 1/24
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
As much as you repeat your last sentence, his mps will be the arbiters of not only his future but theirs and the next few weeks may well be pivotal in the career of Boris Johnson
And then we get Truss
After her performance in the last 24 hours I would genuinely prefer Johnson
Whilst an overall Labour majority is a huge challenge and Mike is right to say that punters are over-estimating the chances, this is not the same as saying it cannot, or won't happen. Nor is a hung parliament Keir Starmer's 'best hope.'
I've seen sea changes happen, and we are experiencing one. I rule out nothing right now, including a Conservative wipeout.
To get a majority I think Labour would have to get up to 15-20 seats in Scotland. I would struggle to see more than 5-10 tops at the next GE TBH.
I would say 10% chance of a Labour OM rather than 20%.
~30% chance of a Con OM seems about right.
My view is that when Scotland flips it will flip (sorry to be tautological about it).
If Scots sense a chance to eject the Westminster government and replace it with a Labour government with good SLAB representation then I think they'll take it - and we will see c.20 seats go.
Those will be centre/centre-left Unionists, sure, and also include some who vote SNP in Holyrood - because Nicola - but are desperate to see the back of the Tories in Westminster.
I don't think that Scotland will flip next GE. I think the only thing that would flip Scotland back to SLAB would be the SNP losing a further indy ref by a larger margin than last time.
I think "flip" is completely overstating it but I will be surprised if Labour does not take up to a dozen seats off the SNP in the same way as the Tories did in 2017. It is possible that the SNP might be compensated by recovering more seats from the Tories but they are not quite as dominant as they were.
Indeed. While I also doubt a flip (unless a gain of 10-15 seats counts and perhaps a lot of that coming from Tory switchers?), the SNP are weak on domestic issues, particularly education and local Government. Throw in ferries, general Government incompetence and this kerfuffle over Indy legal advice (where the ScotGov seem to be operating under the misapprehension that such advice was given to a private client) and you have the conditions for a big political backlash. The missing ingredient is the scandal that catalyses the whole thing into a coherent narrative and dumps it at the feet of the SNP.
My own view is that the people of Scotland are not daft, and for a sizeable chunk of the electorate the Union/Independence is transactional. If people feel they are better served outside the UK, then they will vote for independence. If they think independence will make them poorer, then they won't vote for it. This makes the SNP vote soft at the margins, which means that a decent opposition could do pretty well, especially if they can target the SNP's weaknesses.
Yes. This gets to the nub of it. Scots won't knowingly vote to make themselves poorer - which is what independence would do. Puts the SNP in a bind. The only way they can win is to BS monumentally about currency, debt, etc etc, - essentially lie and deceive. This is what politicians do, but a strain, all the same. And those not invested in Indy can smell it.
I think we are in a holding pattern still but, as has been commented, if there does seem a realistic chance of a Lab Govt at Westminster then we could see some movement in the Central Belt. In 2017 Corbyn took 6 seats off the SNP and a lot of other SNP seats had their majorities cut to wafer-thin levels. Lab lost them again in 2019, but it does show what could happen.
Though the Union is on the other side of those scales, and the case for it wont make itself, in my opinion. It benefits by being the incumbent, but if Scotland feels unfairly overlooked or like it is not a full part of the Union, then the Union will become increasingly distant and it's preservation will become a more difficult argument.
I agree on that last paragraph. The SNP's (and therefore, currently, Scotland's) best bet at national influence is through a minority Labour Government, reliant on the SNP. Remove that as a prospect and I think there will be movement away from the SNP.
I see it's that time of year when Unionists revert to seeing Labour as the saviour of the Union; comes round earlier and earlier.
Mysteriously many of them seem unconvinced that Labour would be the best option for English voters.
Or indeed Slab persons. Some of them seem to think that the Tories are the best choice for Scotland but not the UK. Or have become indistinguishable from Tories with Mr Sarwar's, in contrast to the late Mr Leonard (ret hurt), support (vide Aberdeen).
Can you imagine Mr Dewar or Mrs Thatcher tolerating that? Nay, encouraging that?
It's almost as if Scotland was hopelessly and radically different and getting more so.
While across Europe there are determined attempts to restrict the flow of energy from Russia, here in Estonia we have just seized over 2 tonnes of Cocaine headed the other way. The shutters have come done pretty solidly on all forms of trade and connections into Russia, it seems.
The comment from Liz Truss about their being a potential for a long war was greeted with a shrug here. "What exactly are the Russians going to fight with?" Their primary weapon of longer range artillery will now be matched by longer range, laser guided Ukrainian artillery. The Ukrainians now have not only more tanks but also, likely, more troops in theatre. The sense of panic in Russia is beginning to grow, and although the logical conclusion of the first use of nuclear weapons by Russia, i.e. that the attacking forces are quite likely to receive the same treatment is not discussed, I beleive is nevertheless now increasingly understood by the Russian kleptocrats. The ramping up of nuclear rhetoric is a clear sign that many in the Kremlin increasingly know that it is on the brink of conventional defeat. The attempt to provoke unrest in Transnistria was another shrug. "Only Russia, Transnistria and Gabon use these grenades, and we are not looking for any Gabonese". The Tiraspol government is not interested in losing the lucative smuggling business to Russian overlordship, and there is virtually no way that the heavily mauled Russian armed forces can get forces to their puppet state. Any serious attempt to attack Odesa is also looking beyond current Russian capabilities.
The massive nervous breakdown that has hit the ruling thugs in Russia is being compounded by a growing sense that Putin is actually too ill to care what happens next. The vicious brutality of the Russian forces is dissolving into a rabble as the butchers of Bucha are placed in points of maximum danger in order to eliminate the evidence. There is serious pressure on the Ukrainians, but they are generally holding firm and increasingly time is on their side, as they get new equipment and fresh, well trained troops. Even if Putin announced conscription on May 9th, that is more likely to provoke serious unrest in European Russia, where casualties have so far been very low.
We are not complacent and the next two-three weeks could well see dramatic Russian escalation, but the sense we are getting here is of a growing panic in Moscow. Estonia intends to hold firm and if NATO does too, then the numbers game does not favour the Kremlin regime.
Excellent as ever.
The point about the ethnic origin of many of the Russian troops is not often mentioned...
EDIT: I think it entirely possible that the Russians will carry on fighting a "broken back" war - with ever decreasing quality of equipment.
Has anyone considered the effect of cutting off Bolivian Marching Powder to Russian decision makers?
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
Yes it is a good drama I am 4 episodes into although the Bullingdon Club, which is what the Libertines is based on, has effectively gone defunct in the age of Woke and MeToo at top universities.
Should be pointed out though Blair was also a privileged posh boy who misled Parliament on WMD, they are not only Tories
Slow progress; Blair now 'misled' Parliament; he didn't 'lie' to it.
🇺🇦authorities have repeatedly reported on the forced deportation of Ukrainians, incl orphans, to Russia, in particular from Mariupol and Izium
Horrible. But that is why Western policy in Ukraine, ie to demilitarise Russia, is correct. This is what real life colonialism/ imperialism looks like. People tearing down statues of old colonial figures in the UK and complaining about 'colonial legacies', would be more productively occupied going to join the Ukraine foreign legion - fighting a real modern day colonial power that is actually engaged in mass slavery and genocide. The alleged 'historic crimes of colonialism' cannot compete with the abundant evidence of actual real world crimes going on right now, and circulating on twitter, etc. Decolonialism has a new front, and it is a good thing. I am totally with it.
I think you are mistakingly confusing people who are tearing down statues to do with colonialism, imperialism and slavery with people who actually care about colonialism, imperialism and slavery rather than people who can virtue signal without getting out of bed before the crack of noon
Finished Anatomy of a Scandal which I enjoyed greatly. A bit silly in places but a good finale.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
Yes it is a good drama I am 4 episodes into although the Bullingdon Club, which is what the Libertines is based on, has effectively gone defunct in the age of Woke and MeToo at top universities.
Should be pointed out though Blair was also a privileged posh boy who misled Parliament on WMD, they are not only Tories
Let's look at that Blair reference.
He did mislead parliament, but did he knowingly? You have no proof that he did. Whereas we know Boris has lied. Also even if Blair knew full well there were no WMD and used it as an excuse how does that make it alright for Boris? I wouldn't try that in court eg he murdered someone so I thought it ok if I did as well.
Which tells you what imbeciles the government are if they think that is going to work....oh dear I cant watch what I want because the government blocks it....oh well flicks on the vpn and watches it anyway. Politicians really are clueless dickheads who think saying something is the same as achieving something
Comments
Boris Johnson 'says he didn't break lockdown law by being at wife Carrie's 'Abba party' because he was there to interview one of her best friends for a job'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10761193/Boris-Johnson-wife-Carries-Abba-party-interview-one-friends-job.html
What we've been seeing lately is the US/UK taking credit for successful *Ukrainian* attacks, including ones that seem like they probably didn't actually happen. If this is true it's not really obvious how it's helpful (beyond impressing journalists about how great a job their government is doing), although maybe there's some cunning misinformation game going on, or maybe since everybody knows it anyway there's no downside and you may as well be honest with the voters.
Thank you, I hope you are keeping well.
Mysteriously many of them seem unconvinced that Labour would be the best option for English voters.
What makes you think Putin gets a say in the matter? And please don't say nukes.
This MP was under a police caution when he was appointed to this panel. Why on earth did anyone think that he was even remotely acceptable as a member of this? Were those making the decision completely unaware of all the reports on child abuse IICSA have been writing? And what was in those reports?
We seem to have lost our moral compass as a society. Worse, we seem to think that the very idea of moral compasses is appallingly old-fashioned. That "I want, I get" is the only guide to follow.
Perhaps I overstate. But the idea of trying to do one's best, owning up when one gets it wrong and apologising for your own actions not for how others are feeling or making excuses and trying to do better the next time seems strangely quaint. And appealing. To me anyway. Could we try bringing it back perhaps?
We need to do everything possible to break this apprehension otherwise we will never be safe.
Putin has to lose, and be seen to lose. It's the less risky option, although not without risk.
And the idea of "spheres of influence", ie, regions of the world where countries have no right to self-determination, because the local big-bully deems it inconvenient, needs to be disavowed. Otherwise they will always be trouble-spots, liable to blow up. So a pragmatic as well as a moral argument.
Liz Truss's speech is entirely justifiable. It had to be said. No more "business as usual" for all our sakes.
One rule for them...
Red tape is for the little people.
No Spoilers but they must have been pretty gobsmacked when partygate broke, long, long, after the script was signed off and they had finished filming.
What I think is so punchy are the comments about the privileged Oxford posh boys who went on to become the leading politicians. These particularly stand out:
"Your stories keep on changing … people of privilege can no more break the law without consequence than anyone else.
I’ve always let you curate the truth: pick and choose details so that they align with the world as you preferred it to be. It’s like a toy for you the truth. But you play with it through elisions, omissions and half-truths. You can’t help yourself."
I wonder if we are not yet under-estimating the crushing defeat the tories may suffer in the next General Election? There has never before been a Prime Minister found guilty of breaking the law whilst in office. He is a man wholly without principle. A privileged serial liar who thought he could curate the truth. To pick and choose the details so they align with the world as he preferred it to be. It's like a toy for him the truth.
When the campaigns begin he will be mauled. He is a total liability to the Conservative Party.
Like IndyRef2 in 23?
https://twitter.com/Motorsport/status/1519585368303190020
It's the free flow of information, and the ability to criticise our leaders that makes democracies formidable when it comes to waging war.
Once it is all over it would be good to hear a report from you on the Elmbridge election.
If the local elections are not too bad, I can imagine Tory MPs making a fateful mistake.
But I think if they bottle this then they're in real trouble at the election.
If they do oust him they could still turn this around. I'm not sure there's that much 'love' for Starmer. Not like there was for Blair anyway.
After her performance in the last 24 hours I would genuinely prefer Johnson
As to the government, it is not unusually unpopular. The Conservatives are polling about 8% better than in equivalent period of the 1992-97 Parliament, so I think a crushing defeat is unlikely.
My recollection is that he was Literal Democrat both times.
If his 640 votes the first time had gone to Mark Oaten, Malone would probably have given in a little more gracefully than he eventually had to!
We are worried about the Northern Ireland situation, we think this agreement could cause problems.
We are worried too, but this agreement is the best solution available.
Not sure we can sign this due to the risk of problems.
If you don't sign this, then we can not have any agreement at all.
How about a safeguarding clause? The deal gets implemented but if the problems we are worried about come to pass, then we can take appropriate safeguarding measures.
If you can take safeguarding measures, then we will need the ability to do the same.
That is reasonable.
*Article 16 is added to the Protocol*
OK with the safeguarding article in the Protocol we are happy with this agreement.
So are we.
*Deal is signed*
Scene: Present
Those problems we were worried about are coming to pass, we may need to implement the safeguarding Article that was put in the Protocol in case this happened.
FBPE style Twitter etc: WHAT!? HOW DARE YOU!? YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW!? DID YOU NOT FORESEE THESE PROBLEMS WHEN YOU SIGNED THE AGREEMENT?
Conservatory party
Liberal Democrat Top Choice for Parliament standing against Liberal Democrats
Bloke called Peter Rubery-Hayward changed his name by deed poll to Sir Nicholas Lyell to stand against err, Sir Nicholas Lyell
Another man changed his name to Alice Mahon, to stand against Alice Mahon
New Labour (nothing to do with Labour) standing against Labour
The great and good (such as themselves) weren't up for the risk of having their data stolen. So their data was to be sequestered in a special database - not available to the police without specific authorisation.
*And completely accessible by anyone with authorisation. So a local council worker investigating recycling not being done properly could access all your personal data - easily enough to clone ID, commit fraud etc.
There was a picture doing the rounds on twitter the other day of the smoking remains of a tyre fitters somewhere in Lviv, with the comment that the owner should feel a certain pride that his shop was such a valuable target the Russians had felt the need to use a million dollars worth of cruse missile on it...
I can see some point (in the event of it actually happening being a realistic possibility) in giving it to next of kin so that they can plan a bit, take measures at home etc to make home return viable (at this point for my parents this would be adding some hand rails and likely arranging some help) and share with the patient if they think it is useful. But to give it to the patients themselves not really helpful in that situation.
If she's speaking the UK's official position that's fine. But the Foreign Secretary can't spout her own views for attention on such a serious matter. It's contemptible.
Should be pointed out though Blair was also a privileged posh boy who misled Parliament on WMD, they are not only Tories
By 2014 border you mean Russia's own border. Yes its entirely appropriate for Ukraine to push Russia back to their own border, with our aid. Indeed if Putin doesn't then surrender and end his war, it'd be appropriate for Ukraine if they so chose to push into Russia itself, with our support, until Russia surrenders. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.
I never liked Tony Blair, and not because I'm one of those far Left loons. I always thought he was a bit phoney to be honest. If you listen to his speeches there's no real substance at all, and he undoubtedly had the luck to build on the stunning economic legacy of the Conservatives.
Just recently Blair seems to be talking a lot of sense which has unnerved me
The comment from Liz Truss about their being a potential for a long war was greeted with a shrug here. "What exactly are the Russians going to fight with?" Their primary weapon of longer range artillery will now be matched by longer range, laser guided Ukrainian artillery. The Ukrainians now have not only more tanks but also, likely, more troops in theatre. The sense of panic in Russia is beginning to grow, and although the logical conclusion of the first use of nuclear weapons by Russia, i.e. that the attacking forces are quite likely to receive the same treatment is not discussed, I beleive is nevertheless now increasingly understood by the Russian kleptocrats. The ramping up of nuclear rhetoric is a clear sign that many in the Kremlin increasingly know that it is on the brink of conventional defeat. The attempt to provoke unrest in Transnistria was another shrug. "Only Russia, Transnistria and Gabon use these grenades, and we are not looking for any Gabonese". The Tiraspol government is not interested in losing the lucative smuggling business to Russian overlordship, and there is virtually no way that the heavily mauled Russian armed forces can get forces to their puppet state. Any serious attempt to attack Odesa is also looking beyond current Russian capabilities.
The massive nervous breakdown that has hit the ruling thugs in Russia is being compounded by a growing sense that Putin is actually too ill to care what happens next. The vicious brutality of the Russian forces is dissolving into a rabble as the butchers of Bucha are placed in points of maximum danger in order to eliminate the evidence. There is serious pressure on the Ukrainians, but they are generally holding firm and increasingly time is on their side, as they get new equipment and fresh, well trained troops. Even if Putin announced conscription on May 9th, that is more likely to provoke serious unrest in European Russia, where casualties have so far been very low.
We are not complacent and the next two-three weeks could well see dramatic Russian escalation, but the sense we are getting here is of a growing panic in Moscow. Estonia intends to hold firm and if NATO does too, then the numbers game does not favour the Kremlin regime.
We are going into the late spring and then summer when heating can be turned off and while it is not inflation busting many will see increases in their wage packets from this month, and those earning upto £34,000 a reduction in their taxes from the 1st July
Rishi will be very conscious that the energy cap is to rise again in the autumn when intervention will be necessary, and by being prudent now he may have provided a contingency to enable him to use it then
This does not change Boris position, but if he survives the next few weeks, and remember I have forecast he will be out of office by the 31st May, then a cabinet reshuffle and a genuine blitz on the cost of living crisis in the autumn may change the narrative, but the constant problem in all of this is the war in Ukraine and Europe with still many unknowns and potentially very serious consequences
As for Starmer he is uninspiring and I simply have no idea how either he or labour will make the hard unpopular decisions that all governments, not just the UK, will face in 24 and going forward
My preference in all this is for Boris to be replaced and the conservative party resets itself, but at the same time I think we would be unwise if we discount the possibility that Boris may well win GE24 and with a majority
I agree on that last paragraph. The SNP's (and therefore, currently, Scotland's) best bet at national influence is through a minority Labour Government, reliant on the SNP. Remove that as a prospect and I think there will be movement away from the SNP.
Can you imagine Mr Dewar or Mrs Thatcher tolerating that? Nay, encouraging that?
It's almost as if Scotland was hopelessly and radically different and getting more so.
The point about the ethnic origin of many of the Russian troops is not often mentioned...
EDIT: I think it entirely possible that the Russians will carry on fighting a "broken back" war - with ever decreasing quality of equipment.
Has anyone considered the effect of cutting off Bolivian Marching Powder to Russian decision makers?
He did mislead parliament, but did he knowingly? You have no proof that he did. Whereas we know Boris has lied. Also even if Blair knew full well there were no WMD and used it as an excuse how does that make it alright for Boris? I wouldn't try that in court eg he murdered someone so I thought it ok if I did as well.