He does have some amusing moments. There was that occasion awhile back whena a journalist was trying get some detail about what Biden precisely meant about responding in kind to a potential Russian chemical attack in Ukraine. “I’m not going to tell you. Why would I tell you? You got to be silly.”
“The world wants to know?”
“The world wants to know a lot of things. I’m not telling what the response would be. Then Russia knows the response."
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
Different rules at different times.
Starmer and Rayner were also drinking in a social gathering in lockdown, little difference at all
You are embarrassing yourself here.
Case 1. Leaving do. Big piss up. Table weighed down with booze.
Case 2. A late evening take away curry. Washed down with a lager.
No difference?
Yes no difference, both social events of multiple people against the rules. The amount of alcohol consumed was irrelevant
Were the rules identical on Nov 13th 2020 (before the first vaccination and during a steep rise in cases) and in April 21 (when 50% of the British population had at least one vaccination and cases swiftly dropping)?
In April 2021 you were still not allowed to socialise indoors except with your household or support bubble.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
Different rules at different times.
Starmer and Rayner were also drinking in a social gathering in lockdown, little difference at all
You are embarrassing yourself here.
Case 1. Leaving do. Big piss up. Table weighed down with booze.
Case 2. A late evening take away curry. Washed down with a lager.
No difference?
Yes no difference, both social events of multiple people against the rules. The amount of alcohol consumed was irrelevant
Were the rules identical on Nov 13th 2020 (before the first vaccination and during a steep rise in cases) and in April 21 (when 50% of the British population had at least one vaccination and cases swiftly dropping)?
In April 2021 you were still not allowed to socialise indoors except with your household or support bubble.
Indoor hospitality was illegal at the time
And yet there we have Michael Gove advertised as the big pull to Tory activists in a pub at lunchtime.
Campaign events were legal. Your squirming just makes us laugh at your massive plank even harder.
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
Different rules at different times.
Starmer and Rayner were also drinking in a social gathering in lockdown, little difference at all
You are embarrassing yourself here.
Case 1. Leaving do. Big piss up. Table weighed down with booze.
Case 2. A late evening take away curry. Washed down with a lager.
No difference?
Yes no difference, both social events of multiple people against the rules. The amount of alcohol consumed was irrelevant
Were the rules identical on Nov 13th 2020 (before the first vaccination and during a steep rise in cases) and in April 21 (when 50% of the British population had at least one vaccination and cases swiftly dropping)?
In April 2021 you were still not allowed to socialise indoors except with your household or support bubble.
Indoor hospitality was illegal at the time
So - are you agreeing that Lee Cain's leaving do on 13th November was illegal?
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
Different rules at different times.
Starmer and Rayner were also drinking in a social gathering in lockdown, little difference at all
You are embarrassing yourself here.
Case 1. Leaving do. Big piss up. Table weighed down with booze.
Case 2. A late evening take away curry. Washed down with a lager.
No difference?
Yes no difference, both social events of multiple people against the rules. The amount of alcohol consumed was irrelevant
We don't yet know whether the police consider the Durham event to be against the rules.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
For hydro, substitute wind and tidal. The first hasn’t happened fast enough; the second has been completely and irrationally hobbled.
It turns out the entire energy market was a scam, with providers merely providing a kind of performative competition.
The UK seems to specialise in such fictions while maintaining that it is a deregulated, post-Thatcher paradise.
Care to explain why?
For the decade I have been advising people on reducing their energy costs, the single most effective measure has been to switch regularly - and we now have services to make it easy.
Often saves 25%+. Then generally as much again can be saved by low-hanging fruit of energy saving measures.
That's not working at the moment for obvious reasons, and the regulation has undermined the gains to an extent since about 2019.
There’s a more strategic issue though in that because spot was cheaper it encouraged the market to lean one way while not correctly pricing in societal risks
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”.
Even if the events were parties AND Boris *knew* they were parties that quote is not necessarily a lie.
All he is saying is he was “repeatedly assured” about something at a given point in time.
Is that really the killer quote / smoking gun?
But when he instigated the Cain leaving party. Attended. Led the toasts and made a speech. He knows that his statement "there was no party" is a lie because he was there.
He didn’t say “there was no party” in the quote above. He said “I have been assured there was no party”.
That’s not the same thing at all.
He Was There. He doesn't need to be assured.
Of course he didn’t. But the cute choice of words potentially allows him to wiggle out of a charge of lying. That’s all I am arguing.
Makes no difference - he deliberately misled the House on several occasions, whatever the terminological quibbling.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
He does have some amusing moments. There was that occasion awhile back whena a journalist was trying get some detail about what Biden precisely meant about responding in kind to a potential Russian chemical attack in Ukraine. “I’m not going to tell you. Why would I tell you? You got to be silly.”
“The world wants to know?”
“The world wants to know a lot of things. I’m not telling what the response would be. Then Russia knows the response."
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Well, hang on, if the output on this board consists of "baying opinions" which are of less value than the views of most people, why are you here? Some sort of sociological fieldwork deal?
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”.
Even if the events were parties AND Boris *knew* they were parties that quote is not necessarily a lie.
All he is saying is he was “repeatedly assured” about something at a given point in time.
Is that really the killer quote / smoking gun?
But when he instigated the Cain leaving party. Attended. Led the toasts and made a speech. He knows that his statement "there was no party" is a lie because he was there.
He didn’t say “there was no party” in the quote above. He said “I have been assured there was no party”.
That’s not the same thing at all.
He Was There. He doesn't need to be assured.
Of course he didn’t. But the cute choice of words potentially allows him to wiggle out of a charge of lying. That’s all I am arguing.
Makes no difference - he deliberately misled the House on several occasions, whatever the terminological quibbling.
This is the serious charge. But how is it to be judged? Surely by the House itself, not some quasi judicial process. Let the LotO bring a motion and get it passed. If that happened he would have to resign.
It seems quite likely from the report that it was his own lovable tail-wagger, which makes laughing like a drain a legitimate option.
I’m going with the “only a drunken shit like @IshmaelZ would laugh at the death of another human”
Why do you assume I am a human?
And, sorry, but if this story turns out to be: Man has throat ripped out by own lovable tail-wagger, it is as funny as fuck. Your sensayuma deficiency is not my problem.
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”.
Even if the events were parties AND Boris *knew* they were parties that quote is not necessarily a lie.
All he is saying is he was “repeatedly assured” about something at a given point in time.
Is that really the killer quote / smoking gun?
But when he instigated the Cain leaving party. Attended. Led the toasts and made a speech. He knows that his statement "there was no party" is a lie because he was there.
He didn’t say “there was no party” in the quote above. He said “I have been assured there was no party”.
That’s not the same thing at all.
He Was There. He doesn't need to be assured.
Of course he didn’t. But the cute choice of words potentially allows him to wiggle out of a charge of lying. That’s all I am arguing.
Makes no difference - he deliberately misled the House on several occasions, whatever the terminological quibbling.
Misled is a much better complaint because it includes the kind of sophistry that lets you wriggle out of a lying charge
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”.
Even if the events were parties AND Boris *knew* they were parties that quote is not necessarily a lie.
All he is saying is he was “repeatedly assured” about something at a given point in time.
Is that really the killer quote / smoking gun?
But when he instigated the Cain leaving party. Attended. Led the toasts and made a speech. He knows that his statement "there was no party" is a lie because he was there.
He didn’t say “there was no party” in the quote above. He said “I have been assured there was no party”.
That’s not the same thing at all.
He Was There. He doesn't need to be assured.
Of course he didn’t. But the cute choice of words potentially allows him to wiggle out of a charge of lying. That’s all I am arguing.
Makes no difference - he deliberately misled the House on several occasions, whatever the terminological quibbling.
This is the serious charge. But how is it to be judged? Surely by the House itself, not some quasi judicial process. Let the LotO bring a motion and get it passed. If that happened he would have to resign.
Are Tory MP's appearing in the media the only people who haven't seen these photos? I mean. I think it's overblown. But "having made no effort whatsoever to see what I am being interviewed about" is a pretty pathetic excuse. You'd be sanctioned if this was a DWP mandated interview for openly taking the piss.
Based on my brief experience of Job Centres, they are perfectly polite but require extensive documentation of everything, with no leeway given for any deviation or doubt. People who they judge are probably lying about anything lose their entire source of income and are held up in the Mail as "scroungers".
I won't prejudge the report, but I think we can reasonably prejudge the standards of the Mail.
For hydro, substitute wind and tidal. The first hasn’t happened fast enough; the second has been completely and irrationally hobbled.
It turns out the entire energy market was a scam, with providers merely providing a kind of performative competition.
The UK seems to specialise in such fictions while maintaining that it is a deregulated, post-Thatcher paradise.
Care to explain why?
For the decade I have been advising people on reducing their energy costs, the single most effective measure has been to switch regularly - and we now have services to make it easy.
Often saves 25%+. Then generally as much again can be saved by low-hanging fruit of energy saving measures.
That's not working at the moment for obvious reasons, and the regulation has undermined the gains to an extent since about 2019.
@Gardenwalker overstates the case, but the electricity regulation system in the UK has reduced the resilience of the UK to external shocks.
Right now, electrical generators are paid according to:
(1) How much electricity they produce, and (for gas, coal, etc) the market price for that energy (2) A capacity payment for dispatchable power
The idea of (2) was to ensure that there would always be enough power generation available in the even the sun was not shining and the wind not blowing. Basically, that slightly out of date plant might not produce a lot of energy a year, but this way the capacity payments ensured it stayed open (and available) rather being shuttered.
There was only one problem - which I identified in a white paper in 2015 - which is that the owners of these power plants didn't actually have to have any coal or gas for their plants, they only needed to have the plant.
What this meant is that - with the exception of the Norwegian supply contract - pretty much none of the UK's gas is on long-term contracts.
In the event that it became impossible to get LNG deliveries (because you were outbid by the Spanish), well, you might not be able to actually generate power, but you'd still get paid the capacity payment.
Yes- I follow that. Thanks for the detailed comment.
However the loss of resilience was a political decision in 2015-16 (?) that the country basically did not need strategic gas reserves. In essence the May (?) govt decided that we did not need an insurance policy.
A requirement on energy suppliers to keep a supply of gas would be another way to address that, perhaps.
Neither of which is about market failure, as they are political / regulatory decisions.
It will be very interesting to see what Brussel comes up with.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London is low rise compared to most US or Canadian cities, or Tokyo, or Beijing, or Hong Kong.
It is high rise relative to European peers.
IMO low-rise usually equates to nicer places to live, and high-rise the opposite. There are a few exceptions.
Different people value different things.
That's what makes the world great. On this board, most people prefer low rise, gardens, etc.
But I'm much more of an urban bod, and would rather be on the 32nd floor of a tower block in Manhattan or in the Barbican than in a three bedroom semi with a garden in Muswell Hill.
Having lived on the 20th floor all I can say is when the lifts dont work its a pain, when they do work they smell of urine and are littered with used condoms
Are Tory MP's appearing in the media the only people who haven't seen these photos? I mean. I think it's overblown. But "having made no effort whatsoever to see what I am being interviewed about" is a pretty pathetic excuse. You'd be sanctioned if this was a DWP mandated interview for openly taking the piss.
Based on my brief experience of Job Centres, they are perfectly polite but require extensive documentation of everything, with no leeway given for any deviation or doubt. People who they judge are probably lying about anything lose their entire source of income and are held up in the Mail as "scroungers".
I won't prejudge the report, but I think we can reasonably prejudge the standards of the Mail.
Yes. And. If you are sent for an interview specifically for a hospital porter, say. "Well. I haven't seen the job specs, so can't comment" even though they have been e-mailed to you. And are in every newspaper, website and TV channel. Wouldn't be a valid excuse. Your money would be stopped.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
I haven't. I don't form opinions based just on what I read here and doesn't the same go for you as well? I was completely open minded as to their reasons and that they might be right so hardly grounds for criticism. However I think there is a wide spread view Boris is toxic so it is a risk to take by Tiverton Tories to assume that is wrong.
The Tories have what looks like a good candidate who could win on her own credentials so why take the risk at tying her to Boris' apron strings. The LDs might have found it hard to target her. They now have excellent target material.
Off topic. But my youngest has just taken his first actual counting exam of his life He's well past 18. Was hugely stressful for him.
It will be very interesting to see how the students awarded grades the last couple of years compare to those who are graded by exams. My suspicion is that there will be little to choose between their performance at University. What will we do if the British cult of exams is shown to be a pointless distraction from learning?
Off topic. But my youngest has just taken his first actual counting exam of his life He's well past 18. Was hugely stressful for him.
He had an exam where he had to count to well past 18? And they say tests are getting easier!
I went on a date with a Goth girl. It went really well. She leaned over and whispered " Who's your favourite vampire?" I panicked and said "That one from Sesame Street." She giggled and said "He doesn't count." I had to mansplain and assure her he definitely did.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
Boris is doing a pretty good job at the moment. He's rather repelling the tide of socialist policy dressed up in blue that seems to be pervading the Tory party. He does need to go, but until someone else starts to make a case for sensible Tory leadership of a hopefully more sensible Tory party he's the best man for the job.
Edit: And this is definitely not the Steve Bakers.
I don't really think that's true. I think his Government (whatever his own true feelings are, which we never learn) seems to be exactly as you describe. Boris just doesn't take the flak for it because every now and again he declares something vaguely commonsensical, eg. that 18 stone hulks of testosterone with balls like melons shouldn't compete in women's shinty, and Telegraph readers get all excited. It's pretty thin gruel really isn't it?
Boris “is doing a pretty good job at the moment” is a staggering thing to hear someone say - i think it’s more like, why would someone want to be PM if they have no sane ideas how to lead the country forward? This is the first government in my lifetime without an economic plan and direction.
Well could have been worse could have been Corbyn who certainly had a plan and direction...merely a wrong one
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
So, yes, not most people.
Erm dont you vote lib dem which implies most people dont agree with you? well 90% or so at least?
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
I think you are misreading each situation.
Should Starmer and Rayner get FPNs it is for a technical misreading of the rules. When we were allowed back to work in our office we ate our supermarket sandwiches and drank our soft drinks whilst engaging in idle banter for half an hour over lunch. Perhaps technically I should have retired to the car and eaten lunch on my own. Millions of us did the same. The law might have been broken in Durham, but the spirit was not. The rules were hazy.
Johnson wrote the rules and on today's pictures was present, maybe not at a party, but a non socially distanced "piss up" involving multiple people when the rules stated just two to be present. He drove a coach and horses through laws he had drafted.
Starmer may well get an FPN and lose his job, whilst Johnson will not, but suggesting the two events are identical is ludicrous.
I also think the clamour tonight for Starmer to be issued an FPN because the police have embarrassed themselves by not issuing Johnson with one is a bizarre reading of justice in post-Brexit Britain.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
So, yes, not most people.
Erm dont you vote lib dem which implies most people dont agree with you? well 90% or so at least?
Don't get me wrong as I stopped voting in 2010 as I only get the choice con, lab or ld....but on the whole the not voting as they are all shit party gets 3 times more support than the lib dems
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
So, yes, not most people.
Erm dont you vote lib dem which implies most people dont agree with you? well 90% or so at least?
1) It was a joke
2) Most people not agreeing with me was the point of the second sentence
3) I voted Tory in 2017, and at the 2019 Euros funnily enough, where even fewer people agreed with me.
Fuck me, what a completely pathetic point, given that if they hadn't you'd be rebleating someone saying Hurhurhur no reference to Boris on tory Tiverton letters. Is a bit of quality control on your part just too much to ask for?
I think it is a fair point. It is well known that parties use pictures of their leader when popular and avoid like the plague when unpopular so this is an interesting development worthy of note.
So what does this interesting development signify, in your opinion?
Not a clue to be honest. Confident he is a net vote winner? Not confident, but cocked it up?
Really don't know, but interesting because I would assume they would avoid using his picture, but haven't so definitely interesting.
Tx. They think he adds to their chance of winning. Ishmael caught Scott with his trousers down.
I don't think Scott was caught with his trousers down at all. He makes a valid point because what has been done is counter intuitive for most people. I think most people including many Tories think Boris is currently toxic so it seems odd they are doing this. It could be that the Tiverton Tories are correct, but it is not what most people think.
You shouldn't confuse the baying opinions on this board with "most people".
Most people of sense agree with everything I say, naturally.
So, yes, not most people.
Erm dont you vote lib dem which implies most people dont agree with you? well 90% or so at least?
1) It was a joke
2) Most people not agreeing with me was the point of the second sentence
3) I voted Tory in 2017, and at the 2019 Euros funnily enough, where even fewer people agreed with me.
blinks I had you down as a rational person how did you have a moment of madness and vote for may or johnson? The sort of reaction I normally reserve for the type of person who says "I can gargle with my own vomit its my party trick"
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
I think you are misreading each situation.
Should Starmer and Rayner get FPNs it is for a technical misreading of the rules. When we were allowed back to work in our office we ate our supermarket sandwiches and drank our soft drinks whilst engaging in idle banter for half an hour over lunch. Perhaps technically I should have retired to the car and eaten lunch on my own. Millions of us did the same. The law might have been broken in Durham, but the spirit was not. The rules were hazy.
Johnson wrote the rules and on today's pictures was present, maybe not at a party, but a non socially distanced "piss up" involving multiple people when the rules stated just two to be present. He drove a coach and horses through laws he had drafted.
Starmer may well get an FPN and lose his job, whilst Johnson will not, but suggesting the two events are identical is ludicrous.
I also think the clamour tonight for Starmer to be issued an FPN because the police have embarrassed themselves by not issuing Johnson with one is a bizarre reading of justice in post-Brexit Britain.
The latest desperate Johnson cult attempt to explain all this tonight from right wingers seems to be focusing on a time factor which none of the rest of us were aware was in the law on covid.
So, Johnson attended Lee Cain's leaving do for a small amount of time where as others, who were fined, stayed longer. Johnson came, drank booze, made a speech described as ten to fifteen minutes long and then left. This is legal apparently because he stayed less time than others.
If Boris got 2 fines, he already has 1 with Sunak, then Starmer and Rayner definitely should get at least 1 too given the drinks event they attended in lockdown too
Please show your working out
As otherwise it would be police bias in favour of Labour and against the Tories. There was little to no difference between the social event Starmer and Rayner went to in lockdown and those Johnson and Sunak attended
I think you are misreading each situation.
Should Starmer and Rayner get FPNs it is for a technical misreading of the rules. When we were allowed back to work in our office we ate our supermarket sandwiches and drank our soft drinks whilst engaging in idle banter for half an hour over lunch. Perhaps technically I should have retired to the car and eaten lunch on my own. Millions of us did the same. The law might have been broken in Durham, but the spirit was not. The rules were hazy.
Johnson wrote the rules and on today's pictures was present, maybe not at a party, but a non socially distanced "piss up" involving multiple people when the rules stated just two to be present. He drove a coach and horses through laws he had drafted.
Starmer may well get an FPN and lose his job, whilst Johnson will not, but suggesting the two events are identical is ludicrous.
I also think the clamour tonight for Starmer to be issued an FPN because the police have embarrassed themselves by not issuing Johnson with one is a bizarre reading of justice in post-Brexit Britain.
The latest desperate Johnson cult attempt to explain all this tonight from right wingers seems to be focusing on a time factor which none of the rest of us were aware was in the law on covid.
So, Johnson attended Lee Cain's leaving do for a small amount of time where as others, who were fined, stayed longer. Johnson came, drank booze, made a speech described as ten to fifteen minutes long and then left. This is legal apparently because he stayed less time than others.
I think you are being to tribal here, general consensus I think amongst normal people is being an mp should be an arrestable offence as they are all doing shit that would get the rest of us locked up or fired.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
I think here in some ways you are wrong and some ways you are right. I think most masons would find the same things abhorrent as you and I which is where you are wrong. Where you are right is that from what I have experienced most masons will then go on to give the benefit of the doubt and assume is was an aberrant event and you will mend your ways now its been pointed out.
Right on covid modelling. Utterly deluded on parties...
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico I see everyone's now pretending this isn't obviously a work speech saying goodbye to a colleague. I've done loads of those. Dull affairs where we stand around in a circle at the end of the working day, holding a glass & remembering some amusing projects we did together.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3h Replying to @andrew_lilico All these matters were already investigated by the police & Boris was exonerated. Leave it now. You lost. You're just embarrassing yourselves at this point. Move on - there are so many genuine things to (quite properly) criticise Boris & his govt for! Why waste more time on this?
Has Number 10 deliberately sent Peter Bone and Desmond Swayne out to defend him as some kind of “burn down Paris” strategy, or are they literally the last men left in the bunker?
For hydro, substitute wind and tidal. The first hasn’t happened fast enough; the second has been completely and irrationally hobbled.
It turns out the entire energy market was a scam, with providers merely providing a kind of performative competition.
The UK seems to specialise in such fictions while maintaining that it is a deregulated, post-Thatcher paradise.
Care to explain why?
For the decade I have been advising people on reducing their energy costs, the single most effective measure has been to switch regularly - and we now have services to make it easy.
Often saves 25%+. Then generally as much again can be saved by low-hanging fruit of energy saving measures.
That's not working at the moment for obvious reasons, and the regulation has undermined the gains to an extent since about 2019.
There’s a more strategic issue though in that because spot was cheaper it encouraged the market to lean one way while not correctly pricing in societal risks
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
I think here in some ways you are wrong and some ways you are right. I think most masons would find the same things abhorrent as you and I which is where you are wrong. Where you are right is that from what I have experienced most masons will then go on to give the benefit of the doubt and assume is was an aberrant event and you will mend your ways now its been pointed out.
I have shown my working out. I have availed myself of the mechanics of Freemasonry reading both Yallop and Knight's books. I have also crossed the path of a number of nobs who wear masonic rings.
I am sure your intimation of a few bad apples applies, and the argument presented to me is masonry is all about charitable works. Fair enough, colour me skeptical, but secret societies, why? And anyway no thanks, and I have been approached.
Robert Reich @RBReich · 1h Doug Mastriano—the GOP nominee for PA Gov—is a Jan 6 insurrectionist & Big Lie conspiracy theorist. If he wins in November, he'll appoint the secretary of state, who will oversee the 2024 election results in one of the most important battleground states in the country. Be warned
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
“Can the prime minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November?” asks Labour’s Catherine West
“No, but I’m sure whatever happened the guidance... and the rules were followed at all times,” says the PM
Strangely, I remember that day very well. It was the day Mrs Foxy was redeployed to Intensive Care, pre vaccination. She came down with it a few days later.
Again his quote:
“No” relates to “can the pm tell the house whether…” not whether there was a part
“I’m sure.. guidance … and rules were followed” makes it his belief not fact.
He’s clever with words.
My view remains that it’s the political blowback among votes (eg Foxy above) that matters
It’s even more weaseling than that.
Catherine West asked “Will the prime minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November?”
“Will”, not “can”. The BBC have misreported it by claiming the latter.
Johnson replied “No.” Or in other words, “Shan’t.”
Has Number 10 deliberately sent Peter Bone and Desmond Swayne out to defend him as some kind of “burn down Paris” strategy, or are they literally the last men left in the bunker?
And I thought I was just watching Beavis and Butthead...
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
I think here in some ways you are wrong and some ways you are right. I think most masons would find the same things abhorrent as you and I which is where you are wrong. Where you are right is that from what I have experienced most masons will then go on to give the benefit of the doubt and assume is was an aberrant event and you will mend your ways now its been pointed out.
I have shown my working out. I have availed myself of the mechanics of Freemasonry reading both Yallop and Knight's books. I have also crossed the path of a number of nobs who wear masonic rings.
I am sure your intimation of a few bad apples applies, and the argument presented to me is masonry is all about charitable works. Fair enough, colour me skeptical, but secret societies, why? And anyway no thanks, and I have been approached.
I wasn't disagreeing they are bad just saying thats the mind set. My step father was a mason. His response to being told a mason was a pervert that liked little kids was not to report him but to tell him its unacceptable and needs to stop
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
I think here in some ways you are wrong and some ways you are right. I think most masons would find the same things abhorrent as you and I which is where you are wrong. Where you are right is that from what I have experienced most masons will then go on to give the benefit of the doubt and assume is was an aberrant event and you will mend your ways now its been pointed out.
I have shown my working out. I have availed myself of the mechanics of Freemasonry reading both Yallop and Knight's books. I have also crossed the path of a number of nobs who wear masonic rings.
I am sure your intimation of a few bad apples applies, and the argument presented to me is masonry is all about charitable works. Fair enough, colour me skeptical, but secret societies, why? And anyway no thanks, and I have been approached.
I wasn't disagreeing they are bad just saying thats the mind set. My step father was a mason. His response to being told a mason was a pervert that liked little kids was not to report him but to tell him its unacceptable and needs to stop
For hydro, substitute wind and tidal. The first hasn’t happened fast enough; the second has been completely and irrationally hobbled.
It turns out the entire energy market was a scam, with providers merely providing a kind of performative competition.
The UK seems to specialise in such fictions while maintaining that it is a deregulated, post-Thatcher paradise.
True, but more importantly, long term planning for reliable and economic energy generation was non existent. The failure to invest in large scale projects that only government could undertake was forever kicked into the long grass.
And I think we've missed our best opportunity to secure cheap funding for tidal - over the last decade we could have borrowed hundreds of billions, long term, at very low rates had the debt been government backed. It could likely have been paid off profitably from tidal electric revenues. That might not work if long term rates are too high.
Despite having a bit of fun with this myself upthread, I still don't care about partygate. I agree that Boris's time has passed, but not because of partygate.
Tom Harwood @tomhfh · 3h going to ride the purple train tomorrow just for fun. cannot wait!
As many of you have probably guessed, the Elizabeth Line has been rushed into opening in time for the Platinum Jubilee without it all functioning as one cohesive service.
So, from later this morning, the central section east of Paddington (low level) including the branch from Whitechapel to Canary Wharf, Custom House, Woolwich and Abbey Wood, will not yet be connected to Stratford in the east, and Acton in the west. Bond Street platforms are also not ready. But the connections and Bond Street should be ready "by the autumn". Hmmm,,, we'll see!
Also, if you're into trying to take pics of trains arriving/leaving at the stations from Paddington to Canary Wharf, as well as Woolwich - don't bother! Platform edge doors similar to those on the Jubilee line will prevent you having a clear view of the trains or the tracks!
Best places to see the trains on the section that's opening tomorrow are Custom House and Abbey Wood, which are out in the open. Also, there's a footbridge at Silvertown, near LCY Airport, affording views of the route.
Journey time is 29 minutes from Paddington to Abbey Wood. And the frequency is every 5 minutes. Not bad at all for a "main line" service.
Personally, travelling in from Ilford, I aim to change trains at Liverpool Street, head southeast to Abbey Wood, then visit each station on the way back to Liverpool Street, head west through to Paddington (low level), then visit the remaining two stations in Zone 1 (Tottenham Court Road and Farringdon) on the way back to Liverpool Street, thereby doing the route and all nine stations opening tomorrow.
Also, it's bound to be full of media-people and fucking Youtubers today, so I'm seriously mulling delaying my expedition until tomorrow (Wednesday) when it's bound to be less busy. But then, that's just me!
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today?
Paul Brant on ITV, who broke the story believes similar photos of the event are integral to Gray's evidence and the old bill were given everything she had.
It's a judgement call from the detectives, they may have deduced that despite half a dozen empty bottles of wine, sparkling wine and spirits alongside spent glasses, Johnson's ministerial box jauntily flung to the floor meant he was still at work.
You’ve made your point very clear - but what you just typed there, do you actually believe it? Alternately you can believe what the investigation lead said last week, the key determinant to each FPN issued was to be sure it was correct to issue (and not challenged and overturned) everybody in the media seemed to believe this meant was FPN by being in photograph. The point you are making in this mini discussion with me you yourself are admitting “similar photos to these” in other words “you are stonkingly right again MoonRabbit, until today the police have not seen these particular photos”.
I don’t want to come over all Sherlock, but what alerted me to it was the haste Downing Street hit the microphones this evening to claim “the police had access to all photos”
Moonrabbit, I am amongst other things a sad, low level masonic conspiracy theorist having been "tucked up" by a couple of Freemasons at work over two decades ago. So when I see egregious incompetence like Kenny Noye's acquittal for killing a police officer surveilling his premises because evidence was corrupted, and Noye was a Mason, or incompetent South Wales Police officers "losing" evidence to collapse the trial of the detectives who allegedly "fitted up" the men convicted in the Lynette White case, I ask the question "is Boris Johnson a Freemason"?
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
I think here in some ways you are wrong and some ways you are right. I think most masons would find the same things abhorrent as you and I which is where you are wrong. Where you are right is that from what I have experienced most masons will then go on to give the benefit of the doubt and assume is was an aberrant event and you will mend your ways now its been pointed out.
I have shown my working out. I have availed myself of the mechanics of Freemasonry reading both Yallop and Knight's books. I have also crossed the path of a number of nobs who wear masonic rings.
I am sure your intimation of a few bad apples applies, and the argument presented to me is masonry is all about charitable works. Fair enough, colour me skeptical, but secret societies, why? And anyway no thanks, and I have been approached.
I wasn't disagreeing they are bad just saying thats the mind set. My step father was a mason. His response to being told a mason was a pervert that liked little kids was not to report him but to tell him its unacceptable and needs to stop
What had to stop: the child abuse or the telling on other masons?
I just looked at my phone Photos for November 2020 ... at no stage do any of them look like this. Try it with your photos... if you can find a party with raised glasses you probably were a Tory politician or SPAD .. that's how bad it is https://mobile.twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1528835927279288322
Comments
“I’m not going to tell you. Why would I tell you? You got to be silly.”
“The world wants to know?”
“The world wants to know a lot of things. I’m not telling what the response would be. Then Russia knows the response."
This morning: Chief Secretary to the Treasury Simon Clarke says Sue Gray organised the Downing Street meeting https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1528668890951213056
This evening; The Times front page lead - Johnson called the meeting and demanded Gray drop her investigation https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1528847049747316739/photo/1
But there is no cover-up. Nothing to see. Tory corruption front and centre.
Barely a single voter will agree I think.
I'm very much looking forward to the by-elections.
Indoor hospitality was illegal at the time
Campaign events were legal. Your squirming just makes us laugh at your massive plank even harder.
No way should he get a FPN .
So, yes, not most people.
And, sorry, but if this story turns out to be: Man has throat ripped out by own lovable tail-wagger, it is as funny as fuck. Your sensayuma deficiency is not my problem.
I won't prejudge the report, but I think we can reasonably prejudge the standards of the Mail.
He's well past 18. Was hugely stressful for him.
And they say tests are getting easier!
However the loss of resilience was a political decision in 2015-16 (?) that the country basically did not need strategic gas reserves. In essence the May (?) govt decided that we did not need an insurance policy.
A requirement on energy suppliers to keep a supply of gas would be another way to address that, perhaps.
Neither of which is about market failure, as they are political / regulatory decisions.
It will be very interesting to see what Brussel comes up with.
If you are sent for an interview specifically for a hospital porter, say. "Well. I haven't seen the job specs, so can't comment" even though they have been e-mailed to you. And are in every newspaper, website and TV channel.
Wouldn't be a valid excuse. Your money would be stopped.
The Tories have what looks like a good candidate who could win on her own credentials so why take the risk at tying her to Boris' apron strings. The LDs might have found it hard to target her. They now have excellent target material.
Apart from Mail obviously.
It went really well. She leaned over and whispered " Who's your favourite vampire?"
I panicked and said "That one from Sesame Street."
She giggled and said "He doesn't count."
I had to mansplain and assure her he definitely did.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/may/23/decision-to-leave-review-tang-wei-stuns-in-park-chan-wook-black-widow-noir
Looks promising.
Should Starmer and Rayner get FPNs it is for a technical misreading of the rules. When we were allowed back to work in our office we ate our supermarket sandwiches and drank our soft drinks whilst engaging in idle banter for half an hour over lunch. Perhaps technically I should have retired to the car and eaten lunch on my own. Millions of us did the same. The law might have been broken in Durham, but the spirit was not. The rules were hazy.
Johnson wrote the rules and on today's pictures was present, maybe not at a party, but a non socially distanced "piss up" involving multiple people when the rules stated just two to be present. He drove a coach and horses through laws he had drafted.
Starmer may well get an FPN and lose his job, whilst Johnson will not, but suggesting the two events are identical is ludicrous.
I also think the clamour tonight for Starmer to be issued an FPN because the police have embarrassed themselves by not issuing Johnson with one is a bizarre reading of justice in post-Brexit Britain.
2) Most people not agreeing with me was the point of the second sentence
3) I voted Tory in 2017, and at the 2019 Euros funnily enough, where even fewer people agreed with me.
Tom Harwood
@tomhfh
·
3h
going to ride the purple train tomorrow just for fun. cannot wait!
So, Johnson attended Lee Cain's leaving do for a small amount of time where as others, who were fined, stayed longer. Johnson came, drank booze, made a speech described as ten to fifteen minutes long and then left. This is legal apparently because he stayed less time than others.
Cock up or conspiracy, who knows? But even this far from Scotland Yard the investigation from beginning to end smells rank.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
I see everyone's now pretending this isn't obviously a work speech saying goodbye to a colleague. I've done loads of those. Dull affairs where we stand around in a circle at the end of the working day, holding a glass & remembering some amusing projects we did together.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
3h
Replying to
@andrew_lilico
All these matters were already investigated by the police & Boris was exonerated. Leave it now. You lost. You're just embarrassing yourselves at this point. Move on - there are so many genuine things to (quite properly) criticise Boris & his govt for! Why waste more time on this?
https://twitter.com/ak92501/status/1528851863306752000?s=20&t=nuUwqDFUz6ARreG-uUg12Q
A state-of-the-art text-to-image generation model (like DALL-E) from Google Brain!
https://gweb-research-imagen.appspot.com/
I'm becoming obsessed with the Moldovan Eurovision entry. I've played it like a dozen times. And I need to stop.
But I can't.
I am sure your intimation of a few bad apples applies, and the argument presented to me is masonry is all about charitable works. Fair enough, colour me skeptical, but secret societies, why? And anyway no thanks, and I have been approached.
Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
1h
Doug Mastriano—the GOP nominee for PA Gov—is a Jan 6 insurrectionist & Big Lie conspiracy theorist. If he wins in November, he'll appoint the secretary of state, who will oversee the 2024 election results in one of the most important battleground states in the country. Be warned
https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1528849675347845120
Catherine West asked “Will the prime minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November?”
“Will”, not “can”. The BBC have misreported it by claiming the latter.
Johnson replied “No.” Or in other words, “Shan’t.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9RJQPZsj8E
Old skool train carriages.
Outstanding.
What more can I say?
https://twitter.com/benwansell/status/1528865347138633728?s=21&t=PRfkP1RMPreReWLz-WYKKg
So many Tories thought he was the Heineken politician. Now they are beginning to realise that Heineken tastes like piss.
@Dominic2306
·
1h
Bone is notoriously thick.
The MET has NOT said it was a 'work event', they've FINED officials cos they've defined the event as UNLAWFUL.
That's why the whole of SW1 is asking: why didn't MET fine 🛒 given a) MET defined it unlawful & b) photo proves 🛒 there drinking?
https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1528859842282233857
The jury is out on whether or not they are right.
Despite having a bit of fun with this myself upthread, I still don't care about partygate. I agree that Boris's time has passed, but not because of partygate.
So, from later this morning, the central section east of Paddington (low level) including the branch from Whitechapel to Canary Wharf, Custom House, Woolwich and Abbey Wood, will not yet be connected to Stratford in the east, and Acton in the west. Bond Street platforms are also not ready. But the connections and Bond Street should be ready "by the autumn". Hmmm,,, we'll see!
Also, if you're into trying to take pics of trains arriving/leaving at the stations from Paddington to Canary Wharf, as well as Woolwich - don't bother! Platform edge doors similar to those on the Jubilee line will prevent you having a clear view of the trains or the tracks!
Best places to see the trains on the section that's opening tomorrow are Custom House and Abbey Wood, which are out in the open. Also, there's a footbridge at Silvertown, near LCY Airport, affording views of the route.
Journey time is 29 minutes from Paddington to Abbey Wood. And the frequency is every 5 minutes. Not bad at all for a "main line" service.
Personally, travelling in from Ilford, I aim to change trains at Liverpool Street, head southeast to Abbey Wood, then visit each station on the way back to Liverpool Street, head west through to Paddington (low level), then visit the remaining two stations in Zone 1 (Tottenham Court Road and Farringdon) on the way back to Liverpool Street, thereby doing the route and all nine stations opening tomorrow.
Also, it's bound to be full of media-people and fucking Youtubers today, so I'm seriously mulling delaying my expedition until tomorrow (Wednesday) when it's bound to be less busy. But then, that's just me!
By err Turkey in Northern Syria.
Can even play muted
Should kill off those parasitic ear worms.
I just looked at my phone Photos for November 2020 ... at no stage do any of them look like this. Try it with your photos... if you can find a party with raised glasses you probably were a Tory politician or SPAD .. that's how bad it is
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1528835927279288322