Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
1) I’m sure you don’t want the Home Secretary intervening in operational Police Matters (least of all recent incumbents) and 2) Policing and Prosecution decisions in Scotland are matters for the Scottish Government - and the Lord Advocate who is a Minister in the Scottish Government - probably an even worse idea.
Er, aren't you a bit out of date? Mr Salmond revised the position so that it was no longer a ministerial role.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Disrupt how?
Storming into the building with weapons threatening to kill people to prevent the process happening, as Trumpists did on 6 January, should be a crime.
Peacefully saying words or holding placards in public, should not be.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Disrupt how?
Storming into the building with weapons threatening to kill people to prevent the process happening, as Trumpists did on 6 January, should be a crime.
Peacefully saying words or holding placards in public, should not be.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
You can have an ELECTED head of state if you really want it.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
Weren't Anglos Saxon kings elected? Then it all started to go wrong..
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
Exactly. It will need a republican remainer to sort all this out. What a shame there don't appear to be any of those around atm.
Pre-Truss, all the polls were pointing to a Labour majority. Electoral calculus still has Labour on 333 seats, or a majority of 16. Assuming that any Truss bounce is temporary, I think the price is a fair reflection on that.
In reality I think everything hinges on what happens with the economy over the next couple of years. If Truss is lucky, and the war ends sooner rather than later, and the cost of living crisis abates, it will be a Labour minority or she may even scrape home in a Major 1992 style narrow victory.
On the other hand if inflation remains a problem, the cost of living crisis fails to abate, unemployment rises and so on - given the Conservatives will have been in power 14 years there will be a strong "change" vote coupled with a lot of people who usually vote Conservative staying at home - people who can't see themselves voting Labour but who wouldn't really *mind* if Starmer got in.
The key factor here is the scale of the 2019 defeat was squarely at the hands of an enormous ABC vote - Anyone But Corbyn. I was certainly motivated to turn out and vote in 2019 as an "ABC" voter. That impetus will be gone in 2024.
I think that is fair but there are so many unknowns
A week ago the Queen died in an event of enormous magnitude that will continue to next Mondays funeral and then onto the coronation next Spring (probably)
The war in Ukraine is edging towards a defeat for Putin of some sort and again an end to hostilities would have huge economic repercussions
Furthermore, April 23 will see the end of NI and corporation tax increases together with the triple lock giving pensioners a 10% plus rise and possibly changes to personal allowances yet to be announced by the COE. Today's poll shows tax cuts and corporation tax cuts are popular with the public
I do not claim Truss will win in 2024 but Labour do need to accept this is not a foregone conclusion
Indeed. If the war ends and the economy bounces as a result, Truss will be a very lucky general and I reckon will score a 1992-like victory.
On the other hand, sustained inflation and business bankruptcies caused by elevated energy prices remaining a problem in 2023 and 2024, coupled with high interest rates and a corresponding fall in the housing market could easily see a "change" vote for Labour plus a lot of stay-at-home Conservatives.
Combined with the most recent polling showing a small Labour majority (assuming any Truss bounce is temporary), I don't think a 25% chance of a Labour majority is a particularly wild mis-price. As others have mentioned downthread, tactical voting in England could make a big difference and Labour and the Lib Dems have two years to figure out how to make this work.
Yeah... But the fact that labour is marooned with just a couple of seats in Scotland, and none in Northern Ireland, means that labour needs to substantially outperform 1997 in England and Wales to even eke out a majority.
Good point. Its scotland which is really screwing them, else they could be pretty confident.
Off topic, and just popping by, but I would like to claim a definitive way to determine if you are in The North or The South.
I bring you "The P/G Ratio", where P is the number of branches of Pret in a town, and G is the number of branches of Greggs.
P/G > 1 = South P/G = 1 = Midlands P/G < 1 = North
Someone with a lot of time on their hands could generate a map to illustrate this...
Brighton: 3 Prets, 3 Greggs. Midlands? Sorry, theory fails.
Hm. A quick Google reveals that there are 2229 branches of Greggs and only 460 of Pret in the UK. I proposed we need to introduce constant, Y, which is equal to 460/2229, or about 0.206:
PY/G > 1 = South PY/G = 1 = Midlands PY/G < 1 = North
That may work better?
Shouldn’t it be P/GY > 1 etc?
I don't think so. You'd naturally expect more Greggses* than Prets, so you multiply the Greggs number by the constant, which is less than 1, to make it smaller. But my maths may be wrong. My brain is addled from too many practice 11+ questions.
*Other plurals are no doubt available.
I just assumed that P= Pret and G = Greggs… my formulation multiplies the number of Greggs by the constant
I don’t understand what he is complaining about? The Paddington bears being included with the flowers?
I think it refers to a gormless royal commentator/expert (of which there appears to be thousands out in the wild) opining that the late queen did a marvellous job acting in the Paddington sketch because 'there wasn't a real Paddington bear there you know'.
That’s like complaining about the weird shopping channel on TV where orange people advertise ridiculous products. Complaining that the presenters are orange and advertising ridiculous products, no less.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Yes, I cannot think of any prominent figures who were Republicans and changed their minds.
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
ISTR that the British state did rather a lot of direct interfering in the German constitution well within the last reign. Though I'm not sure that proves anything.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
You can have an ELECTED head of state if you really want it.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Yes, I cannot think of any prominent figures who were Republicans and changed their minds.
Scottish Tories, Labour cabinet ministers, even Tory prime ministers ...
Not exactly. It's an odd thing about Russia. We think of it as a monolithic state where any sign of disagreement gets you locked up. It's not. it's an autocracy in which it's easy for the Government to lock you up if it wants to. Oddly, that's actually more unnerving in some ways than a dictatorship that lays down exactly what you can say. My mother's family left Russia in the 20s not because they disapproved of the Revolution - a very apolitical family, they agreed czarism had been a failure and they vaguely wished the new lot well - but because it was becoming dangerous to have no opinion - you had to have the opinion du jour.
But, from time to time - especially now - people break ranks and speak up, either thinking that they'll probably be tolerated or that it's so important that they can't remain silent. Also, there are in any case perfectly legal opponents elected - the Government rigs the system so they don't win a majority, and quite likely they wouldn't anyway, but they do exist, and probably these deputies were among them.
The problem for the autocrats is deciding when it's best to lock people up and when to smile vaguely and ignore them - and, just occasionally, to listen to them. A bit of listening would be a good idea right now,
People seem to have a surprising amount of personal freedom in Russia, within the constraints of this managed system where it is never quite clear where the boundaries are.
I think that the authorities can create a lot of problems for you in the UK if they so decide, but the judiciary is still independent so they can't just haul you off to jail, or carry out extra judicial executions, etc; and this is a major advantage. Also, the police can't just beat you up, you have all these rights when dealing with the authorities (although obviously governments always try and find reasons to cut these back).
My concern however is that freedom to speak on certain issues (like women's rights, racial differences) is actually now far more constrained in the UK than it is in places like Russia.
Pre-Truss, all the polls were pointing to a Labour majority. Electoral calculus still has Labour on 333 seats, or a majority of 16. Assuming that any Truss bounce is temporary, I think the price is a fair reflection on that.
In reality I think everything hinges on what happens with the economy over the next couple of years. If Truss is lucky, and the war ends sooner rather than later, and the cost of living crisis abates, it will be a Labour minority or she may even scrape home in a Major 1992 style narrow victory.
On the other hand if inflation remains a problem, the cost of living crisis fails to abate, unemployment rises and so on - given the Conservatives will have been in power 14 years there will be a strong "change" vote coupled with a lot of people who usually vote Conservative staying at home - people who can't see themselves voting Labour but who wouldn't really *mind* if Starmer got in.
The key factor here is the scale of the 2019 defeat was squarely at the hands of an enormous ABC vote - Anyone But Corbyn. I was certainly motivated to turn out and vote in 2019 as an "ABC" voter. That impetus will be gone in 2024.
I think that is fair but there are so many unknowns
A week ago the Queen died in an event of enormous magnitude that will continue to next Mondays funeral and then onto the coronation next Spring (probably)
The war in Ukraine is edging towards a defeat for Putin of some sort and again an end to hostilities would have huge economic repercussions
Furthermore, April 23 will see the end of NI and corporation tax increases together with the triple lock giving pensioners a 10% plus rise and possibly changes to personal allowances yet to be announced by the COE. Today's poll shows tax cuts and corporation tax cuts are popular with the public
I do not claim Truss will win in 2024 but Labour do need to accept this is not a foregone conclusion
Indeed. If the war ends and the economy bounces as a result, Truss will be a very lucky general and I reckon will score a 1992-like victory.
On the other hand, sustained inflation and business bankruptcies caused by elevated energy prices remaining a problem in 2023 and 2024, coupled with high interest rates and a corresponding fall in the housing market could easily see a "change" vote for Labour plus a lot of stay-at-home Conservatives.
Combined with the most recent polling showing a small Labour majority (assuming any Truss bounce is temporary), I don't think a 25% chance of a Labour majority is a particularly wild mis-price. As others have mentioned downthread, tactical voting in England could make a big difference and Labour and the Lib Dems have two years to figure out how to make this work.
Yeah... But the fact that labour is marooned with just a couple of seats in Scotland, and none in Northern Ireland, means that labour needs to substantially outperform 1997 in England and Wales to even eke out a majority.
Good point. Its scotland which is really screwing them, else they could be pretty confident.
I wonder if Labour will ever realise that Scotland could prevent them gaining a majority because instead of trying to win back their former voters who switched to the SNP, and who turned away from Labour because of their views on independence, they are fighting the Tories for the unionist vote, like two bald men fighting over a comb.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
You really think everyone who voted conservative in 2019 was a monarchist
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
It was not remotely justified by existing laws. extinct legal regimes are irrelevant - though your apparent continued penchant for their revival is not to your credit.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
You really think everyone who voted conservative in 2019 was a monarchist
Delusional
61% of republicans vote Labour, though even Starmer now backs a reformed monarchy
Pre-Truss, all the polls were pointing to a Labour majority. Electoral calculus still has Labour on 333 seats, or a majority of 16. Assuming that any Truss bounce is temporary, I think the price is a fair reflection on that.
In reality I think everything hinges on what happens with the economy over the next couple of years. If Truss is lucky, and the war ends sooner rather than later, and the cost of living crisis abates, it will be a Labour minority or she may even scrape home in a Major 1992 style narrow victory.
On the other hand if inflation remains a problem, the cost of living crisis fails to abate, unemployment rises and so on - given the Conservatives will have been in power 14 years there will be a strong "change" vote coupled with a lot of people who usually vote Conservative staying at home - people who can't see themselves voting Labour but who wouldn't really *mind* if Starmer got in.
The key factor here is the scale of the 2019 defeat was squarely at the hands of an enormous ABC vote - Anyone But Corbyn. I was certainly motivated to turn out and vote in 2019 as an "ABC" voter. That impetus will be gone in 2024.
I think that is fair but there are so many unknowns
A week ago the Queen died in an event of enormous magnitude that will continue to next Mondays funeral and then onto the coronation next Spring (probably)
The war in Ukraine is edging towards a defeat for Putin of some sort and again an end to hostilities would have huge economic repercussions
Furthermore, April 23 will see the end of NI and corporation tax increases together with the triple lock giving pensioners a 10% plus rise and possibly changes to personal allowances yet to be announced by the COE. Today's poll shows tax cuts and corporation tax cuts are popular with the public
I do not claim Truss will win in 2024 but Labour do need to accept this is not a foregone conclusion
Indeed. If the war ends and the economy bounces as a result, Truss will be a very lucky general and I reckon will score a 1992-like victory.
On the other hand, sustained inflation and business bankruptcies caused by elevated energy prices remaining a problem in 2023 and 2024, coupled with high interest rates and a corresponding fall in the housing market could easily see a "change" vote for Labour plus a lot of stay-at-home Conservatives.
Combined with the most recent polling showing a small Labour majority (assuming any Truss bounce is temporary), I don't think a 25% chance of a Labour majority is a particularly wild mis-price. As others have mentioned downthread, tactical voting in England could make a big difference and Labour and the Lib Dems have two years to figure out how to make this work.
Yeah... But the fact that labour is marooned with just a couple of seats in Scotland, and none in Northern Ireland, means that labour needs to substantially outperform 1997 in England and Wales to even eke out a majority.
Good point. Its scotland which is really screwing them, else they could be pretty confident.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
It was not remotely justified by existing laws. extinct legal regimes are irrelevant - though your apparent continued penchant for their revival is not to your credit.
He does get muddled about extinct regimes, not least the illegality of treason prosecutions in Scotland before a panicked catchup in 1848 (think Queen V was taking a train or something and they were worried about it).
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Yes, I cannot think of any prominent figures who were Republicans and changed their minds.
To become leader of the Tories that was a necessity, I doubt any of the protestors want to lead the Tory party
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
Weren't Anglos Saxon kings elected? Then it all started to go wrong..
Bloody French!
(I’d argue “ratified” rather than elected but there was an element of choice by members of the Bretwalda)
St Giles is where Charles I reign started to come undone. His Ill-advised attempt to impose a Common Prayer Book resulted in a riot with the wifies of Edinburgh pelting the pulpit with prayer stools shouting “the diel is come among us” ultimately leading to the “War of the Three Kingdoms” (or “English” (sic) Civil War).
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Armchair generals, chickenhawks, people who give it large on the internet and seem to see Ukraine as a proxy for their own psychodramas, often with a EUrophobic streak running through it all.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
You really think everyone who voted conservative in 2019 was a monarchist
Delusional
61% of republicans vote Labour, though even Starmer now backs a reformed monarchy
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Yes, I cannot think of any prominent figures who were Republicans and changed their minds.
To become leader of the Tories that was a necessity, I doubt any of the protestors want to lead the Tory party
Ah so to become leader of the Tories you need to forego your principles and say whatever is expedient to achieve personal gain. That it?
I don't mind it in someone like you who changed your political beliefs when you lost but for leader of the party?
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
You can have an ELECTED head of state if you really want it.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
If the service was supposed to start at 3pm, I’m surprised they didn’t leave Holyrood Palace much earlier.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
Last I checked, the police are not run by the BBC. Police overreach isn't unheard of, as we learned during lockdown - even so, charging these people is insane.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
Weren't Anglos Saxon kings elected? Then it all started to go wrong..
Bloody French!
(I’d argue “ratified” rather than elected but there was an element of choice by members of the Bretwalda)
Yes, @ydoethur was quite interesting on this on the previous thread. Worth a look if you're at all interested.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
1) I’m sure you don’t want the Home Secretary intervening in operational Police Matters (least of all recent incumbents) and 2) Policing and Prosecution decisions in Scotland are matters for the Scottish Government - and the Lord Advocate who is a Minister in the Scottish Government - probably an even worse idea.
Er, aren't you a bit out of date? Mr Salmond revised the position so that it was no longer a ministerial role.
He said he was going to, but:
The Cabinet is the main decision-making body of the Scottish Government. It is made up of the First Minister, all Cabinet Secretaries, Minister for Parliamentary Business and Permanent Secretary. The Lord Advocate may also attend in his or her role as the Scottish Government’s principal legal adviser.
St Giles is where Charles I reign started to come undone. His Ill-advised attempt to impose a Common Prayer Book resulted in a riot with the wifies of Edinburgh pelting the pulpit with prayer stools shouting “the diel is come among us” ultimately leading to the “War of the Three Kingdoms” (or “English” (sic) Civil War).
The problem wasn't a prayer book per se - a uniform one was already in operation in the kirk. The problem was the use of C of E forms and more generally Charles's attempt to take control of the Kirk as he did in London.
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Things you learn on PB! I'd always assumed an ilk was some more opinionated (or otherwise objectionable) relative of the elk.
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
As experts in pedantry, it is PB’s solemn duty to point it out.
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
No it isn't, just the usual far left extremism from the likes of you. Corbyn of course lost twice anyway, including in 2017.
Personally I would also never hold another referendum again, we are a representative not direct democracy. Our monarch also gets his authority from God as a ceremonial monarch not election.
Mild protests by republicans are OK, aggressively disrupting the accession process was correctly dealt with by the full force of the law
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Thankfully hanging and stuff doesn't come into it. But freedoms are complicated. To me (but I am older, traditionalist and monarchist) it is just obvious that at this precise moment the public freedom to participate in respectful observance trumps the general and equal right to make a discordant noisy protest.
Both are real rights. But they are not always concordant rights.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
1) I’m sure you don’t want the Home Secretary intervening in operational Police Matters (least of all recent incumbents) and 2) Policing and Prosecution decisions in Scotland are matters for the Scottish Government - and the Lord Advocate who is a Minister in the Scottish Government - probably an even worse idea.
Er, aren't you a bit out of date? Mr Salmond revised the position so that it was no longer a ministerial role.
He said he was going to, but:
The Cabinet is the main decision-making body of the Scottish Government. It is made up of the First Minister, all Cabinet Secretaries, Minister for Parliamentary Business and Permanent Secretary. The Lord Advocate may also attend in his or her role as the Scottish Government’s principal legal adviser.
St Giles is where Charles I reign started to come undone. His Ill-advised attempt to impose a Common Prayer Book resulted in a riot with the wifies of Edinburgh pelting the pulpit with prayer stools shouting “the diel is come among us” ultimately leading to the “War of the Three Kingdoms” (or “English” (sic) Civil War).
Charles promised to uphold the Church of Scotland as well as Head the Church of England at his accession
Pronunciation IPA(key): /ɪlk/ Etymology 1 From the Old English īlca, from Proto-Germanic *ilīkaz, a compound of *iz and *-līkaz from the noun *līką (“body”).
Cognate to English ilk.
Adjective ilk (not comparable)
The same. Usage notes Used following a person’s name to show that he lives in a place of the same name, eg Johnstone of that ilk means Johnstone of Johnstone.
Etymology 2 From Middle English ilk, from Old English ġehwylc (“each, every”), equivalent to y- + which. Merged with Northern Old English ylc (“each”). More at each. (compare the Dutch elk - each).
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Same as trying to point out that carrot and stick should/was originally that a donkey would have a carrot suspended above and in front of its head by means of a stick fixed which would make it walk forward
and it has now come to mean carrot = reward and stick = punishment for someone to do something.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
What Charles wants or even what the late Queen would have wanted is not remotely relevant.
Being a Republican is not an offence in this country and is not remotely a basis for arresting people.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
Nothing is more likely to turn people away from institutions most of us value than bullying people into only one accepted opinion or expecting them to feel things they don't feel.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
What Charles wants or even what the late Queen would have wanted is not remotely relevant.
Being a Republican is not an offence in this country and is not remotely a basis for arresting people.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
Nothing is more likely to turn people away from institutions most of us value than bullying people into only one accepted opinion or expecting them to feel things they don't feel.
It's not strictly constitutionally relevant, but by extension it can't help but not be. His mother's pet global project of the Commonwealth was well outside her constitutional role, for instance, as is his professed one of a more democratic monarchy. It may not be constitutionally proper, but it's the spirit of the age, as Hegel would see it.
St Giles is where Charles I reign started to come undone. His Ill-advised attempt to impose a Common Prayer Book resulted in a riot with the wifies of Edinburgh pelting the pulpit with prayer stools shouting “the diel is come among us” ultimately leading to the “War of the Three Kingdoms” (or “English” (sic) Civil War).
Charles promised to uphold the Church of Scotland as well as Head the Church of England at his accession
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
If Labour don't win now it's hard to imagine that they ever will. Liz is perfectly designed as the ideal opponent for them.
'cept she is a woman. And the Lab leader will be, as La Truss so acutely pointed out, an old white bloke from North London. A knight of the realm, no less.
The Cons, meanwhile, have just gone through a(n interminable) leadership contest which must have been the most diverse in British political history.
Rayner, Dodds, Mahmood, Reeves all would have a better chance than SKS.
And I believe it will matter.
It really doesn't matter. What matters is the economy. If Truss's energy plans bring down energy bills, inflation and mortgage rates she wins. If they don't she doesn't.
Truss' plan doesn't bring down energy bills, it just stop them rising as far as they otherwise would.
For them to fall significantly, we need a solution in Russia - by which I mean rapid political change, an emerging stable government the EU feel they can trust, and therefore the lifting of sanctions so they can trade freely in gas again.
I have to say that strikes me as a very narrow path. Political change is looking fairly likely, but it will probably either lead to another wing nut taking charge and sanctions continuing, or the emergence of some kind of revolutionary government that's as stable as a blancmange in an earthquake.
Until we can focus our power generation on renewable electricity, which requires not just the replacement of CCGT with wind but a tenfold increase in overall output and probably a radical overhaul of the grid, higher prices seem likely to be a feature of life.
That is undoubtedly true.
There is some straw clutching going on in PBTory circles, like @TOPPING expecting a Conservative win because of diversity. I was responding simply. I don't for one moment think the Truss Government have the wherewithal to achieve what I have suggested.
Alternatively, as @MarqueeMark has outlined, a magnificent victory for the Conservatives in Ukraine could see Truss over the line.
While I appreciate that PB Tory is a generic term I am not in fact a PB Tory and therefore am even more well placed than usual (which is pretty well placed) to deliver a devastating, impartial and coruscatingly accurate take on things.
Edit: and that take was that I think it will help her while SKS might well be a deadweight around Lab's neck.
Come, come sir, you fit my stereotype perfectly.
You, I suspect are not a Johnsonian, but la Truss? SOLD! To the gentleman in the top hat!
I am very relieved that Johnson has gone, and have been told by those who know that Truss will be a disaster.
So I am holding fire for the moment.
Hence my acute and insightful reading of the whole thing.
Cameron, though? You betcha.
It's difficult not to look back and see the Cameron-Glegg partnership as the halcyon days. It was a time that felt vaguely left of centre and the ugliness of Farage had hardly registered.
Johnson was still honing his skills as a comedian and was miles away from turning the country upside by leading an army of English Nationalists that few had seen coming.
It would be nice to see Starmer returning us to those times but I doubt it'll happen. The hard right is out there now. A nasty combo of Corbynite Leavers and Faragists and as history shows it's a stink that's difficult to get rid of.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
Bit fat and florid. Wouldn't be amazed by a stroke.
I am picking up rumours of significant logistics issues for advancing Ukrainian forces. This actually looks quite serious. They may be running out of Ukrainian flags to raise over liberated towns.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
If the service was supposed to start at 3pm, I’m surprised they didn’t leave Holyrood Palace much earlier.
We both know the royal mile and they took a big risk getting Charles to walk that distance on cobbles
Ukraine government organization · 25m It is official: Vysokopillya, Novovoznesenske, Bilohirka, Myrolyubivka and Sukhyj Stavok have been liberated. The occupiers are preparing to "regroup" in the Kherson region as well. As in Kharkiv, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are helping them with this.
If Labour don't win now it's hard to imagine that they ever will. Liz is perfectly designed as the ideal opponent for them.
'cept she is a woman. And the Lab leader will be, as La Truss so acutely pointed out, an old white bloke from North London. A knight of the realm, no less.
The Cons, meanwhile, have just gone through a(n interminable) leadership contest which must have been the most diverse in British political history.
Rayner, Dodds, Mahmood, Reeves all would have a better chance than SKS.
And I believe it will matter.
It really doesn't matter. What matters is the economy. If Truss's energy plans bring down energy bills, inflation and mortgage rates she wins. If they don't she doesn't.
Truss' plan doesn't bring down energy bills, it just stop them rising as far as they otherwise would.
For them to fall significantly, we need a solution in Russia - by which I mean rapid political change, an emerging stable government the EU feel they can trust, and therefore the lifting of sanctions so they can trade freely in gas again.
I have to say that strikes me as a very narrow path. Political change is looking fairly likely, but it will probably either lead to another wing nut taking charge and sanctions continuing, or the emergence of some kind of revolutionary government that's as stable as a blancmange in an earthquake.
Until we can focus our power generation on renewable electricity, which requires not just the replacement of CCGT with wind but a tenfold increase in overall output and probably a radical overhaul of the grid, higher prices seem likely to be a feature of life.
That is undoubtedly true.
There is some straw clutching going on in PBTory circles, like @TOPPING expecting a Conservative win because of diversity. I was responding simply. I don't for one moment think the Truss Government have the wherewithal to achieve what I have suggested.
Alternatively, as @MarqueeMark has outlined, a magnificent victory for the Conservatives in Ukraine could see Truss over the line.
While I appreciate that PB Tory is a generic term I am not in fact a PB Tory and therefore am even more well placed than usual (which is pretty well placed) to deliver a devastating, impartial and coruscatingly accurate take on things.
Edit: and that take was that I think it will help her while SKS might well be a deadweight around Lab's neck.
Come, come sir, you fit my stereotype perfectly.
You, I suspect are not a Johnsonian, but la Truss? SOLD! To the gentleman in the top hat!
I am very relieved that Johnson has gone, and have been told by those who know that Truss will be a disaster.
So I am holding fire for the moment.
Hence my acute and insightful reading of the whole thing.
Cameron, though? You betcha.
It's difficult not to look back and see the Cameron-Glegg partnership as the halcyon days. It was a time that felt vaguely left of centre and the ugliness of Farage had hardly registered.
Johnson was still honing his skills as a comedian and was miles away from turning the country upside by leading an army of English Nationalists that few had seen coming.
It would be nice to see Starmer returning us to those times but I doubt it'll happen. The hard right is out there now and as history shows it's a stink that's difficult to get rid of.
That vaguely left of centre Austerity we hanker for Boris was Mayor of London UKIP went ftom 16% in 2009 euros to 27.5% in 2014 and won 2 parliamentary by elections
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
What Charles wants or even what the late Queen would have wanted is not remotely relevant.
Being a Republican is not an offence in this country and is not remotely a basis for arresting people.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
Nothing is more likely to turn people away from institutions most of us value than bullying people into only one accepted opinion or expecting them to feel things they don't feel.
Good old Guardian reverts to type with the headline:
"Being a republican in Britain used to be perfectly respectable. So why are people now getting arrested for it?" Zoe Williams
The strain of all the saturation Grauniad royal coverage is beginning to tell. (Law note: Being a republican remains entirely lawful. Being arrested for it would entitle you to substantial damages for wrongful arrest. A number of woke firms of solicitors would love the case.)
Well, that is going to happen if your national broadcaster stops allowing any dissent and the police follow its cue. Considering his life's work, I don't think that's remotely what Charles even wants.
What Charles wants or even what the late Queen would have wanted is not remotely relevant.
Being a Republican is not an offence in this country and is not remotely a basis for arresting people.
Where's the Home Secretary to tell the police to follow the bloody law? Oh, fuck ... it's Suella.
Nothing is more likely to turn people away from institutions most of us value than bullying people into only one accepted opinion or expecting them to feel things they don't feel.
It's not strictly constitionally relevant, but by extension it can't help but not be. His mother's pet global project of the Commonwealth was well outside her constitutional role, as his professed one of a more democratic monarchy. It may nor be constitutionally proper, but it's the spirit of the age, as Hegel would see it.
IMHO, there's no real point to the Commonwealth if it doesn't include the largest English-speaking (by mother tongue) country, the USA, or if it doesn't include our nearest English-speaking neighbour, the RoI.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Ah we thought you had returned to the Kremlin for futher orders !!!!
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
Bit fat and florid. Wouldn't be amazed by a stroke.
My pharmacist friend reckons exactly that - thinks he look hypertensive and a sure-fire candidate for getting nowhere near his parents' age of death.
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
Things you learn on PB! I'd always assumed an ilk was some more opinionated (or otherwise objectionable) relative of the elk.
Contemplate the moose, which is a rodent in Scotland rather than an ungulate.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
Monarchists don't like it up 'em, and right now they have a LOT of weak points.
Already the video clips are mounting up, for example. The king's extreme sh*ttiness to his underlings at that desk - which is obviously habitual - and now his brother (whose accuser Virginia Giuffre was paid £12m to drop her case) is seen touching his own daughter in a very questionable fashion (it might only be 60:40, but very few of us would want this guy teaching or spending time alone with our children after we've watched that clip).
How many more clips by the weekend? Add a few booings... Add one or two posters that hit the nail right on the head...
Teeny repayment of the MASSIVE amount of advice you and your ilk have been giving them I guess.
"Help Ukraine who you raped 80 years ago from being raped again" from me is hardly state-sponsored constitutional advice to Germany.
I'm now intrigued by the nature of my "ilk"
People like you, it's not complicated.
I speak English. I'm intrigued by what you think that means.
Weird conversation. It's Scots not English, and it doesn't mean type at all.
Is ilk a Scots word? Genuinely had no idea.
Yes and no. It means 'same' and originates like so: if you are a Scots laird you are called say Macduff of Cawdor. If your castle happens also to be called Macduff you are Macduff of Macduff, or Macduff of that ilk (I.e. it means ditto). People then erroneously thought of that ilk ought to mean of that kind because ilk looks a bit like like.
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
The word itself is Anglo-Saxon, though.
So is Scots (as opposed to Gaelic) generally.
Sister language families - and plenty of Danish etc in both as well.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
I would just say this walk from Holyrood to St Giles is a fair uphill hike on cobbles and Charles is doing well to complete it considering everything else he has done today
I get the impression that for a man of, what, 76? - he is in pretty good shape.
Bit fat and florid. Wouldn't be amazed by a stroke.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
Monarchists don't like it up 'em, and right now they have a LOT of weak points.
Already the video clips are mounting up, for example. The king's extreme sh*ttiness to his underlings at that desk - which is obviously habitual - and now his brother (whose accuser Virginia Giuffre was paid £12m to drop her case) is seen touching his own daughter in a very questionable fashion (it might only be 60:40, but very few of us would want this guy teaching or spending time alone with our children after we've watched that clip).
How many more clips by the weekend? Add a few booings... Add one or two posters that hit the nail right on the head...
The royalists are running scared.
Will you be at the Dynamo Moscow-PSB Sochi match at the weekend, Dynamo ? I have a friend who would like a few tickets.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
Weren't Anglos Saxon kings elected? Then it all started to go wrong..
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Thankfully hanging and stuff doesn't come into it. But freedoms are complicated. To me (but I am older, traditionalist and monarchist) it is just obvious that at this precise moment the public freedom to participate in respectful observance trumps the general and equal right to make a discordant noisy protest.
Both are real rights. But they are not always concordant rights.
So far the surge of disruption by republicans seems to involve one or two isolated loudmouths holding placards or shouting a couple of things. Pretty harmless and a kind of national version of the drunk uncle heckling the wedding speeches.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Here's an idea for the next birthday present for HYUFD if you are stuck:
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
As opposed to the long list of elected Kings.
Weren't Anglos Saxon kings elected? Then it all started to go wrong..
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
Monarchists don't like it up 'em, and right now they have a LOT of weak points.
Already the video clips are mounting up, for example. The king's extreme sh*ttiness to his underlings at that desk - which is obviously habitual - and now his brother (whose accuser Virginia Giuffre was paid £12m to drop her case) is seen touching his own daughter in a very questionable fashion (it might only be 60:40, but very few of us would want this guy teaching or spending time alone with our children after we've watched that clip).
How many more clips by the weekend? Add a few booings... Add one or two posters that hit the nail right on the head...
The royalists are running scared.
Will you be at the Dynamo Moscow-PSB Sochi match at the weekend, Dynamo ? I have a friend who would like a few tickets.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
Our UNELECTED new King.
Thr monarchist Tories trounced the republican Corbyn in 2019, though in any case monarchs are unelected ceremonial Heads of State, that is the whole point
The growth of republican feeling now is probably more like the growth of support for Labour led by Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the election in 2017.
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
No it isn't, just the usual far left extremism from the likes of you. Corbyn of course lost twice anyway, including in 2017.
Personally I would also never hold another referendum again, we are a representative not direct democracy. Our monarch also gets his authority from God as a ceremonial monarch not election.
Mild protests by republicans are OK, aggressively disrupting the accession process was correctly dealt with by the full force of the law
What aggressive disruption? Did armed thugs storm the chamber where the accession was happening? I've not seen that.
All I've seen in peaceful protestors, no violent ones.
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Here's an idea for the next birthday present for HYUFD if you are stuck:
Unless the police ( and the BBC ) get a little more of a grip, they will hand the initiative to republicans. I want to see a democratic-minded era of Charles III, which in fact he's quite capable of and will suppott, not north korean-style nonsense.
They were attempting to disrupt the accession process of the new King. 150 years ago they would have been hung for doing so, 300 years ago they would have been beheaded for doing so. It was a mild response from the police under the Public Order Act given the disruption they were causing
There is no excuse and you even talk about hanging and beheading
You are a recruiting sargent for republicans
Republicans are Republicans, they will not change their mind, if they try and aggressively disrupt the accession process for our new King it is only right they are arrested and charged for doing so
We live in a democracy, but you seem to support stifling free speech and by referencing hanging and beheading you inflame opinion and enhance the cause you so dislike
Here's an idea for the next birthday present for HYUFD if you are stuck:
Comments
Storming into the building with weapons threatening to kill people to prevent the process happening, as Trumpists did on 6 January, should be a crime.
Peacefully saying words or holding placards in public, should not be.
Change the channel - or you go insane.
I think that the authorities can create a lot of problems for you in the UK if they so decide, but the judiciary is still independent so they can't just haul you off to jail, or carry out extra judicial executions, etc; and this is a major advantage. Also, the police can't just beat you up, you have all these rights when dealing with the authorities (although obviously governments always try and find reasons to cut these back).
My concern however is that freedom to speak on certain issues (like women's rights, racial differences) is actually now far more constrained in the UK than it is in places like Russia.
Delusional
extinct legal regimes are irrelevant - though your apparent continued penchant for their revival is not to your credit.
https://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/snd/ilk_adj1_n
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists
Blackadder: So your father's German, you're half-German, and you married a German?!
(I’d argue “ratified” rather than elected but there was an element of choice by members of the Bretwalda)
I don't mind it in someone like you who changed your political beliefs when you lost but for leader of the party?
MONARCHY = SOCIALISM!
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech?
It ought to be diplomatic, not trying to change the head of state of an ally in his first week on the job
Mind you the error is so well established that it is insanely pedantic to point it out.
The Firth of Forth empties into the North sea and its a beautiful day
The Cabinet is the main decision-making body of the Scottish Government. It is made up of the First Minister, all Cabinet Secretaries, Minister for Parliamentary Business and Permanent Secretary. The Lord Advocate may also attend in his or her role as the Scottish Government’s principal legal adviser.
https://www.gov.scot/about/who-runs-government/cabinet-and-ministers/
You won’t find the head of the CPS in Downing St meetings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Geddes
Personally I would also never hold another referendum again, we are a representative not direct democracy. Our monarch also gets his authority from God as a ceremonial monarch not election.
Mild protests by republicans are OK, aggressively disrupting the accession process was correctly dealt with by the full force of the law
Both are real rights. But they are not always concordant rights.
"Scots
Pronunciation
IPA(key): /ɪlk/
Etymology 1
From the Old English īlca, from Proto-Germanic *ilīkaz, a compound of *iz and *-līkaz from the noun *līką (“body”).
Cognate to English ilk.
Adjective
ilk (not comparable)
The same.
Usage notes
Used following a person’s name to show that he lives in a place of the same name, eg Johnstone of that ilk means Johnstone of Johnstone.
Etymology 2
From Middle English ilk, from Old English ġehwylc (“each, every”), equivalent to y- + which. Merged with Northern Old English ylc (“each”). More at each. (compare the Dutch elk - each).
Determiner
ilk
(archaic, of two or more) each; every "
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ilk#Scots
and it has now come to mean carrot = reward and stick = punishment for someone to do something.
Does my effing head in. Anyway, can we move on.
Johnson was still honing his skills as a comedian and was miles away from turning the country upside by leading an army of English Nationalists that few had seen coming.
It would be nice to see Starmer returning us to those times but I doubt it'll happen. The hard right is out there now. A nasty combo of Corbynite Leavers and Faragists and as history shows it's a stink that's difficult to get rid of.
https://twitter.com/james_rands/status/1569266939511406593
I’ve become a war addict
Horror is now a form of entertainment"
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/i-ve-become-a-war-addict
Defense of Ukraine
@DefenceU
Ukraine government organization
·
25m
It is official: Vysokopillya, Novovoznesenske, Bilohirka, Myrolyubivka and Sukhyj Stavok have been liberated. The occupiers are preparing to "regroup" in the Kherson region as well. As in Kharkiv, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are helping them with this.
Boris was Mayor of London
UKIP went ftom 16% in 2009 euros to 27.5% in 2014 and won 2 parliamentary by elections
https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1569327750543990784
The only way we will find out whether that statement is true or not is if someone does a poll. Which you don't want, for some reason.
Or...wait...there's another way...we could reach the same conclusion if peaceful demonstrations grow against this monarchist circus which is mounting its silly events all over the country right now. Who knows, there may well even be a big crescendoing chorus of booing. Has Edinburgh shown the way forward? Rather than saying "f***" on their banners - inadvisable - some might even hold up pictures of suitcases with "€1m" written on them and a little crown above. What do you reckon? Chuck them all in the cells or allow free speech? Getting worried?
Monarchists don't like it up 'em, and right now they have a LOT of weak points.
Already the video clips are mounting up, for example. The king's extreme sh*ttiness to his underlings at that desk - which is obviously habitual - and now his brother (whose accuser Virginia Giuffre was paid £12m to drop her case) is seen touching his own daughter in a very questionable fashion (it might only be 60:40, but very few of us would want this guy teaching or spending time alone with our children after we've watched that clip).
How many more clips by the weekend?
Add a few booings...
Add one or two posters that hit the nail right on the head...
The royalists are running scared.
https://www.culttvmanshop.com/PREORDER-The-Guillotine--Special-ArtBox-Edition-from-Doll-and-Hobby-GA--4199-PREORDER-RESERVATION-_p_6938.html
All I've seen in peaceful protestors, no violent ones.