Recall Sunak rose to high office when he accepted that the Treasury would be run politically by advisors appointed by Dominic Cummings. Special advisors also have legal powers to direct civil servants. Sajid Javid was sacked for refusing the "offer". I conclude that he will do anything to please the top guy in the room, leaving a void now he's the top guy. It would be ultra-cynical to suggest that the top guy is now Murthy.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
They don't like Badenoch and nobody is flinging muck her way.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
Your ability to see into the mind of the left is HYUFDesque.
It's quite funny when you consider a lot of Braverman's critics are on the right.
FYI - The minister responsible for MI5 can never be involved in any security breaches.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Surely the bigger problem is Sir Gavin Williamson. He was sacked by May for there being compelling evidence that he leaked information from a National Security Council meeting. His career in government is the most puzzling that I can think of.
Meh. Suella is crap. But she thinks she’s smart which is even more dangerous.
Rishi had to include her - it was her nomination that killed off Boris. Dirty deals get done in politics. To have not delivered would have created a betrayal mantra.
But I’m sure he read her the riot act in her appointment meeting. And if she puts a foot wrong she’ll be out on her ear - but this time with a good reason… Labour get to say “I told you so for one day and then it’s just chip paper”
Recall Sunak rose to high office when he accepted that the Treasury would be run politically by advisors appointed by Dominic Cummings. Special advisors also have legal powers to direct civil servants. Sajid Javid was sacked for refusing the "offer". I conclude that he will do anything to please the top guy in the room, leaving a void now he's the top guy. It would be ultra-cynical to suggest that the top guy is now Murthy.
I remember that cringe-tastic interview he did with two schoolboys. About 1m 30s into it the lads realise that they are the alphas in the situation.
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
I wonder if it was even true that Braverman had much clout in the contest. Truss supporters (and therefore in many cases Boris supporters) seem to be as furious as anyone else with the reappointment, as indicated in the two tweets @TSE has shown.
Of course Boris supporters are furious.
Americans still bitch about Benedict Arnold even though he was a US war hero.
I wonder if it was even true that Braverman had much clout in the contest. Truss supporters (and therefore in many cases Boris supporters) seem to be as furious as anyone else with the reappointment, as indicated in the two tweets @TSE has shown.
It's not Truss people, it was the ERG and Boris people that she brought with her, she denied Boris the opportunity to take it to a members vote. Had Rishi not done the deal we'd all be nervous about the result of the old racists getting a chance to bring Boris back and inevitably on Monday Boris would be meeting KC to become PM and Suella would be back as HS.
She gets the job either way, the difference is that we've got a proper grown up in charge as PM rather than the fat sack of shit.
Sorry you seem to be taking Rishi's shit cabinet of no talent so hard, but there's no need for completely unjustified slurs on Tory members - they wanted Badenoch; Rishi's lack of popularity had nothing to do with his race.
I've been a member of the party for 10 out of the last 11 years. I've been to countless events, I've donated thousands to the party for local and national campaigns. I've met thousands of members at the conference and other events. Anyone who wants to come at me and say there's no racism among the members (especially the older ones) can go fuck themselves tbh.
I think there's a good chance that the Liar King would still have failed to reach 100 nominations, and a good chance he would still have lost had he done so, but why take the chance?
Maybe it would have helped to keep Truss in for another month and let the privileges committee do its work.
Surely the bigger problem is Sir Gavin Williamson. He was sacked by May for there being compelling evidence that he leaked information from a National Security Council meeting. His career in government is the most puzzling that I can think of.
I don't like Williamson, but give him a pass on that one. People should be allowed rehabilitation and second chances. But not within a week, that's not rehabilitation that's brushing aside what's literally just happened and saying it doesn't matter.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Waste of time
1) make the penalty for employing an undocumented worker 100k. Personal responsibility of directors of the company - they lose their houses etc. 2) if the said undocumented worker gives evidence leading to a conviction, they get £50k plus indefinite leave to remain.
The err… underground economy evaporates by lunchtime the next day.
Implantation costs - zero. Probably a profit for HMG.
Just for fun, do the same for employing people at less than minimum wage.
Iranian Colonel Mehdi Molashahi, who was in charge of delivering drones to Russia, was shot dead by "unknown gunmen" in Zahedan.
Is it just me, or does anyone else get the impression that this Ukraine crisis is hotting up?
(I do not mean today's sabre rattling by Putin)
Maybe. Although there is this in contrast:
"Russia is not going to use nukes," the Kremlin's Ambassador to the UK Andrey Kelin tells me in an exclusive interview, on a day when Russia is conducting military nuclear training drills.
You have to try to convince the civilians on the other side that nukes are imminent (to get them to pressure their governments in fear, and for the governments to become unpopular for not giving concessions) whilst reassuring the governments and military on the other side that no, of course we're not going to be that stupid (because you don't want to accidentally blunder into an actual nuclear war, because that's a lose-lose situation).
It's harder in the modern information age, because compartmentalising those messages is so much more difficult.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
Comparisons between Braverman and Heseltine are just ridiculous. The primary objection is not that she's an ideological opponent.
Truss could hardly complain about leaking. She was very close to Harry Cole according to Cummings.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
I wonder if it was even true that Braverman had much clout in the contest. Truss supporters (and therefore in many cases Boris supporters) seem to be as furious as anyone else with the reappointment, as indicated in the two tweets @TSE has shown.
It's not Truss people, it was the ERG and Boris people that she brought with her, she denied Boris the opportunity to take it to a members vote. Had Rishi not done the deal we'd all be nervous about the result of the old racists getting a chance to bring Boris back and inevitably on Monday Boris would be meeting KC to become PM and Suella would be back as HS.
She gets the job either way, the difference is that we've got a proper grown up in charge as PM rather than the fat sack of shit.
Sorry you seem to be taking Rishi's shit cabinet of no talent so hard, but there's no need for completely unjustified slurs on Tory members - they wanted Badenoch; Rishi's lack of popularity had nothing to do with his race.
I've been a member of the party for 10 out of the last 11 years. I've been to countless events, I've donated thousands to the party for local and national campaigns. I've met thousands of members at the conference and other events. Anyone who wants to come at me and say there's no racism among the members (especially the older ones) can go fuck themselves tbh.
I think there's a good chance that the Liar King would still have failed to reach 100 nominations, and a good chance he would still have lost had he done so, but why take the chance?
Maybe it would have helped to keep Truss in for another month and let the privileges committee do its work.
Maybe that's why Johnson supporters turned against Truss when they did.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
All that plus she is deadly serious - it seems - about stopping the Dinghy People. And Patel has failed at this, so why not give Suella a go
NB today Sunak mentioned "controlling our borders" AGAIN. He knows it is totemic and he knows that if he can halfway solve the issue he could get a big boost in the polls. Which he urgently needs, given these enormous Labour leads
Ending the boats would do more to kill off Reform/Restore/Renew/Farage that anything else I can think of and move some WNV/DKs back into his camp.
He should make it an absolute priority.
But the finest brains in the Conservative Party have been trying to solve the Dinghy issue and come up with nothing that works so far. what is going to change now? i dont think anyone with even half an idea would have to wait until they were Home Secretary before raising it at the Cabinet table or elsewhere. So I'm expecting no solution.
The reason they have not come up with a solution is that their ideology and that of their supporters means they only try to deal with one half of the issue which is the (failing) dam. They have not even tried to seriously address the other half which is giving refugees and asylum seekers a legitimate way to enter the country. Every possible barrier is put in the way of people trying to claim asylum and every 'solution' involves more, costlier and impracticable ways to prevent entry. If we spent half as much time and effort trying to find ways to process and allow in a reasonable number of legitimate asylum seekers and refugees then we would have far more support and far more success in dealing with those who do not deserve to be granted asylum.
How much is a "reasonable number"? If they set up an asylum centre in say Syria and it processed 10,000 asylum seekers who were allowed in to the UK how much would that reduce the number trying to cross the channel? I'd say close to zero. and how many of those would get deported on the basis there was an asylum centre to access in the country they came from? Think it would need a Labour government before that gets tried anyway as to the Conservatives a reasonable number is probably about 10.
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
The South Africans use Cent, only it's called Olifant. Though I'm not sure how much of the original tank is left apart from the bare metal hulls and turrets, especially in the later marks.
A Conqueror was still running at IWM Duxford, at least until recently:
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
I think there are pills he can get for this problem. Seriously, this was the blood sacrifice he had to make to become PM. With braverman backing Boris he'd have probably run and won.
As a socially liberal, economically dry, moderate right winger, the Braverman appointment is utterly toxic to me. Everything else I could just about get on board with and potentially see my way to voting Conservative at the next election if their handling of the economy a) improves and b) appears more competent than Labour.
But not with Braverman anywhere near government. It's hard to find an adequate description for her, fascist obviously isn't it, but it's certainly fascist-adjacent - the disrespect for the rule of law combined with the love of the police state and hatred of immgrants - there's something Trumpian about her that I find utterly toxic.
A terrible move by Sunak, and one that keeps moderates like me firmly away from the Conservatives at the ballot box.
I would be very surprised if she was Home Secretary at the time of the next election
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
The South Africans use Cent, only it's called Olifant. Though I'm not sure how much of the original tank is left apart from the bare metal hulls and turrets, especially in the later marks.
They even removed the Meteor engines - the heretics.
IIRC due to government issues in South Africa, a lot of military equipment are non runners.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
All that plus she is deadly serious - it seems - about stopping the Dinghy People. And Patel has failed at this, so why not give Suella a go
NB today Sunak mentioned "controlling our borders" AGAIN. He knows it is totemic and he knows that if he can halfway solve the issue he could get a big boost in the polls. Which he urgently needs, given these enormous Labour leads
Ending the boats would do more to kill off Reform/Restore/Renew/Farage that anything else I can think of and move some WNV/DKs back into his camp.
Honestly what planet are you living on?
Are Mr & Mrs Average worrying about boat people? No, they are not - they are worrying about how they're going to pay their mortgage, heat their house and put food on the table.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Me
I reckon Rwanda would work if it was implemented fully. But we would have to be ruthless. For a week or two dozens would have to be sent straight to Rwanda. Maybe hundreds. Ideally you would send everyone but that's probably not feasible
The 1 in 10 chance that even if you made it to the UK you would end up in the middle of Africa would, I think, deter 90% of people from taking to the boats in the first place. Rwanda??? WTF?? Why not stay in France or head to Spain, etc
That's how it would work. It is a deterrent. It's not a long term process of sending tens of thousands
This is presumably why the Danes - not known for their inhumanity - are looking at a very similar option, in Rwanda
You would need a highly determined Home Secretary, perhaps with a streak of madness, to pull it off. Ideally he or SHE would be minority ethnic so they can shrug off the white liberal shrieks of anguish, and she - let's say it's a she - would have to be prepared to quit the ECHR or something akin
If only there was a Tory politician that ticked all these boxes
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
If I was the French i'd be leaving fully fueled boats on the beach and turn a blind eye.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
If you are alluding to her being a hanger, a flogger as well a significant security risk, I concur.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
If I was the French i'd be leaving fully fueled boats on the beach and turn a blind eye.
There is film footage of French Police standing and staring as a boat was brought to the beach, launched and filled. They quite literally ignored what was happening 50 meters away.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
If you are alluding to her being a hanger, a flogger as well a significant security risk, I concur.
Andy speaks the truth here. The left tend not to like the hard right.
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
The South Africans use Cent, only it's called Olifant. Though I'm not sure how much of the original tank is left apart from the bare metal hulls and turrets, especially in the later marks.
They even removed the Meteor engines - the heretics.
IIRC due to government issues in South Africa, a lot of military equipment are non runners.
The underlying issue may be CFE treaties - the Americans and the Russians have hinterlands outwith Europe where they can park lots of tanks but UK doesn't, so any excess tanks had to be demilitarised. Though that can only be partial. You'd think [edit] MoD still had plenty of scope for storing armour within the treaty limits, given how much the active armoured force has been run down; whether this made sense to them is another matter.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Waste of time
1) make the penalty for employing an undocumented worker 100k. Personal responsibility of directors of the company - they lose their houses etc. 2) if the said undocumented worker gives evidence leading to a conviction, they get £50k plus indefinite leave to remain.
The err… underground economy evaporates by lunchtime the next day.
Implantation costs - zero. Probably a profit for HMG.
Just for fun, do the same for employing people at less than minimum wage.
The other benefit of that approach is that it applies to all the illegal routes into the country- the lorries, the people who come on holiday and like it so much that they forget to leave.
The tiny boats are terrible and the people running them need to be stopped. But I'd be really surprised if they were the main unofficial route in, even now. And whilst the visible symbolism is bad, that's not a reason to shout about a largely symbolic policy.
But at the moment, all the danger, cruelty and government incompetence seems pretty deliberate. Either to stop people coming in or to make British voters think that the government is stopping people coming in. I don't know which option depresses me more.
(And yes, that means having more places for people to live in places where the local economy can sustain them, not dumping them in dying towns because the accommodation is cheap. A tram ride from a reasonably perky city, that sort of thing. But we need to do that anyway.)
ETA: Talking of which, this is shameful:
Incredible evidence being given by Home Office officials at CommonsHomeAffs :
The Home Office has only processed 4% of asylum claims from Channel migrants last year.
85% of those completed claims were granted asylum.
No wonder the asylum backlog has soared over 100,000
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
If I was the French i'd be leaving fully fueled boats on the beach and turn a blind eye.
There is film footage of French Police standing and staring as a boat was brought to the beach, launched and filled. They quite literally ignored what was happening 50 meters away.
Well they probably arent breaking any french laws. and they and the local populace are likely glad to see the back of them.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Enlist them on the spot into the Royal Navy.
That only worked for experienced matelots in the old days.
Honeymoon bounce. Says a lot about Truss and Johnson that a trillionaire Borrower brings a sense of return-to-normal.
Won't last, lab maj nailed on.
Hung parliament nailed on IMO.
People stupid enough to think that anything is "nailed on" two years hence, particularly given what we've seen in the past few months, are the reason why astute gamblers are able to make money.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
All that plus she is deadly serious - it seems - about stopping the Dinghy People. And Patel has failed at this, so why not give Suella a go
NB today Sunak mentioned "controlling our borders" AGAIN. He knows it is totemic and he knows that if he can halfway solve the issue he could get a big boost in the polls. Which he urgently needs, given these enormous Labour leads
Ending the boats would do more to kill off Reform/Restore/Renew/Farage that anything else I can think of and move some WNV/DKs back into his camp.
Honestly what planet are you living on?
Are Mr & Mrs Average worrying about boat people? No, they are not - they are worrying about how they're going to pay their mortgage, heat their house and put food on the table.
The boat people are a concern among the Tory core vote, and the Farage vote. Changing that situation alone wouldn't win the Tories the next election, especially if the same Home Secretary, as discussed fully today, is alienating non-core voters with absurdly but also concerningly draconian proposed legislation like the Public Order Bill going through last week, threatening to electronically tag anyone involved in a noisy protest in the last year.
Russia has just claimed that Ukraine plan to shoot down a rocket filled with radioactive material over the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
So, going by Russian logic, that is exactly what Russia will now do. Then they can say Told you so, while scaring the shit out of everyone
Given the U?S at least and probably others have intel into the heart of the Kremlin (eg detailed advance knowledge of the Ukraine invasion) how do you think Russia will get away with this? Sure, there will be a gazillion Twitter twats who will go "Ooh, look, Ukrainian bastards!" but the higher levels of diplomacy will know exactly what gas gone on.
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
If I was the French i'd be leaving fully fueled boats on the beach and turn a blind eye.
There is film footage of French Police standing and staring as a boat was brought to the beach, launched and filled. They quite literally ignored what was happening 50 meters away.
Yes, you're quite right. The French will never stop the boats. Every migrant that makes it to the UK is one less they have to house and support, or chase around Dunkirk or Paris
So all solutions relying on French co-operation are wishful thinking
Which leaves us with..... Rwanda. Or something like it. Or, in the end, something even more radical and brutal. Because in the end you can't have unstoppable thousands of people simply turning up on your beaches and being allowed in. Ultimately, voters will push for a Far Right party that gets medieval on the problem. Best avoided
Is Sunak's calculation that Braverman will do something equally dumb in a short space of time and can just be sacked again? That way he would have used her to win the leadership campaign, and saved us from a worse fate (ie Johnson back as PM). Just a thought.
I can't read the article because it's behind a paywall. But I can read the description of the author. Does "central banker" refer to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis? I mean I've got nothing against Minneapolitans, but really ...
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
If you are alluding to her being a hanger, a flogger as well a significant security risk, I concur.
Andy speaks the truth here. The left tend not to like the hard right.
Russia has just claimed that Ukraine plan to shoot down a rocket filled with radioactive material over the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
So, going by Russian logic, that is exactly what Russia will now do. Then they can say Told you so, while scaring the shit out of everyone
Given the U?S at least and probably others have intel into the heart of the Kremlin (eg detailed advance knowledge of the Ukraine invasion) how do you think Russia will get away with this? Sure, there will be a gazillion Twitter twats who will go "Ooh, look, Ukrainian bastards!" but the higher levels of diplomacy will know exactly what gas gone on.
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
Russia doesn't care about the truth, here, it cares about perceptions
If they set off a small dirty bomb and manage to at least temporarily blur the truth of who did it, then that is job done. Everyone will know it was probably Russia - probably - but won't be entirely sure. And everyone will be scared shitless and probably pushing Ukraine to back down
See the Kerch bombing, the Nordstream bombing, and the Dugin bombing. Each has been successfully blamed on various actors, even though we have a good idea in all cases who did it (Ukraine, USA, Ukraine)
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Poppycock.If you can read a tidal flow chart and a weather forecast the channel crossing is about as fraught with peril as driving from Southampton to Basinstoke.
I can't read the article because it's behind a paywall. But I can read the description of the author. Does "central banker" refer to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis? I mean I've got nothing against Minneapolitans, but really ...
That put him on the FOMC setting US interest rates.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
This is an interesting argument. Last Sunday's interview with Mervyn King (the former central banker, not the darts player) is also essential viewing regarding the bad monetary policy of the last few years, as he sees it, and the links to inflation today. However, if there is any truth to the reports that neither Kwarteng nor Truss gave any notice to Bailey of the contents of the 'mini-budget', they still must carry a large part of the blame. Their policies' unpalatability to their own parliamentary party is also entirely down to their own refusal to prepare the ground or introduce change gradually.
On Braverman: I really dislike her, however I think she is better than Priti Patel, who is after all alleged to have bullied civil servants. I do think it shows how culturally progressive we are as a nation that the figure in government labelled as closest to hard right is a Buddhist of South Asian descent via East Africa, who studied at Cambridge and the Sorbonne (so is presumably also fluent in French).
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
All that plus she is deadly serious - it seems - about stopping the Dinghy People. And Patel has failed at this, so why not give Suella a go
NB today Sunak mentioned "controlling our borders" AGAIN. He knows it is totemic and he knows that if he can halfway solve the issue he could get a big boost in the polls. Which he urgently needs, given these enormous Labour leads
Ending the boats would do more to kill off Reform/Restore/Renew/Farage that anything else I can think of and move some WNV/DKs back into his camp.
Honestly what planet are you living on?
Are Mr & Mrs Average worrying about boat people? No, they are not - they are worrying about how they're going to pay their mortgage, heat their house and put food on the table.
In fairness, he was talking about killing off ReFarage, or whatever they are now called, not Mr and Mrs Average. Farage has always eked out a role worrying Tories in marginals, and in facing a difficult election he wouldn't need to take much off them.
Personally, I don't think the public actually care a great deal about immigration levels, so long as they think it is being managed ok, and at the moment they don't.
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
The South Africans use Cent, only it's called Olifant. Though I'm not sure how much of the original tank is left apart from the bare metal hulls and turrets, especially in the later marks.
They even removed the Meteor engines - the heretics.
IIRC due to government issues in South Africa, a lot of military equipment are non runners.
The underlying issue may be CFE treaties - the Americans and the Russians have hinterlands outwith Europe where they can park lots of tanks but UK doesn't, so any excess tanks had to be demilitarised. Though that can only be partial. You'd think [edit] MoD still had plenty of scope for storing armour within the treaty limits, given how much the active armoured force has been run down; whether this made sense to them is another matter.
All sold on. No one thinks that 50 year old tanks are worth a damn.
I knew a chap who sold surplussed vehicles. Interestingly, if your gun license doesn’t have a calibre limit, you can own a live tank. The ammunition comes under various explosives rules so owning that is basically impossible, though.
Apparently quite few Ferrets have shown up in Ukraine - sold by private owners to the Ukrainian government. Also various ages of 432.
That's rather remarkable when you consider that Labour is polling 25-30 points ahead of the Tories. Sunak has had quite the impact. But we wait for actual new polls...
On his plans to tackle illegal immigration he insisted that the failure to put a stop to the hundreds of people crossing the channel in small boats had frustrated him hugely and he wanted to complete the plans of deportations to Rwanda.
He said: “It vexes me and was part of the reason I supported Brexit, even though I was told that it would be potentially damaging for my career.
“But I believed in it and one of the reasons was clearly making sure that we had proper control of our borders. We've got to change the definition of asylum.
“At the moment we use the ECHR, the European definition, and that is very broad. It's become broader.”
He added: “Over time, it's exploited by lefty lawyers for lots of spurious reasons to keep people here. So, I think we should move to a different definition, another international standard that the Australians and others use, which is much tighter and narrower, so that will help.
“The plan I've set out is radical. I will do whatever it takes including any legal changes to make the Rwanda policy work, because we must have control over our borders.”
When asked if that meant he would leave the ECHR he said: “Yes, no option should be off the table.”
This was the cost of getting rid of Boris once and for all. I think we all need to recognise that Suella Braverman was the kingmaker in this race and was able to name her price, Rishi did the right thing by getting her on side.
Once again, I'd like for anyone to name a better alternative, as I see it we would have had Boris as PM on Monday and Braverman as HS on Tuesday has Rishi declined her offer.
Rishi, IMO, did what grown up politicians do and compromised to get over the line. Purity is invariably for losers and anyone who's saying that he should have rejected her is kidding themselves about the road not taken.
So why didn’t he conveniently forget to appoint her after he got the job? The no dishonour in not responding to blackmail.
My hunch is that the coronation is most of it, but not all. I think he likes having a right winger in the HO feeding headlines to the Mail.
Because he'd have 90-100 MPs rebelling from day one.
He gave his word, that may not mean anything to you but clearly it does to him.
We have no evidence of that he gave his word. If you do, please share. I am not sure 90-100 MPs would have rebelled.
She gave him her considerable support and now she has the job. He gave his word. That's all there is to it. He rightly recognised she was the kingmaker and she named her price.
If Sunak decided that Braverman was the kingmaker and that he had to give her whatever price she demanded, then the Tory party is dead, and may it rest in peace.
Isn't this just normal politics? Mrs Thatcher had to keep Heseltine in the cabinet for many years even though she didn't agree with him on many things because he represented an important faction in the party at that time.
Was Heseltine an incompetent security threat?
The reason the left don't like Braverman isn't because she was involved in a minor security breach.
If you are alluding to her being a hanger, a flogger as well a significant security risk, I concur.
Andy speaks the truth here. The left tend not to like the hard right.
Is the Labor government in Australia hard right?
"Albanese said on Thursday people attempting to arrive in Australia by boat will be turned back to avoid offshore detention, but didn’t clarify whether offshore detention was still a Labor policy."
Surely Sunak can’t be that stupid to think the issue with Braverman would disappear and it’s a dreadful start optically for the news to be leading with this rather than his first day on the job .
Is Sunak's calculation that Braverman will do something equally dumb in a short space of time and can just be sacked again? That way he would have used her to win the leadership campaign, and saved us from a worse fate (ie Johnson back as PM). Just a thought.
I don't think so, though it could well happen. He could have put someone else in there and still rewarded her, with a 'Sorry, but it is just too soon given your resignation last week'. He didn't, because he must think she serves a purpose in that role as more than a human shield.
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
I'll google it
I was having this debate at the weekend with my mates in Arizona. What is the most prescient novel, play, etc
We decided the most uncannily prescient movie is Life of Brian, right down to the trans debate
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
Is that really in 1984?
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
We haven't had helicopter gunships machinegunning refugees even in 1984 but if you think back to 1948 (Orwell's mental setting) you had the British armed forces trying to keep the Jews out of Palestine, shipsful being turned away.
Russia has just claimed that Ukraine plan to shoot down a rocket filled with radioactive material over the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
So, going by Russian logic, that is exactly what Russia will now do. Then they can say Told you so, while scaring the shit out of everyone
Given the U?S at least and probably others have intel into the heart of the Kremlin (eg detailed advance knowledge of the Ukraine invasion) how do you think Russia will get away with this? Sure, there will be a gazillion Twitter twats who will go "Ooh, look, Ukrainian bastards!" but the higher levels of diplomacy will know exactly what gas gone on.
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
Russia doesn't care about the truth, here, it cares about perceptions
If they set off a small dirty bomb and manage to at least temporarily blur the truth of who did it, then that is job done. Everyone will know it was probably Russia - probably - but won't be entirely sure. And everyone will be scared shitless and probably pushing Ukraine to back down
See the Kerch bombing, the Nordstream bombing, and the Dugin bombing. Each has been successfully blamed on various actors, even though we have a good idea in all cases who did it (Ukraine, USA, Ukraine)
You think US did nordstream? Interesting. I imagine any nuclear incident would lead to enormous pressure on China and India not to buy Russian oil. China is already alleged to be pretty furious with Putin and their economy is in trouble.
Russia has just claimed that Ukraine plan to shoot down a rocket filled with radioactive material over the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
So, going by Russian logic, that is exactly what Russia will now do. Then they can say Told you so, while scaring the shit out of everyone
Given the U?S at least and probably others have intel into the heart of the Kremlin (eg detailed advance knowledge of the Ukraine invasion) how do you think Russia will get away with this? Sure, there will be a gazillion Twitter twats who will go "Ooh, look, Ukrainian bastards!" but the higher levels of diplomacy will know exactly what gas gone on.
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
Russia doesn't care about the truth, here, it cares about perceptions
If they set off a small dirty bomb and manage to at least temporarily blur the truth of who did it, then that is job done. Everyone will know it was probably Russia - probably - but won't be entirely sure. And everyone will be scared shitless and probably pushing Ukraine to back down
See the Kerch bombing, the Nordstream bombing, and the Dugin bombing. Each has been successfully blamed on various actors, even though we have a good idea in all cases who did it (Ukraine, USA, Ukraine)
I don't think they even care about perceptions, some of their pretexts and arguments have been laughably ridiculous. So I guess it is more about giving people who want an excuse not to get involved something to hang it off.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
Is that really in 1984?
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
English comprehension not your strong point. Still wondering if you have one, in fact.
There is significant public concern about illegal immigrants coming on small boats from France English Channel migrant crisis. However, this is a small portion of overall illegal immigration. As above, there are between 594,000 and 745,000 illegal immigrants in UK. In contrast a total of approximately 30,000 people came in on small boats[28] and of these only approximately 10% are illegal immigrants (90% are legitimate refugees with a legal right to asylum in UK).[29][30]
wikipedia
No idea if this is true except the 30,000 figure is about right for 2021.
NB that sub Saharan Africa is a serious shithole. This is not a problem for the white man with money, otherwise it is. The "hotel" in which deportees are allegedly to be housed looks nicer and cleaner than almost all hotels I have stayed in in Africa (the Luxor Sheraton is nice, though) and is not going to happen. Realistically we can expect government-toppling stories of torture, slavery and murder if we enact Rwanda (because what after all is it famous for?). And it is only effective if we multiply x 10 the border Force and catch absolutely everybody, because people will cheerfully run a 1 in 10 risk of almost anything. People smoke tobacco.
Is Sunak's calculation that Braverman will do something equally dumb in a short space of time and can just be sacked again? That way he would have used her to win the leadership campaign, and saved us from a worse fate (ie Johnson back as PM). Just a thought.
I have no reason to doubt Rishi agreed with her on HS at the moment Johnson withdrew because at the time Penny was hoping to gain Johnson votes to achieve the 100 and I remember raising an eyebrow when Braverman quickly and pubically declared for Rishi, effectively ending Penny's hopes
It is noted that some think Rishi should just have gone back on his agreement once elected but I for one am reassured that if he makes a promise he can be trusted
Of course it would have been better that she was not HS but Rishi has made a close confident in Robert Jenrick her minister for immigration to no doubt check her worst aspects , but it must also be remembered the cabinet is from all parts of the party and she will not get an easy ride if she steps out of line
I would also comment that the red wall seats want the channel crossings stopped, as indeed we all should, not least because of the risk to the migrants and also those rescuing them and apparently she is a fluent French speaker and hopefully she can make progress with the French on this difficult matter
It is politics and if her appointment resulted in the end of the Johnson/Truss debacle then it is a real positive and I would say to Rishi's opponents be careful you do not underestimate him, he is going to take the fight to labour and they have a very different opponent to deal with now
With all the reports of T-62 in combat in Ukraine, is anyone else wishing we had some classics to send there? A few hundred Centurions? Even a troop of Conquerors?
Think we might have enough trouble reactivating the Challengers that are in storage. The thought of trying to get older Centurions or Conquerors running would probably give the relevant military engineers more than a few sleepless nights.
There aren’t any. Bovington might have a Centurion that runs - pretty sure all the Conquerors are just exhibits and gate guardians.
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
The South Africans use Cent, only it's called Olifant. Though I'm not sure how much of the original tank is left apart from the bare metal hulls and turrets, especially in the later marks.
They even removed the Meteor engines - the heretics.
IIRC due to government issues in South Africa, a lot of military equipment are non runners.
The underlying issue may be CFE treaties - the Americans and the Russians have hinterlands outwith Europe where they can park lots of tanks but UK doesn't, so any excess tanks had to be demilitarised. Though that can only be partial. You'd think [edit] MoD still had plenty of scope for storing armour within the treaty limits, given how much the active armoured force has been run down; whether this made sense to them is another matter.
All sold on. No one thinks that 50 year old tanks are worth a damn.
I knew a chap who sold surplussed vehicles. Interestingly, if your gun license doesn’t have a calibre limit, you can own a live tank. The ammunition comes under various explosives rules so owning that is basically impossible, though.
Apparently quite few Ferrets have shown up in Ukraine - sold by private owners to the Ukrainian government. Also various ages of 432.
Hmm, nobody told the Taliban. They've got a pre-war Italian tankette running around. 1935-ish design, not the cutting edge even then.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
Is that really in 1984?
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
Here is more
"Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her .arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats."
Russia has just claimed that Ukraine plan to shoot down a rocket filled with radioactive material over the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
So, going by Russian logic, that is exactly what Russia will now do. Then they can say Told you so, while scaring the shit out of everyone
Given the U?S at least and probably others have intel into the heart of the Kremlin (eg detailed advance knowledge of the Ukraine invasion) how do you think Russia will get away with this? Sure, there will be a gazillion Twitter twats who will go "Ooh, look, Ukrainian bastards!" but the higher levels of diplomacy will know exactly what gas gone on.
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
Russia doesn't care about the truth, here, it cares about perceptions
If they set off a small dirty bomb and manage to at least temporarily blur the truth of who did it, then that is job done. Everyone will know it was probably Russia - probably - but won't be entirely sure. And everyone will be scared shitless and probably pushing Ukraine to back down
See the Kerch bombing, the Nordstream bombing, and the Dugin bombing. Each has been successfully blamed on various actors, even though we have a good idea in all cases who did it (Ukraine, USA, Ukraine)
You think US did nordstream? Interesting. I imagine any nuclear incident would lead to enormous pressure on China and India not to buy Russian oil. China is already alleged to be pretty furious with Putin and their economy is in trouble.
I am fairly confident the USA did Nordstream, tho they might have used a proxy to get it done yet avoid the blame (Ukraine itself, or maybe the Poles or Finns)
The strategic prize of keeping Germany on the western side, reliant on America, and also of cutting off Putin's options - one day selling more gas to Europe - was irresistible for Washington. And recall we have several vids of Biden and aides months ago saying the USA would do exactly this: cut Nordsream (one way or another)
But we cannot be sure. The fog of war obscures the truth. And that fog is what Putin might rely on, if he "does something radioactive"
Braverman advised Johnson on how the government should go about breaking the law. FFS! Did no-one tell the Bar Council? She shouldn't be a minister, and she shouldn't remain a barrister either.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
The only way to stop the boats is to eliminate the pull factor. It must be clearly understood that there is no direct route to staying in the country for boat arrivals. No ifs or buts.
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
Talking of sedentary lifestyles: something interesting has happened in England since the lockdown in my experience. There seem to be fewer obese and overweight people walking around. But whether this is because a lot of people have decided to lose weight, or whether they've just decided to stay at home more than they use to and so you don't seem them as often, I don't know.
Braverman advised Johnson on how the government should go about breaking the law. FFS! Did no-one tell the Bar Council? She shouldn't be a minister, and she shouldn't remain a barrister either.
DMed you in response to a question of yours in case you haven't seen.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
The only way to stop the boats is to eliminate the pull factor. It must be clearly understood that there is no direct route to staying in the country for boat arrivals. No ifs or buts.
Not logical. Why treat them differently from other illegals?
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
And residency rights for any illegal immigrant who whistleblows on the above.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
And residency rights for any illegal immigrant who whistleblows on the above.
But think about the companies. How are they to know, in the absence of a UK ID card?
They'd need to ask everyone to show a passport. How do they know they are real? And what about the many, many UK subjects who don't have a passport? Are they to become unemployable?
I wonder whether any Ministers sacked by Sunak have sent in letters to Graham Brady as an act of spite or revenge! I imagine that a few would find it emotionally satisfying.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
Is that really in 1984?
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
Here is more
"Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her .arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats."
Genius indeed.
My favourite is Duckspeak (from chapter 5)
"Winston had finished his bread and cheese. He turned a little sideways in his chair to drink his mug of coffee. At the table on his left the man with the strident voice was still talking remorselessly away. A young woman who was perhaps his secretary, and who was sitting with her back to Winston, was listening to him and seemed to be eagerly agreeing with everything that he said. From time to time Winston caught some such remark as 'I think you're so right, I do so agree with you', uttered in a youthful and rather silly feminine voice. But the other voice never stopped for an instant, even when the girl was speaking.
"Winston knew the man by sight, though he knew no more about him than that he held some important post in the Fiction Department. He was a man of about thirty, with a muscular throat and a large, mobile mouth. His head was thrown back a little, and because of the angle at which he was sitting, his spectacles caught the light and presented to Winston two blank discs instead of eyes. What was slightly horrible, was that from the stream of sound that poured out of his mouth it was almost impossible to distinguish a single word. Just once Winston caught a phrase -'complete and final elimination of Goldsteinism'- jerked out very rapidly and, as it seemed, all in one piece, like a line of type cast solid.
"For the rest it was just a noise, a quack-quack-quacking. And yet, though you could not actually hear what the man was saying, you could not be in any doubt about its general nature. He might be denouncing Goldstein and demanding sterner measures against thought-criminals and saboteurs, he might be fulminating against the atrocities of the Eurasian army, he might be praising Big Brother or the heroes on the Malabar front -- it made no difference. Whatever it was, you could be certain that every word of it was pure orthodoxy, pure Ingsoc. As he watched the eyeless face with the jaw moving rapidly up and down, Winston had a curious feeling that this was not a real human being but some kind of dummy. It was not the man's brain that was speaking, it was his larynx.
"The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words, but it was not speech in the true sense: it was a noise uttered in unconsciousness, like the quacking of a duck."
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
The only way to stop the boats is to eliminate the pull factor. It must be clearly understood that there is no direct route to staying in the country for boat arrivals. No ifs or buts.
Not logical. Why treat them differently from other illegals?
We shouldn't. Anyone here illegally should, by definition, be deported.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
And does that halt the flow of new arrivals?
Given the torment that people are prepared to put themselves through to get here, deterring "supply" seems a forlorn hope. Dealing with "demand" in the grey economy is probably a better bet. So, in the long term, it has a better chance of doing so than anything else that's been suggested.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
And residency rights for any illegal immigrant who whistleblows on the above.
But think about the companies. How are they to know, in the absence of a UK ID card?
They'd need to ask everyone to show a passport. How do they know they are real? And what about the many, many UK subjects who don't have a passport? Are they to become unemployable?
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
Talking of sedentary lifestyles: something interesting has happened in England since the lockdown in my experience. There seem to be fewer obese and overweight people walking around. But whether this is because a lot of people have decided to lose weight, or whether they've just decided to stay at home more than they use to and so you don't seem them as often, I don't know.
I was struck this afternoon by how young and slim everyone in London appears, after two weeks in the USA
However this is probably an unfair comparison. If I had returned to Wick or Newent I would probably not feel quite the same
Speaking of weight-loss, I must to the gym to earn my laksa...
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
The only way to stop the boats is to eliminate the pull factor. It must be clearly understood that there is no direct route to staying in the country for boat arrivals. No ifs or buts.
Not logical. Why treat them differently from other illegals?
We shouldn't. Anyone here illegally should, by definition, be deported.
Thanks, that's consistent. It just read as if you were focussing on boaters, that's all. I was wondering if Embarrassing the Home Sec was a crime or something!
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Easy.
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
And residency rights for any illegal immigrant who whistleblows on the above.
But think about the companies. How are they to know, in the absence of a UK ID card?
They'd need to ask everyone to show a passport. How do they know they are real? And what about the many, many UK subjects who don't have a passport? Are they to become unemployable?
Companies are already required to do that.
Butd how do they know whom to ask? Presumably everyone? So those sans passports are ...?
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
I'll google it
I was having this debate at the weekend with my mates in Arizona. What is the most prescient novel, play, etc
We decided the most uncannily prescient movie is Life of Brian, right down to the trans debate
Surely the bigger problem is Sir Gavin Williamson. He was sacked by May for there being compelling evidence that he leaked information from a National Security Council meeting. His career in government is the most puzzling that I can think of.
I don't like Williamson, but give him a pass on that one. People should be allowed rehabilitation and second chances. But not within a week, that's not rehabilitation that's brushing aside what's literally just happened and saying it doesn't matter.
It's almost funny, that the official line seems to be that resigning (we'll pretend it was voluntary) shows she was willing to show responsibility, therefore she doesn't actually have to take responsibility.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
Sink, burn or destroy then.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
Reminded again of 1984 Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
Is that really in 1984?
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
Here is more
"Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her .arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats."
Genius indeed.
My favourite is Duckspeak (from chapter 5)
"Winston had finished his bread and cheese. He turned a little sideways in his chair to drink his mug of coffee. At the table on his left the man with the strident voice was still talking remorselessly away. A young woman who was perhaps his secretary, and who was sitting with her back to Winston, was listening to him and seemed to be eagerly agreeing with everything that he said. From time to time Winston caught some such remark as 'I think you're so right, I do so agree with you', uttered in a youthful and rather silly feminine voice. But the other voice never stopped for an instant, even when the girl was speaking.
"Winston knew the man by sight, though he knew no more about him than that he held some important post in the Fiction Department. He was a man of about thirty, with a muscular throat and a large, mobile mouth. His head was thrown back a little, and because of the angle at which he was sitting, his spectacles caught the light and presented to Winston two blank discs instead of eyes. What was slightly horrible, was that from the stream of sound that poured out of his mouth it was almost impossible to distinguish a single word. Just once Winston caught a phrase -'complete and final elimination of Goldsteinism'- jerked out very rapidly and, as it seemed, all in one piece, like a line of type cast solid.
"For the rest it was just a noise, a quack-quack-quacking. And yet, though you could not actually hear what the man was saying, you could not be in any doubt about its general nature. He might be denouncing Goldstein and demanding sterner measures against thought-criminals and saboteurs, he might be fulminating against the atrocities of the Eurasian army, he might be praising Big Brother or the heroes on the Malabar front -- it made no difference. Whatever it was, you could be certain that every word of it was pure orthodoxy, pure Ingsoc. As he watched the eyeless face with the jaw moving rapidly up and down, Winston had a curious feeling that this was not a real human being but some kind of dummy. It was not the man's brain that was speaking, it was his larynx.
"The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words, but it was not speech in the true sense: it was a noise uttered in unconsciousness, like the quacking of a duck."
Genius.
When not writing fiction he was a complete wombat. Was reading the other day how he nearly drowned himself and others by taking a motorboat across the Corrievreckan outside slack water, after living on Jura for 3 years, which is like living next to the M25 for 3 years and thinking it is a good idea to cross it on foot in fog in the rush hour.
A week or so ago, I said I thought the UK would muddle through your current political problems. I would say now that you appear to be at least halfway through -- and that the choice of the subject for this header, shows it. You are now worrying about one Cabinet member, rather than an entire government. (I wouldn't even be surprised to see a header in the next few days on a foreign election.)
And you have shown a commendable stability in your support for Ukraine, all through this muddle.
Mr. Leon, dystopia isn't my preferred genre, but in the novella The Machine Stops EM Forster predicts instant messaging and (implicitly) the internet. And an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
Talking of sedentary lifestyles: something interesting has happened in England since the lockdown in my experience. There seem to be fewer obese and overweight people walking around. But whether this is because a lot of people have decided to lose weight, or whether they've just decided to stay at home more than they use to and so you don't seem them as often, I don't know.
They're all taking Mediterranean cruises which stop in Villefranche. You could always tell the American ships because of the obesity of the passengers. Now they are being outnumbered by the English.Some of the narrow alleys become impassable.
I'm interested on how PB's finest would tackle the boats across the channel issue. I think a deal with the French is needed along lines of processing applications for asylum jointly in France and we take a certain percentage or number and French agree that intercepted boats can be turned back. Anybody think that Rwanda might "work" if implemented fully?
Good God! Strike a deal with the French? You absolute traitor, sir, how dare you!
More importantly, the French will never stop the boats.
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
The only way to stop the boats is to eliminate the pull factor. It must be clearly understood that there is no direct route to staying in the country for boat arrivals. No ifs or buts.
Not logical. Why treat them differently from other illegals?
We shouldn't. Anyone here illegally should, by definition, be deported.
Comments
It's quite funny when you consider a lot of Braverman's critics are on the right.
FYI - The minister responsible for MI5 can never be involved in any security breaches.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48126974
Rishi had to include her - it was her nomination that killed off Boris. Dirty deals get done in politics. To have not delivered would have created a betrayal mantra.
But I’m sure he read her the riot act in her appointment meeting. And if she puts a foot wrong she’ll be out on her ear - but this time with a good reason… Labour get to say “I told you so for one day and then it’s just chip paper”
Mind you, given how well they maintain stuff at Bovey, wouldn’t be surprised if they could be brought back to running status.
The gate guardians are odd shaped scrap, of course.
Americans still bitch about Benedict Arnold even though he was a US war hero.
I don't like Williamson, but give him a pass on that one. People should be allowed rehabilitation and second chances. But not within a week, that's not rehabilitation that's brushing aside what's literally just happened and saying it doesn't matter.
1) make the penalty for employing an undocumented worker 100k. Personal responsibility of directors of the company - they lose their houses etc.
2) if the said undocumented worker gives evidence leading to a conviction, they get £50k plus indefinite leave to remain.
The err… underground economy evaporates by lunchtime the next day.
Implantation costs - zero. Probably a profit for HMG.
Just for fun, do the same for employing people at less than minimum wage.
You have to try to convince the civilians on the other side that nukes are imminent (to get them to pressure their governments in fear, and for the governments to become unpopular for not giving concessions) whilst reassuring the governments and military on the other side that no, of course we're not going to be that stupid (because you don't want to accidentally blunder into an actual nuclear war, because that's a lose-lose situation).
It's harder in the modern information age, because compartmentalising those messages is so much more difficult.
Truss could hardly complain about leaking. She was very close to Harry Cole according to Cummings.
A Conqueror was still running at IWM Duxford, at least until recently:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTxZibECa3E
They will make agreements, but the locals hate the migrants with a considerable heat.
No French politician is going to upset so many French people to accommodate foreigners. Especially the British.
Ghastly though it sounds it'd probably save lives.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1585253715547938819
Honeymoon bounce. Says a lot about Truss and Johnson that a trillionaire Borrower brings a sense of return-to-normal.
Won't last, lab maj nailed on.
IIRC due to government issues in South Africa, a lot of military equipment are non runners.
Are Mr & Mrs Average worrying about boat people? No, they are not - they are worrying about how they're going to pay their mortgage, heat their house and put food on the table.
Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it.
I reckon Rwanda would work if it was implemented fully. But we would have to be ruthless. For a week or two dozens would have to be sent straight to Rwanda. Maybe hundreds. Ideally you would send everyone but that's probably not feasible
The 1 in 10 chance that even if you made it to the UK you would end up in the middle of Africa would, I think, deter 90% of people from taking to the boats in the first place. Rwanda??? WTF?? Why not stay in France or head to Spain, etc
That's how it would work. It is a deterrent. It's not a long term process of sending tens of thousands
This is presumably why the Danes - not known for their inhumanity - are looking at a very similar option, in Rwanda
You would need a highly determined Home Secretary, perhaps with a streak of madness, to pull it off. Ideally he or SHE would be minority ethnic so they can shrug off the white liberal shrieks of anguish, and she - let's say it's a she - would have to be prepared to quit the ECHR or something akin
If only there was a Tory politician that ticked all these boxes
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-10-26/liz-truss-s-ouster-wasn-t-the-markets-doing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SRUzPhQw2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cRMMxAX7gA
The underlying issue may be CFE treaties - the Americans and the Russians have hinterlands outwith Europe where they can park lots of tanks but UK doesn't, so any excess tanks had to be demilitarised. Though that can only be partial. You'd think [edit] MoD
still had plenty of scope for storing armour within the treaty limits, given how much the active armoured force has been run down; whether this made sense to them is another matter.
The tiny boats are terrible and the people running them need to be stopped. But I'd be really surprised if they were the main unofficial route in, even now. And whilst the visible symbolism is bad, that's not a reason to shout about a largely symbolic policy.
But at the moment, all the danger, cruelty and government incompetence seems pretty deliberate. Either to stop people coming in or to make British voters think that the government is stopping people coming in. I don't know which option depresses me more.
(And yes, that means having more places for people to live in places where the local economy can sustain them, not dumping them in dying towns because the accommodation is cheap. A tram ride from a reasonably perky city, that sort of thing. But we need to do that anyway.)
ETA: Talking of which, this is shameful:
Incredible evidence being given by Home Office officials at
CommonsHomeAffs
:
The Home Office has only processed 4% of asylum claims from Channel migrants last year.
85% of those completed claims were granted asylum.
No wonder the asylum backlog has soared over 100,000
https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1585195009606914050
And Ukraine would lose its military and financial support overnight if they actually did it themselves. So it is beyond any credulity for it to work as the Russians suggest "it was Ukraine wot did it...."
So all solutions relying on French co-operation are wishful thinking
Which leaves us with..... Rwanda. Or something like it. Or, in the end, something even more radical and brutal. Because in the end you can't have unstoppable thousands of people simply turning up on your beaches and being allowed in. Ultimately, voters will push for a Far Right party that gets medieval on the problem. Best avoided
A deep divide exists between Virtuals and Physicals
By Mary Harrington"
https://unherd.com/2022/10/can-sunak-end-the-new-class-war/
If they set off a small dirty bomb and manage to at least temporarily blur the truth of who did it, then that is job done. Everyone will know it was probably Russia - probably - but won't be entirely sure. And everyone will be scared shitless and probably pushing Ukraine to back down
See the Kerch bombing, the Nordstream bombing, and the Dugin bombing. Each has been successfully blamed on various actors, even though we have a good idea in all cases who did it (Ukraine, USA, Ukraine)
Orwell was such a prescient genius. Astonishing
NOM now favourite for next election.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.167249195
However, if there is any truth to the reports that neither Kwarteng nor Truss gave any notice to Bailey of the contents of the 'mini-budget', they still must carry a large part of the blame. Their policies' unpalatability to their own parliamentary party is also entirely down to their own refusal to prepare the ground or introduce change gradually.
On Braverman: I really dislike her, however I think she is better than Priti Patel, who is after all alleged to have bullied civil servants.
I do think it shows how culturally progressive we are as a nation that the figure in government labelled as closest to hard right is a Buddhist of South Asian descent via East Africa, who studied at Cambridge and the Sorbonne (so is presumably also fluent in French).
It's from before World War One, which makes the insight quite impressive.
Personally, I don't think the public actually care a great deal about immigration levels, so long as they think it is being managed ok, and at the moment they don't.
I knew a chap who sold surplussed vehicles. Interestingly, if your gun license doesn’t have a calibre limit, you can own a live tank. The ammunition comes under various explosives rules so owning that is basically impossible, though.
Apparently quite few Ferrets have shown up in Ukraine - sold by private owners to the Ukrainian government. Also various ages of 432.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1651294/Rishi-Sunak-illegal-migrants-small-boats-European-Court-of-Human-Rights-update
On his plans to tackle illegal immigration he insisted that the failure to put a stop to the hundreds of people crossing the channel in small boats had frustrated him hugely and he wanted to complete the plans of deportations to Rwanda.
He said: “It vexes me and was part of the reason I supported Brexit, even though I was told that it would be potentially damaging for my career.
“But I believed in it and one of the reasons was clearly making sure that we had proper control of our borders. We've got to change the definition of asylum.
“At the moment we use the ECHR, the European definition, and that is very broad. It's become broader.”
He added: “Over time, it's exploited by lefty lawyers for lots of spurious reasons to keep people here. So, I think we should move to a different definition, another international standard that the Australians and others use, which is much tighter and narrower, so that will help.
“The plan I've set out is radical. I will do whatever it takes including any legal changes to make the Rwanda policy work, because we must have control over our borders.”
When asked if that meant he would leave the ECHR he said: “Yes, no option should be off the table.”
"Albanese said on Thursday people attempting to arrive in Australia by boat will be turned back to avoid offshore detention, but didn’t clarify whether offshore detention was still a Labor policy."
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/dangerous-statement-border-protection-in-spotlight-after-albanese-said-he-favours-boat-turn-backs-over-offshore-detention-20220414-p5adgv.html
I'll google it
I was having this debate at the weekend with my mates in Arizona. What is the most prescient novel, play, etc
We decided the most uncannily prescient movie is Life of Brian, right down to the trans debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euqEEN8W_Kw
Permanent landlord ban on anyone housing undocumented migrants
Permanent director ban for any company employing them
Permanent driving ban for anyone moving them about
Etc etc
There is significant public concern about illegal immigrants coming on small boats from France English Channel migrant crisis. However, this is a small portion of overall illegal immigration. As above, there are between 594,000 and 745,000 illegal immigrants in UK. In contrast a total of approximately 30,000 people came in on small boats[28] and of these only approximately 10% are illegal immigrants (90% are legitimate refugees with a legal right to asylum in UK).[29][30]
wikipedia
No idea if this is true except the 30,000 figure is about right for 2021.
NB that sub Saharan Africa is a serious shithole. This is not a problem for the white man with money, otherwise it is. The "hotel" in which deportees are allegedly to be housed looks nicer and cleaner than almost all hotels I have stayed in in Africa (the Luxor Sheraton is nice, though) and is not going to happen. Realistically we can expect government-toppling stories of torture, slavery and murder if we enact Rwanda (because what after all is it famous for?). And it is only effective if we multiply x 10 the border Force and catch absolutely everybody, because people will cheerfully run a 1 in 10 risk of almost anything. People smoke tobacco.
It is noted that some think Rishi should just have gone back on his agreement once elected but I for one am reassured that if he makes a promise he can be trusted
Of course it would have been better that she was not HS but Rishi has made a close confident in Robert Jenrick her minister for immigration to no doubt check her worst aspects , but it must also be remembered the cabinet is from all parts of the party and she will not get an easy ride if she steps out of line
I would also comment that the red wall seats want the channel crossings stopped, as indeed we all should, not least because of the risk to the migrants and also those rescuing them and apparently she is a fluent French speaker and hopefully she can make progress with the French on this difficult matter
It is politics and if her appointment resulted in the end of the Johnson/Truss debacle then it is a real positive and I would say to Rishi's opponents be careful you do not underestimate him, he is going to take the fight to labour and they have a very different opponent to deal with now
https://twitter.com/aaf_lukas/status/1567244683146928128
"Last night to the flicks. All war films. One very good one of a ship full of refugees being bombed somewhere in the Mediterranean. Audience much amused by shots of a great huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him, first you saw him wallowing along in the water like a porpoise, then you saw him through the helicopters gunsights, then he was full of holes and the sea round him turned pink and he sank as suddenly as though the holes had let in the water, audience shouting with laughter when he sank. then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it. there was a middle-aged woman might have been a jewess sitting up in the bow with a little boy about three years old in her arms. little boy screaming with fright and hiding his head between her breasts as if he was trying to burrow right into her and the woman putting her .arms round him and comforting him although she was blue with fright herself, all the time covering him up as much as possible as if she thought her arms could keep the bullets off him. then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats."
Genius indeed.
The strategic prize of keeping Germany on the western side, reliant on America, and also of cutting off Putin's options - one day selling more gas to Europe - was irresistible for Washington. And recall we have several vids of Biden and aides months ago saying the USA would do exactly this: cut Nordsream (one way or another)
But we cannot be sure. The fog of war obscures the truth. And that fog is what Putin might rely on, if he "does something radioactive"
Did no-one tell the Bar Council?
She shouldn't be a minister, and she shouldn't remain a barrister either.
They'd need to ask everyone to show a passport. How do they know they are real? And what about the many, many UK subjects who don't have a passport? Are they to become unemployable?
"Winston had finished his bread and cheese. He turned a little sideways in his chair to drink his mug of coffee. At the table on his left the man with the strident voice was still talking remorselessly away. A young woman who was perhaps his secretary, and who was sitting with her back to Winston, was listening to him and seemed to be eagerly agreeing with everything that he said. From time to time Winston caught some such remark as 'I think you're so right, I do so agree with you', uttered in a youthful and rather silly feminine voice. But the other voice never stopped for an instant, even when the girl was speaking.
"Winston knew the man by sight, though he knew no more about him than that he held some important post in the Fiction Department. He was a man of about thirty, with a muscular throat and a large, mobile mouth. His head was thrown back a little, and because of the angle at which he was sitting, his spectacles caught the light and presented to Winston two blank discs instead of eyes. What was slightly horrible, was that from the stream of sound that poured out of his mouth it was almost impossible to distinguish a single word. Just once Winston caught a phrase -'complete and final elimination of Goldsteinism'- jerked out very rapidly and, as it seemed, all in one piece, like a line of type cast solid.
"For the rest it was just a noise, a quack-quack-quacking. And yet, though you could not actually hear what the man was saying, you could not be in any doubt about its general nature. He might be denouncing Goldstein and demanding sterner measures against thought-criminals and saboteurs, he might be fulminating against the atrocities of the Eurasian army, he might be praising Big Brother or the heroes on the Malabar front -- it made no difference. Whatever it was, you could be certain that every word of it was pure orthodoxy, pure Ingsoc. As he watched the eyeless face with the jaw moving rapidly up and down, Winston had a curious feeling that this was not a real human being but some kind of dummy. It was not the man's brain that was speaking, it was his larynx.
"The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words, but it was not speech in the true sense: it was a noise uttered in unconsciousness, like the quacking of a duck."
However this is probably an unfair comparison. If I had returned to Wick or Newent I would probably not feel quite the same
Speaking of weight-loss, I must to the gym to earn my laksa...
Criminals should try that one.
When not writing fiction he was a complete wombat. Was reading the other day how he nearly drowned himself and others by taking a motorboat across the Corrievreckan outside slack water, after living on Jura for 3 years, which is like living next to the M25 for 3 years and thinking it is a good idea to cross it on foot in fog in the rush hour.
And you have shown a commendable stability in your support for Ukraine, all through this muddle.