For some reason they've used different charts across different timescales on the same story within 24 hours, so I think their text updates are getting confused.
I think they should scale that to GDP - some of the small East European countries have made contributions that are relatively massive.
It would be fairer, at the least to include both (it is relevant to see how many dollars the USA has given, even though in GDP terms they will be much lower down the list due to being so wealthy).
I suspect it isn't because we don't look as generous then, even though we'd still rate a lot better than plenty.
It would actually make us look much more generous - the US economy is tens times bigger than the U.K. so their bar on the chart would shrink massively.
Compared to them, but not as compared to, say, Estonia. But I didn't mean it would make us look bad.
Boris Johnson, the man who opposes gesture politics:
Russia’s barbaric and illegal invasion of Ukraine has led to millions of Ukrainians losing electricity, water and vital supplies. I am supporting the #hourforukraine tonight at 8pm in solidarity with them. Victory to Ukraine!
On topic, in TK Maxx using the unisex changing rooms this afternoon; no horses frightened or outrages committed about which I'm sure the trans finders general will be VASTLY relieved.
There's a bit in John Buchan where an English toff speaks dismissively of a Russian who was bolshevised because "his aunt was outraged and his uncle horsewhipped in some one-horse town in upper Volga." Outrages are always vastly amusing when they happen to somebody else's aunt.
If IIRC, that was Scudder in the 39 Steps. In an anti-Semitic tirade. Scudder is quite definitely not a toff.
Scudder was an American, but I don't recall him saying that. It would be a bit unlikely too given the 39 Steps is set in 1914 and 'Bolshevism' didn't become a bogey word until well into 1918.
Edit - you are right, but the word 'Bolshevised' wasn't in it. He was referring to the Jewish conspiracy he was rabbiting on about 'with its knife into the Empire of the Tsar.'
Ok I am doing this from memory, 45 years on.
I think Jew in a bath chair with an eye like a rattlesnake is how it continues
When I asked why, he said that the anarchist lot thought it would give them their chance. Everything would be in the melting-pot, and they looked to see a new world emerge. The capitalists would rake in the shekels, and make fortunes by buying up wreckage.
Capital, he said, had no conscience and no fatherland. Besides, the Jew was behind it, and the Jew hated Russia worse than hell.
“Do you wonder?” he cried. “For three hundred years they have been persecuted, and this is the return match for the pogroms. The Jew is everywhere, but you have to go far down the backstairs to find him. Take any big Teutonic business concern. If you have dealings with it the first man you meet is Prince von und zu Something, an elegant young man who talks Eton-and-Harrow English. But he cuts no ice. If your business is big, you get behind him and find a prognathous Westphalian with a retreating brow and the manners of a hog. He is the German business man that gives your English papers the shakes. But if you’re on the biggest kind of job and are bound to get to the real boss, ten to one you are brought up against a little white-faced Jew in a bath-chair with an eye like a rattlesnake. Yes, sir, he is the man who is ruling the world just now, and he has his knife in the Empire of the Tsar, because his aunt was outraged and his father flogged in some one-horse location on the Volga.”
There is something very sinister about allowing people to change their birth certificate. It is one of the core forms of proof of identity. This feels like a licence for fraudsters.
What I don't really understand is how a birth certificate can be amended. Presumably it would have to be signed with today's date, so it's hardly a birth certificate then is it?
An interesting one this, not just because Britain is one of the worst, but because it's hard to discern a pattern. Any ideas?
Some of them seem so random I wonder if the figures are accurate.
Notable to me that Ireland and Poland are both at the bottom, with the greatest decrease in the inactivity rate. This suggests to me that migration might be a distorting factor.
If Britain has lost lots of young European workers due to a combination of Brexit and the pandemic then this would increase the inactivity rate in Britain even if there wasn't a single additional person on long-term sick, or early retirement.
I'd suggest it would be more useful to look at the numbers in more detail, rather than the overall inactivity rate.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
To me this is the problem. There's clearly a complex and nuanced debate about all this in there.
But in outside world most arguments seem to boil down to one of:
"We shouldn't do it solely because it might result in a small number of sexual predators mis-using it for their own nefarious ends", or "We should do it because...well if you say no you're a massive transphobe and should be hunted down as such and that's all that needs said there."
Pretty much the entirety of the middle which ought to consist of, oh, 90% of the discussion, gets completely lost between the two extremes.
Cyclefree's header is entirely reasonable and well argued within the context of the specific amendment - so no issue from me on that score. It's just as part of the wider discussion on the legislation as a whole there ought to be so much more to the whole thing than JUST that one aspect, important as I accept it is.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Of course she thinks it's the right thing to do.
It's causing a load of tension with Westminster, dividing Scotland from England, and pleasing her left wing to the extent that they're willing to overlook the shambles her government is making of running Scotland.
It's absolutely perfect.
Shame about the possible negative consequences for women, but those are of course much less important to her.
The ideal scenario for Sturgeon is that there are no negative consequences for women, because instead the law is blocked by Westminster/the Courts, and she gets to maximise the constitutional clash.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
To me this is the problem. There's clearly a complex and nuanced debate about all this in there.
But in outside world most arguments seem to boil down to one of:
"We shouldn't do it solely because it might result in a small number of sexual predators mis-using it for their own nefarious ends", or "We should do it because...well if you say no you're a massive transphobe and should be hunted down as such and that's all that needs said there."
Pretty much the entirety of the middle which ought to consist of, oh, 90% of the discussion, gets completely lost between the two extremes.
Cyclefree's header is entirely reasonable and well argued within the context of the specific amendment - so no issue from me on that score. It's just as part of the wider discussion on the legislation as a whole there ought to be so much more to the whole thing than JUST that one aspect, important as I accept it is.
The argument about rights also comes to this point - as a result of conviction of crimes, society withdraws certain rights from the convicted. Some of them for life, even.
Why is this different, if only applied to those convicted of an offence?
Tbf that's politicians from all sides* who are involved in this murky business.
(*All sides of the Conservative Party, that is. "Only Conservative Party Peers, MPs and donors appear to be named as referrers – no politician from any other political party succeeded in referring suppliers onto the Covid testing VIP lane.")
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Of course she thinks it's the right thing to do.
It's causing a load of tension with Westminster, dividing Scotland from England, and pleasing her left wing to the extent that they're willing to overlook the shambles her government is making of running Scotland.
It's absolutely perfect.
Shame about the possible negative consequences for women, but those are of course much less important to her.
The ideal scenario for Sturgeon is that there are no negative consequences for women, because instead the law is blocked by Westminster/the Courts, and she gets to maximise the constitutional clash.
Since every woman who has dared to raise concerns has been subject to really nasty abuse, that ship has already sailed.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
To me this is the problem. There's clearly a complex and nuanced debate about all this in there.
But in outside world most arguments seem to boil down to one of:
"We shouldn't do it solely because it might result in a small number of sexual predators mis-using it for their own nefarious ends", or "We should do it because...well if you say no you're a massive transphobe and should be hunted down as such and that's all that needs said there."
Pretty much the entirety of the middle which ought to consist of, oh, 90% of the discussion, gets completely lost between the two extremes.
Cyclefree's header is entirely reasonable and well argued within the context of the specific amendment - so no issue from me on that score. It's just as part of the wider discussion on the legislation as a whole there ought to be so much more to the whole thing than JUST that one aspect, important as I accept it is.
The problem is that the mad bit of extremist guff - protecting the rights of sex offenders - soils the entire bed. It may well only be a reassurance thing banning such people from self-certifying. But that reassurance is what women who have been assaulted and abused and terrorised by such men need. It does not impede the genuine trans people at all, yet the bill advocates foam on about transphobia.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
-Innova Medical landed Covid contracts valued at £4 billion via the ‘VIP’ lane after its UK partner, a company trading under the name ‘Tried & Tested’ contacted Boris Johnson’s former advisor, Dominic Cummings.
Surescreen Diagnostics landed a £500m contract after Liam Fox MP referred the firm to Matt Hancock – Surescreen subsequently donated £20,000 to Liam Fox.
-Matt Hancock assisted Ecolog International onto the ‘VIP’ lane after being contacted by Genix Healthcare – a company that has donated £156,000 to the Conservative Party. Hancock’s Department paid Ecolog £38m in 2021, after the Government decided not to proceed with previously contracted Covid work.
-Conservative Peer Lord Prior introduced a company called LumiraDx to Lord Bethell. The firm was awarded Covid contracts worth over £45 million.
-Lord Bethell referred a company called Optigne Ltd after being contacted by a Cabinet Office official – Optigene were subsequently awarded a £322m contract, leading to a 1221% increase in profits to £41m.
-Conservative Peer, Lord Lansley, introduced a company called Accoro onto the ‘VIP’ lane. Only Conservative Party Peers, MPs and donors appear to be named as referrers – no politician from any other political party succeeded in referring suppliers onto the Covid testing VIP lane.
We will continue to investigate the latest ‘VIP’ lane scandal. But we can only do this with your support. If you would like to make a donation, you can do so here.
I understand why procurement procedures needed to be sped up, gambles taken, risks increased, at a time of immense urgency. I don't really understand why there would have been any need for specific individuals in government or parliament referring options.
I understand why procurement procedures needed to be sped up, gambles taken, risks increased, at a time of immense urgency. I don't really understand why there would have been any need for specific individuals in government or parliament referring options.
Come on kle, how are they going to get backhanders if they don't insert themselves in the chain?
I understand why procurement procedures needed to be sped up, gambles taken, risks increased, at a time of immense urgency. I don't really understand why there would have been any need for specific individuals in government or parliament referring options.
Come on kle, how are they going to get backhanders if they don't insert themselves in the chain?
An interesting one this, not just because Britain is one of the worst, but because it's hard to discern a pattern. Any ideas?
Some of them seem so random I wonder if the figures are accurate.
By the same token Ireland right at the bottom seems to make no sense.
We still have full free movement with Ireland.
There are more Poles resident in Ireland than Brits. The number of Lithuanians and Latvians in Ireland is more than half the numbers of Brits, despite those countries having much smaller populations.
For whatever reason there seems to be less migration between Ireland and Britain than there was in the past.
A current driver of emigration from Ireland appears to be high housing costs. Given that this is also a problem in Britain that may explain why those emigrating from Ireland are heading to other countries.
I'll admit, I do sometimes weary of your hobby horsing on different aspects of Gender Recognition, not all of which I quite see in the same terms as you.
But in this aspect every word of your header is spot on - the wilful ignoring that sex offenders can and will go to extremes to get opportunities to offend, and that a gender recognition system that fails to provide any safeguards against that fails not just women, but all those who seek to address and be accommodated in addressing their genuine gender dysphoria.
As someone who hoped for Labour pragmatism in the UK to get gender recognition as right as possible, I am disappointed by them. I am not going to suddenly jump to the traditionalist side in any wider culture war - but this is a false step on the road to getting things right, but one that will have, indeed has had, consequences for women's safety.
I understand why procurement procedures needed to be sped up, gambles taken, risks increased, at a time of immense urgency. I don't really understand why there would have been any need for specific individuals in government or parliament referring options.
How else is public money to be awarded to the right people without tender to deliver unusable PPE which can then be hit with a storage charge? If you do it properly you award contracts to actual PPE companies. Not to various unlikely types and companies that don't even exist at the point of reference.
On one hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining this bill is taking up too much time. On the other hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining that it is being rushed through. On the third hand they are delaying proceedings as much as they possibly can because they are hypocritical tory wankers.
Six Fucking Years. Two elections with manifesto commitments to do this.
Three Public Consultations.
Fucking Rushed?
Fuck Off.
Transphobes Fuck Right Off.
Fuck off with your concern trolling and "Actually I support Trans people" lies.
Just admit you are a bigot and move on.
That doesn't actually address the header in any way, but presumably makes you feel good.
I would be interested in breakdowns. For example, I am seeing that people in “paid by the hour” jobs are simply moving to get the wage increases they want. Whereas permanent employees are being more cautious - concerns over where the economy is heading.
This may be creating some interesting effects in the wage structures…
One thing that’s become extremely marked in my industry in the last couple of years is the huge gap between pay in the US and UK. We’re a little below our affiliates in Western Europe, a little above those in Eastern Europe, but at least a third cheaper, often more, than the equivalent levels in the US.
Partly exchange rate, partly the ongoing rocketing of professional salaries over there.
I did a deep dive last night on the state of American downtowns, especially the West Coast and NYC
Report: it is really bad, much worse than London
Even the NYT has noticed the dire state of San Francisco. A shell of what it was
"This is what the kids in San Francisco are forced to walk past everyday.
"Hard drug use, drug deals, feces, needles, adults slumped over with exposed wounds and addicts suffering from mental illness screaming in the streets.
Looks like a grungey Calcutta. Like nothing witnessed in Europe outside wartime
If the decline in American cities continues apace, then a lot of these Americans will come to Europe, esp English speaking London. So those pay differentials might equalise....
Going to get worse in SF....
Today is the start of our two-year budget process.
The first step is to release our projected two-year general fund deficit, and inform Departments of what we need to do over the coming months to balance our budget.
Translation, we ain't got no money and the tax base has left.
San Fransisco is an example of how the exaggerations of American culture and lurching between the extremes results in… horrible shit.
So
1) standard American policing of the homeless is really nasty. Multiplied by the fact that lots of the street people are black. 2) multiples by a demented drug problem 3) people upset with the police shooting and beating street people pass laws to prevent any attempt at moving them on or letting them do their thing 4) the crazy, drugged up street people do their thing
Meanwhile, in west London, a local PCSO lady - “Martin, have you taken your pills today? I’m asking because you were shouting at the ladies at the bus stop again. I know it’s tough but you need to make an effort…”
True story - she knows them all by name and goes round talking to them. In the style of a teacher with the pupils. Seems to work. A lot better than having 27 guys in ninja garb shooting them, anyway….
About a decade ago I was travelling to LA for work and hired a car to drive to my hotel. First thing I saw on the road out of the airport was a man spreadeagled against the boot of a police car with two cop, one pointing a gun at his head and the other holding him down. Welcome to California.
The US has always been a country of extremes and its inequality is most visible and manifest in the big cities where very rich and very poor are side by side. But elsewhere you generally miss the poor stuff because it’s hidden: whole poor suburbs, poor rural counties, big European business travellers and tourists see the wealthy and middle of road bits.
Britain has huge inequalities too but I think they’re most visible in the run down outer suburbs on the East and North East edges of the big cities. The poverty is more of the chip wrapper tumbleweed and betting shop on boarded up street variety. Depressing rather than scary for the most part.
Homelessness, addiction and urban criminality are areas where I think paternalism and intervention are absolutely justified. They may not be the right answer elsewhere in the economy but they absolutely are when people have lost the ability to control their own lives.
What marks the USA out as different is the view, right across the political spectrum, is that if you're poor, it really is down to your own moral failings. Backed up, by a really vindictive criminal justice system.
On one hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining this bill is taking up too much time. On the other hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining that it is being rushed through. On the third hand they are delaying proceedings as much as they possibly can because they are hypocritical tory wankers.
Six Fucking Years. Two elections with manifesto commitments to do this.
Three Public Consultations.
Fucking Rushed?
Fuck Off.
Transphobes Fuck Right Off.
Fuck off with your concern trolling and "Actually I support Trans people" lies.
Just admit you are a bigot and move on.
That doesn't actually address the header in any way, but presumably makes you feel good.
Alastair and Kinabalu are definitely worth listening to when it comes to the betting.
When it comes to the politics it reminds me of the opinions are like arseholes analogy.
On one hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining this bill is taking up too much time. On the other hand the hypocritical tory wankers are complaining that it is being rushed through. On the third hand they are delaying proceedings as much as they possibly can because they are hypocritical tory wankers.
Six Fucking Years. Two elections with manifesto commitments to do this.
Three Public Consultations.
Fucking Rushed?
Fuck Off.
Transphobes Fuck Right Off.
Fuck off with your concern trolling and "Actually I support Trans people" lies.
Just admit you are a bigot and move on.
That doesn't actually address the header in any way, but presumably makes you feel good.
Much like your Clarksonian whinge about Sturgeon I guess.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Nicola Sturgeon's attitude is essentially that "if lives have to be lost, that's just the way it is."
That was exactly the belief of Sir Ian Blair of the Met, after the De Mendes shooting. That a certain number of brown people would be accidentally killed in the course of business. But hey, it won’t be a big number….
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Nicola Sturgeon's attitude is essentially that "if lives have to be lost, that's just the way it is."
That was exactly the belief of Sir Ian Blair of the Met, after the De Mendes shooting. That a certain number of brown people would be accidentally killed in the course of business. But hey, it won’t be a big number….
It's so easy to take that view, when it's not your life, or those who matter you.
Senior Irish government official 'is British military intelligence agent'
"I will tell you what they (British military intelligence) are super, super, super, sensitive about, they have somebody still working, and I am assuming there's many still working in the Irish Republic, but one of them holds a very senior position in the Irish government,"
Senior Irish government official 'is British military intelligence agent'
"I will tell you what they (British military intelligence) are super, super, super, sensitive about, they have somebody still working, and I am assuming there's many still working in the Irish Republic, but one of them holds a very senior position in the Irish government,"
One would indeed hope that Britain has assets inside Ireland given the security context.
Although the idea that smart people are planning what happens if Sinn Fein come to power seems belied by the spectacle of British governmental competence elsewhere.
I really struggle to see the outrage in this: woman with money stays at a nice hotel for Christmas.
Clearly, there's a market for this rabble rousing though.
When someone's nicked £29 million from the public purse it does piss people off.
I don't know why either....
When there are so many ways to get around paying millions and tens of millions in tax the richer you get (ways that don't seem to have any benefit for the state), being accused of outraught fraudulent behaviour to get millions just seems like laziness.
They were also not audited, despite that being required by law. Though he did claim that the reason he couldn’t release them was because they were being audited…
An interesting one this, not just because Britain is one of the worst, but because it's hard to discern a pattern. Any ideas?
Some of them seem so random I wonder if the figures are accurate.
Notable to me that Ireland and Poland are both at the bottom, with the greatest decrease in the inactivity rate. This suggests to me that migration might be a distorting factor.
If Britain has lost lots of young European workers due to a combination of Brexit and the pandemic then this would increase the inactivity rate in Britain even if there wasn't a single additional person on long-term sick, or early retirement.
I'd suggest it would be more useful to look at the numbers in more detail, rather than the overall inactivity rate.
That is the *change* in inactivity rate, rather than the overall inactivity rate. It's a graph generated from OECD data, rather than published by the OECD.
Who published it, why are they not identified, and why leave out the definitions?
As data, here shorn of context such as the actual numbers, it has some questions over it.
Wrt UK (other countries will have different considerations), the OECD measures inactivity rate in the age group 15-64, so straight away that misses out 2 years of our workforce at the top - pension age being 66. And it misses out at least 1.8 million (from memory) of people over pension age who are economically active. And does whatever it does at the bottom.
I'm not calling total BS, but it's a bit whiffy.
Looking up the actual inactivity rates on OECD data, we are currently 12th from the lowest out of 34, rather than having some great collapsing disaster. I wonder if that's why the actual rate was left out? And that's still in the 15-64 age group. Data is here: https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=35562
I'd say - like Scott's OMIGOD LOOK IT'S DOWN 5.5% number from this morning which is obtained by making a comparison with a guestimate, it's a very political presentation.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Nicola Sturgeon's attitude is essentially that "if lives have to be lost, that's just the way it is."
That was exactly the belief of Sir Ian Blair of the Met, after the De Mendes shooting. That a certain number of brown people would be accidentally killed in the course of business. But hey, it won’t be a big number….
It's so easy to take that view, when it's not your life, or those who matter you.
I am trying to remember the black American comic who had a skit about his family asking him why he lived in a Jewish neighbourhood. Partly, he said, the delis. But mostly they had a really finely developed sense of when to get the fuck out of town… And what they do to the Jews today…
I really struggle to see the outrage in this: woman with money stays at a nice hotel for Christmas.
Clearly, there's a market for this rabble rousing though.
When someone's nicked £29 million from the public purse it does piss people off.
I don't know why either....
When there are so many ways to get around paying millions and tens of millions in tax the richer you get (ways that don't seem to have any benefit for the state), being accused of outraught fraudulent behaviour to get millions just seems like laziness.
They were also not audited, despite that being required by law. Though he did claim that the reason he couldn’t release them was because they were being audited…
His finances seem to be transparently bananas based on what comes out about them and what he claims about them, yet financial wheezes are so damn hard to pin people down on.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Turns out my dad had a younger brother who was put up for adoption, whose kids tracked down the family 60 years later, and I thus have a Welsh cousins I never knew existed.
Apparently families forget to mention these things.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
This is quite a puzzler. Your father’s brother was “infamous” in 1917.
You must be getting on yourself, if your father is from a generation capable of “infamy” in 1917.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Lenin was your uncle?
No and nor was his name uncle Joe.
Was he Russia's greatest love machine?
Edit: I guess not, he kicked the bucket right at the end of 1916.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
This is quite a puzzler. Your father’s brother was “infamous” in 1917.
You must be getting on yourself, if your father is from a generation capable of “infamy” in 1917.
My father's half-brother was 28 years older, and you might think I'm getting on a bit, but you're as old as you feel. That's what I'm told anyway. Btw I'm exactly coeval with Sir Mick.
We will continue to investigate the latest ‘VIP’ lane scandal. But we can only do this with your support. If you would like to make a donation, you can do so here.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
Who are the SLD these days?
A more relevant question would be how did the individual LD SMPs vote? And why?
I find it very hard to accept Ms Cyclefree's apparent assertion that they decided to vote en bloc.
That’s nothing. He’s just discovered a family history of insanity.
But also genius. My family is genius. Full of insanely brilliant characters
At least three of them are amongst the brightest people I have ever met
You just have to cope with the alcoholism, manic depression, depression, schizophrenia, drug addiction, suicidality, and pathological risk-taking (me). If you can cope with that, you will have a hoot
Senior Irish government official 'is British military intelligence agent'
"I will tell you what they (British military intelligence) are super, super, super, sensitive about, they have somebody still working, and I am assuming there's many still working in the Irish Republic, but one of them holds a very senior position in the Irish government,"
One would indeed hope that Britain has assets inside Ireland given the security context.
Although the idea that smart people are planning what happens if Sinn Fein come to power seems belied by the spectacle of British governmental competence elsewhere.
That's interesting. Especially that the guy is Sam Rosenfeld (pseudonym). He is former FRU who leaked details around the time of the Stakeknife affair in 2004, and fell out with the Govt at the time, who went after him with the Official Secrets Act and injuncted various UK press.
Very interesting that this article now is in an NI (Belfast) based newspaper rather than one in the ROI or US.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
Who are the SLD these days?
A more relevant question would be how did the individual LD SMPs vote? And why?
I find it very hard to accept Ms Cyclefree's apparent assertion that they decided to vote en bloc.
Aha - Scottish Lib Dems. I see.
I was temporarily lost track on the TLA, and thinking of the SaLaDs from when the Liberals were feuding with David Owen and trying to swallow the SDP (very roughly).
Great piece, and as an SLD member I am appalled. There have been some prissy arguments made which frankly encourage absolutism. I support both women's rights to safety and dignity, *and* the rights of trans women. But that requires balance which too many activists seem hell bent on refusing.
Who are the SLD these days?
A more relevant question would be how did the individual LD SMPs vote? And why?
I find it very hard to accept Ms Cyclefree's apparent assertion that they decided to vote en bloc.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Percy Toplis?
Umm no.
Siegfried Sassoon?
No, and no more comments.
Fair enough, but you piqued interest with your post. I will desist.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Nicola Sturgeon's attitude is essentially that "if lives have to be lost, that's just the way it is."
That was exactly the belief of Sir Ian Blair of the Met, after the De Mendes shooting. That a certain number of brown people would be accidentally killed in the course of business. But hey, it won’t be a big number….
It's so easy to take that view, when it's not your life, or those who matter you.
I am trying to remember the black American comic who had a skit about his family asking him why he lived in a Jewish neighbourhood. Partly, he said, the delis. But mostly they had a really finely developed sense of when to get the fuck out of town… And what they do to the Jews today…
Coincidentally, this is today’s tweet from the US Holocaust museum. With a slightly different perspective on that.
https://twitter.com/HolocaustMuseum/status/1605681264731856928 In 1943, Leon Bass enlisted in the US Army. Two years later at just 20 years old, Leon visited the newly liberated Buchenwald concentration camp; the horrors he witnessed shaped him for the rest of his life. Learn more about Leon from the Museum's podcast.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Lenin was your uncle?
No and nor was his name uncle Joe.
Was he Russia's greatest love machine?
Edit: I guess not, he kicked the bucket right at the end of 1916.
I'm wondering about Sir Roger Casement, but he was hanged in 1916.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Lenin was your uncle?
No and nor was his name uncle Joe.
Was he Russia's greatest love machine?
Edit: I guess not, he kicked the bucket right at the end of 1916.
I'm wondering about Sir Roger Casement, but he was hanged in 1916.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Turns out my dad had a younger brother who was put up for adoption, whose kids tracked down the family 60 years later, and I thus have a Welsh cousins I never knew existed.
Apparently families forget to mention these things.
We had the same thing, my mum's sister was put up for adoption when she was 3 as my mum's family couldn't afford to keep her. They only really discovered it when my grandad was on his deathbed and admitted to the other children that she existed and lived up the road from us in London. A whole 4 new cousins for my sister and I and an aunt and uncle who are great. Happily we're really close as an extended family, I can't imagine not knowing them so I'm glad my grandad came clean 25 years ago to my mum and her brothers.
So if SNP, Greens, Lab and LD all voted against there must have been approx 30 (?) MSPs who voted against their own Party. That's huge.
And it's very encouraging if they did - it shows independent thought and the Scottish Parliament operating as it should.
I don't think there's anything more sophisticated going on here that Sturgeon being desperate to show she's more "progressive" than the English and the alternative Scottish centre-left, because that's how she thinks.
I think this is genuine case of culture war - Sturgeon wants a fight with the Supreme Court in London and Parliament, if she can get it.
She'll get it because this Bill and the Haldane judgment impinge on "equal opportunities" - a reserved matter under the devolution settlement - in England and Wales. So Westminster can - and IMO should - issue a S. 35 Order to stop the Bill getting Royal Assent.
That is incorrect. It does not have the same effect as the Findlay amendment. First, because it requires the sex offender to notify the police if they intend to change gender. If they do not, nothing can be done. So it is piss easy to avoid.
Second, it asks the police to make a risk assessment. It assumes therefore that someone who has already been convicted of a sex offence may not be a risk. That is an absurd position. You could end up with two classes of convicted sex offenders: one has a GRC and can hide their identity, the other cannot. The first category gets to evade DBS checks.
No-one who has been convicted of a sex offence should be allowed to hide their identity or get access to women in the way that this Bill allows them to do.
Put it another way, why should a sex offender who has not been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria have the right to change gender? Why should anyone who does not have a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria have the right to change gender?
"All the amendments must be considered and voted on in one day because the Scottish government insists the Bill be enacted before Xmas."
At least they won't spend as much time as the Polish parliament spent on whether or not Jesus Christ should be declared king of Poland. (Eventually he was, in 2016.)
They trolled you, CycleFree. The law should be left as it is, and the bill binned. The esteemed parliamentarians of the north should look for something useful to parlay about.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
That's nothing - he's just discovered he has 20 more brothers
When I was told “you know we have another brother?” - about 30 minutes ago - I thought “well that doesn’t happen every day!”
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
It's mildly disconcerting. I found out this year that I have a half-uncle whom my father (his half-brother) never mentioned, I suppose because he did not know. This hitherto unknown fellow was also famous/infamous in his day (1917) and is the subject of a recently published book.
Lenin was your uncle?
No and nor was his name uncle Joe.
Was he Russia's greatest love machine?
Edit: I guess not, he kicked the bucket right at the end of 1916.
I'm wondering about Sir Roger Casement, but he was hanged in 1916.
On topic, just trying to understand the issue: Is it currently illegal in Scotland for a man to go into a women's toilet?
Ah, I understand that you are trying not to understand the issue. Understandable, since it means taking a position where the progressive position is not unique or obvious.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Of course she thinks it's the right thing to do.
It's causing a load of tension with Westminster, dividing Scotland from England, and pleasing her left wing to the extent that they're willing to overlook the shambles her government is making of running Scotland.
It's absolutely perfect.
Shame about the possible negative consequences for women, but those are of course much less important to her.
I am now of the view - not just because of this - that women's right, needs, desires and wants, their safety, their lives - are simply not important to those in authority in this country. We are seen as second best. We are expected to accommodate others. We are expected, consciously or unconsciously, to put men's interests first. Society is arranged to suit men. If we complain about this or demand changes or demand better, we are told that we are aggressive or tiresome or bitches or attacked or insulted or demeaned in some way.
We are we must be inclusive and kind to others, to think of others first, to be accommodating, to avoid offence and hurt. We are told that all it takes to be women is to wear dresses, high heels and lipstick as if womanhood was merely a superficial costume to be put on and discarded at will. Women are being told to behave like good little girls again. If we don’t, we are verbally assaulted or threatened with physical assault, some of it in luridly sexually offensive ways. Or simply ignored or excluded.
No.
It is so tiresome, so wearying, so infuriating to have to go through this again, to be told that if we disagree or protest or ask about our needs, our rights, our demands, our boundaries, our concerns, the risks to us, we are being bigoted or selfish and that these are “not valid”.
That is what I think is going on. That is why the debate about self-ID is so toxic and so important. Women are not being listened to. If it goes through, I fear that it will push back or eliminate many of the rights women have gained during my lifetime. I am seeing changes in attitudes already. I am seeing exemptions created specifically to permit women only spaces not being used for fear they will upset men. I am seeing inclusivity being used to exclude women from places they were previously free to treat as women-only. It will affect not just me but my daughter — and her daughters too. That is why it matters to me.
Men with power bossing women around. This is a very old, very sour wine being offered in a new bottle.
I am so angry about this.
Today the police are investigating abuse allegations in a mixed sex hostel in London 44 years ago. In decades to come some future police force will start investigating abuse allegations as a result of what Holyrood voted through tonight. But the politicians and their appeasers who pushed this through will not be around to face the consequences, the accountability for the harm they caused.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Tom Watson should be no where near the HoL, it is an absolute disgrace. In his self appointed role of nonce finder general, not only did he use his unique position to keep firing out these false accusations, he was also (deliberately) totally uninterested in any stories of individuals who weren't part of the Blue Team, when we now know that there appears to have been Red Team and Yellow Team members who had been up to this stuff. And then when it all blew up, he made himself invisible.
This wasn't a good faith opposition campaign, say in the way Stella Creasy campaign against payday loans was.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
There's a theory, obv complete bollocks, this was a Spy Who Came In From The Cold op: get someone to make allegations which are true, in such a shambolic way they are laughed out of court, and everyone is safe.
Odd how few UK news reports are thrown up by googling Mountbatten kincora.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Given the police's resistance to learning lessons from that investigation, expect it to happen again.
But they will gleefully fill the pockets of their bent cronies. And themselves. Goes without saying.
Lol. It's all political diagrams tonight. That one is from the Health Unions on their petition.
Their point is good, their presentation awful. They should consider real salaries, perhaps real take-home ones, not nominal ones. Plot growth since 2010 on the vertical axis. But no, they went for a wall of digits.
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Of course she thinks it's the right thing to do.
It's causing a load of tension with Westminster, dividing Scotland from England, and pleasing her left wing to the extent that they're willing to overlook the shambles her government is making of running Scotland.
It's absolutely perfect.
Shame about the possible negative consequences for women, but those are of course much less important to her.
I am now of the view - not just because of this - that women's right, needs, desires and wants, their safety, their lives - are simply not important to those in authority in this country. We are seen as second best. We are expected to accommodate others. We are expected, consciously or unconsciously, to put men's interests first. Society is arranged to suit men. If we complain about this or demand changes or demand better, we are told that we are aggressive or tiresome or bitches or attacked or insulted or demeaned in some way.
We are we must be inclusive and kind to others, to think of others first, to be accommodating, to avoid offence and hurt. We are told that all it takes to be women is to wear dresses, high heels and lipstick as if womanhood was merely a superficial costume to be put on and discarded at will. Women are being told to behave like good little girls again. If we don’t, we are verbally assaulted or threatened with physical assault, some of it in luridly sexually offensive ways. Or simply ignored or excluded.
No.
It is so tiresome, so wearying, so infuriating to have to go through this again, to be told that if we disagree or protest or ask about our needs, our rights, our demands, our boundaries, our concerns, the risks to us, we are being bigoted or selfish and that these are “not valid”.
That is what I think is going on. That is why the debate about self-ID is so toxic and so important. Women are not being listened to. If it goes through, I fear that it will push back or eliminate many of the rights women have gained during my lifetime. I am seeing changes in attitudes already. I am seeing exemptions created specifically to permit women only spaces not being used for fear they will upset men. I am seeing inclusivity being used to exclude women from places they were previously free to treat as women-only. It will affect not just me but my daughter — and her daughters too. That is why it matters to me.
Men with power bossing women around. This is a very old, very sour wine being offered in a new bottle.
I am so angry about this.
Today the police are investigating abuse allegations in a mixed sex hostel in London 44 years ago. In decades to come some future police force will start investigating abuse allegations as a result of what Holyrood voted through tonight. But the politicians and their appeasers who pushed this through will not be around to face the consequences, the accountability for the harm they caused.
Thank you for this excellent thread header. I fear you are right in what you say and your comment above. If there are weaknesses that people with malice can exploit to their advantage, then they will do so. Do you think that the impact of Scottish self-ID will undermine the UK Equalities Act sufficiently that the UK Supreme Court may overrule it?
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
There's a theory, obv complete bollocks, this was a Spy Who Came In From The Cold op: get someone to make allegations which are true, in such a shambolic way they are laughed out of court, and everyone is safe.
Odd how few UK news reports are thrown up by googling Mountbatten kincora.
The allegations dreamt up by Beech were so out there weird that it’s a wonder anyone ever took them seriously. The idea of a cabal of senior politicians, military men etc would procure young boys, abuse them and murder them, and no one ever was reported missing is just beyond belief. The police were criminally negligent in the investigation, acting as if they wanted it to be true. Watson drove it night and day into the media, and as has been pointed out, did it with narrow party interest at heart. He is an utter slimeball.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Given the police's resistance to learning lessons from that investigation, expect it to happen again.
Some of the cases that got to court showed how much the investigations were absolute shit shows.
From William Roache, where basic checks hadn't been conducted in regards to the properties and cars he had access to, let alone his shooting schedule, which meant as soon as they got to court it quickly became apparent that all the stories couldn't be true because he was on set those days and never had access to the cars or houses where abuse was suppose to take place...through to Rolf Harris, where they hadn't even got proof he attended an event where he had alleged abused a girl and his defence was working that they couldn't provide a single piece of evidence he was there (it was a member of that mid trial wrote in with a photo of that day and luck that the judge allowed it into evidence).
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Tom Watson should be no where near the HoL, it is an absolute disgrace. In his self appointed role of nonce finder general, not only did he use his unique position to keep firing out these false accusations, he was also (deliberately) totally uninterested in any stories of individuals who weren't part of the Blue Team, when we now know that there appears to have been Red Team and Yellow Team members who had been up to this stuff. And then when it all blew up, he made himself invisible.
This wasn't a good faith opposition campaign, say in the way Stella Creasy campaign against payday loans was.
The more amusing bit was how, when May (as Home Sec) mandated that all allegations be investigated, Rotherham et al popped up. At which point some people actually got up on their hind legs to literally say "Not those allegations, those are the wrong ones"......
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
There's a theory, obv complete bollocks, this was a Spy Who Came In From The Cold op: get someone to make allegations which are true, in such a shambolic way they are laughed out of court, and everyone is safe.
Odd how few UK news reports are thrown up by googling Mountbatten kincora.
The allegations dreamt up by Beech were so out there weird that it’s a wonder anyone ever took them seriously. The idea of a cabal of senior politicians, military men etc would procure young boys, abuse them and murder them, and no one ever was reported missing is just beyond belief. The police were criminally negligent in the investigation, acting as if they wanted it to be true. Watson drove it night and day into the media, and as has been pointed out, did it with narrow party interest at heart. He is an utter slimeball.
Sure
Sex ring involving prince Andrew and bill Clinton? LOL. Mountbatten getting lucky in boys homes? Ridiculous. Etc.
While this is welcome, Brammal died with this man’s lies hanging over him (for clarity I mean Beech). Watson enabled that. He persued a fantasists witch hunt that collapsed when the police finally, FINALLY, died some proper detecting and spoke to Beeches wife. Why this wasn’t first on the list, I have no idea. Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Given the police's resistance to learning lessons from that investigation, expect it to happen again.
Some of the cases that got to court showed how much the investigations were absolute shit shows.
From William Roache, where basic checks hadn't been conducted in regards to the properties and cars he had access to, let alone his shooting schedule, which meant as soon as they got to court it quickly became apparent that all the stories couldn't be true because he was on set those days and never had access to the cars or houses where abuse was suppose to take place...through to Rolf Harris, where they hadn't even got proof he attended an event where he had alleged abused a girl and his defence was working that they couldn't provide a single piece of evidence he was there (it was a member of that mid trial wrote in with a photo of that day and luck that the judge allowed it into evidence).
Your point is incoherent but I don't think Rolf Harris actually supports it
What do Sturgeon / the SNP gain from this? Presumably she’s doing it because she believes it’s “the right thing” to do?
Of course she thinks it's the right thing to do.
It's causing a load of tension with Westminster, dividing Scotland from England, and pleasing her left wing to the extent that they're willing to overlook the shambles her government is making of running Scotland.
It's absolutely perfect.
Shame about the possible negative consequences for women, but those are of course much less important to her.
I am now of the view - not just because of this - that women's right, needs, desires and wants, their safety, their lives - are simply not important to those in authority in this country. We are seen as second best. We are expected to accommodate others. We are expected, consciously or unconsciously, to put men's interests first. Society is arranged to suit men. If we complain about this or demand changes or demand better, we are told that we are aggressive or tiresome or bitches or attacked or insulted or demeaned in some way.
We are we must be inclusive and kind to others, to think of others first, to be accommodating, to avoid offence and hurt. We are told that all it takes to be women is to wear dresses, high heels and lipstick as if womanhood was merely a superficial costume to be put on and discarded at will. Women are being told to behave like good little girls again. If we don’t, we are verbally assaulted or threatened with physical assault, some of it in luridly sexually offensive ways. Or simply ignored or excluded.
No.
It is so tiresome, so wearying, so infuriating to have to go through this again, to be told that if we disagree or protest or ask about our needs, our rights, our demands, our boundaries, our concerns, the risks to us, we are being bigoted or selfish and that these are “not valid”.
That is what I think is going on. That is why the debate about self-ID is so toxic and so important. Women are not being listened to. If it goes through, I fear that it will push back or eliminate many of the rights women have gained during my lifetime. I am seeing changes in attitudes already. I am seeing exemptions created specifically to permit women only spaces not being used for fear they will upset men. I am seeing inclusivity being used to exclude women from places they were previously free to treat as women-only. It will affect not just me but my daughter — and her daughters too. That is why it matters to me.
Men with power bossing women around. This is a very old, very sour wine being offered in a new bottle.
I am so angry about this.
Today the police are investigating abuse allegations in a mixed sex hostel in London 44 years ago. In decades to come some future police force will start investigating abuse allegations as a result of what Holyrood voted through tonight. But the politicians and their appeasers who pushed this through will not be around to face the consequences, the accountability for the harm they caused.
Thank you for this excellent thread header. I fear you are right in what you say and your comment above. If there are weaknesses that people with malice can exploit to their advantage, then they will do so. Do you think that the impact of Scottish self-ID will undermine the UK Equalities Act sufficiently that the UK Supreme Court may overrule it?
The last point is surely the end goal here for the SNP. Push as many laws and initiatives as they can which require the supreme court to strike them down. The women, in this case, are just collateral damage.
Comments
Russia’s barbaric and illegal invasion of Ukraine has led to millions of Ukrainians losing electricity, water and vital supplies. I am supporting the #hourforukraine tonight at 8pm in solidarity with them. Victory to Ukraine!
https://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/1605492293867229185?s=46&t=Ji_uMZmedH1Ei70LjicfAQ
When I asked why, he said that the anarchist lot thought it would give them their chance. Everything would be in the melting-pot, and they looked to see a new world emerge. The capitalists would rake in the shekels, and make fortunes by buying up wreckage.
Capital, he said, had no conscience and no fatherland. Besides, the Jew was behind it, and the Jew hated Russia worse than hell.
“Do you wonder?” he cried. “For three hundred years they have been persecuted, and this is the return match for the pogroms. The Jew is everywhere, but you have to go far down the backstairs to find him. Take any big Teutonic business concern. If you have dealings with it the first man you meet is Prince von und zu Something, an elegant young man who talks Eton-and-Harrow English. But he cuts no ice. If your business is big, you get behind him and find a prognathous Westphalian with a retreating brow and the manners of a hog. He is the German business man that gives your English papers the shakes. But if you’re on the biggest kind of job and are bound to get to the real boss, ten to one you are brought up against a little white-faced Jew in a bath-chair with an eye like a rattlesnake. Yes, sir, he is the man who is ruling the world just now, and he has his knife in the Empire of the Tsar, because his aunt was outraged and his father flogged in some one-horse location on the Volga.”
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/558/558-h/558-h.htm
What I don't really understand is how a birth certificate can be amended. Presumably it would have to be signed with today's date, so it's hardly a birth certificate then is it?
If Britain has lost lots of young European workers due to a combination of Brexit and the pandemic then this would increase the inactivity rate in Britain even if there wasn't a single additional person on long-term sick, or early retirement.
I'd suggest it would be more useful to look at the numbers in more detail, rather than the overall inactivity rate.
https://twitter.com/goodlawproject/status/1605583447195631618?s=46&t=Ji_uMZmedH1Ei70LjicfAQ
But in outside world most arguments seem to boil down to one of:
"We shouldn't do it solely because it might result in a small number of sexual predators mis-using it for their own nefarious ends", or
"We should do it because...well if you say no you're a massive transphobe and should be hunted down as such and that's all that needs said there."
Pretty much the entirety of the middle which ought to consist of, oh, 90% of the discussion, gets completely lost between the two extremes.
Cyclefree's header is entirely reasonable and well argued within the context of the specific amendment - so no issue from me on that score. It's just as part of the wider discussion on the legislation as a whole there ought to be so much more to the whole thing than JUST that one aspect, important as I accept it is.
Why is this different, if only applied to those convicted of an offence?
(*All sides of the Conservative Party, that is. "Only Conservative Party Peers, MPs and donors appear to be named as referrers – no politician from any other political party succeeded in referring suppliers onto the Covid testing VIP lane.")
We can reveal:
-Innova Medical landed Covid contracts valued at £4 billion via the ‘VIP’ lane after its UK partner, a company trading under the name ‘Tried & Tested’ contacted Boris Johnson’s former advisor, Dominic Cummings.
Surescreen Diagnostics landed a £500m contract after Liam Fox MP referred the firm to Matt Hancock – Surescreen subsequently donated £20,000 to Liam Fox.
-Matt Hancock assisted Ecolog International onto the ‘VIP’ lane after being contacted by Genix Healthcare – a company that has donated £156,000 to the Conservative Party. Hancock’s Department paid Ecolog £38m in 2021, after the Government decided not to proceed with previously contracted Covid work.
-Conservative Peer Lord Prior introduced a company called LumiraDx to Lord Bethell. The firm was awarded Covid contracts worth over £45 million.
-Lord Bethell referred a company called Optigne Ltd after being contacted by a Cabinet Office official – Optigene were subsequently awarded a £322m contract, leading to a 1221% increase in profits to £41m.
-Conservative Peer, Lord Lansley, introduced a company called Accoro onto the ‘VIP’ lane.
Only Conservative Party Peers, MPs and donors appear to be named as referrers – no politician from any other political party succeeded in referring suppliers onto the Covid testing VIP lane.
We will continue to investigate the latest ‘VIP’ lane scandal. But we can only do this with your
support. If you would like to make a donation, you can do so here.
For whatever reason there seems to be less migration between Ireland and Britain than there was in the past.
A current driver of emigration from Ireland appears to be high housing costs. Given that this is also a problem in Britain that may explain why those emigrating from Ireland are heading to other countries.
I'll admit, I do sometimes weary of your hobby horsing on different aspects of Gender Recognition, not all of which I quite see in the same terms as you.
But in this aspect every word of your header is spot on - the wilful ignoring that sex offenders can and will go to extremes to get opportunities to offend, and that a gender recognition system that fails to provide any safeguards against that fails not just women, but all those who seek to address and be accommodated in addressing their genuine gender dysphoria.
As someone who hoped for Labour pragmatism in the UK to get gender recognition as right as possible, I am disappointed by them. I am not going to suddenly jump to the traditionalist side in any wider culture war - but this is a false step on the road to getting things right, but one that will have, indeed has had, consequences for women's safety.
Families, huh
When it comes to the politics it reminds me of the opinions are like arseholes analogy.
(joke, by the way).
Then I realised Well actually in my family it’s more of a monthly thing
"I will tell you what they (British military intelligence) are super, super, super, sensitive about, they have somebody still working, and I am assuming there's many still working in the Irish Republic, but one of them holds a very senior position in the Irish government,"
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2022/12/21/news/senior_irish_government_official_british_is_military_intelligence_agent-2952247/
Any history of sanity in the family?
https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1605551523240591363?s=46&t=Ji_uMZmedH1Ei70LjicfAQ
Although the idea that smart people are planning what happens if Sinn Fein come to power seems belied by the spectacle of British governmental competence elsewhere.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/20/trump-tax-returns-release-neal-democrats-00074901
They were also not audited, despite that being required by law.
Though he did claim that the reason he couldn’t release them was because they were being audited…
Who published it, why are they not identified, and why leave out the definitions?
As data, here shorn of context such as the actual numbers, it has some questions over it.
Wrt UK (other countries will have different considerations), the OECD measures inactivity rate in the age group 15-64, so straight away that misses out 2 years of our workforce at the top - pension age being 66. And it misses out at least 1.8 million (from memory) of people over pension age who are economically active. And does whatever it does at the bottom.
I'm not calling total BS, but it's a bit whiffy.
Looking up the actual inactivity rates on OECD data, we are currently 12th from the lowest out of 34, rather than having some great collapsing disaster. I wonder if that's why the actual rate was left out? And that's still in the 15-64 age group. Data is here:
https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=35562
I'd say - like Scott's OMIGOD LOOK IT'S DOWN 5.5% number from this morning which is obtained by making a comparison with a guestimate, it's a very political presentation.
Apparently families forget to mention these things.
Your father’s brother was “infamous” in 1917.
You must be getting on yourself, if your father is from a generation capable of “infamy” in 1917.
Edit: I guess not, he kicked the bucket right at the end of 1916.
I find it very hard to accept Ms Cyclefree's apparent assertion that they decided to vote en bloc.
At least three of them are amongst the brightest people I have ever met
You just have to cope with the alcoholism, manic depression, depression, schizophrenia, drug addiction, suicidality, and pathological risk-taking (me). If you can cope with that, you will have a hoot
Very interesting that this article now is in an NI (Belfast) based newspaper rather than one in the ROI or US.
More background from 2003 in the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/may/13/northernireland.northernireland1
What motivation 20 years later for him to be doing this, and playing towards jigsaw identification games?
Presumably it will be all over Slugger.
I was temporarily lost track on the TLA, and thinking of the SaLaDs from when the Liberals were feuding with David Owen and trying to swallow the SDP (very roughly).
https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/votes-and-motions
With a slightly different perspective on that.
https://twitter.com/HolocaustMuseum/status/1605681264731856928
In 1943, Leon Bass enlisted in the US Army. Two years later at just 20 years old, Leon visited the newly liberated Buchenwald concentration camp; the horrors he witnessed shaped him for the rest of his life. Learn more about Leon from the Museum's podcast.
Still notorious in 1917, however.
The Govt of course does not set the salary for MPs; it's done by an independent body.
Which is exactly the process they have followed for the nurses, and approved the recommendation.
(I still think the Unions are on a sticky wicket.)
I listened to a long news report on Deutsche Welle earlier, which was all over Will they get more? Can they recruit enough? Will it all collapse?
Never once mentioned that nurses in the Uk earn around 10% more than their German counterparts.
It's going to be a media bunfight.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/dec/21/tom-watson-apologises-in-lords-for-promoting-false-abuse-allegations-labour-deputy-carl-beech
Second, it asks the police to make a risk assessment. It assumes therefore that someone who has already been convicted of a sex offence may not be a risk. That is an absurd position. You could end up with two classes of convicted sex offenders: one has a GRC and can hide their identity, the other cannot. The first category gets to evade DBS checks.
No-one who has been convicted of a sex offence should be allowed to hide their identity or get access to women in the way that this Bill allows them to do.
Put it another way, why should a sex offender who has not been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria have the right to change gender? Why should anyone who does not have a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria have the right to change gender?
At least they won't spend as much time as the Polish parliament spent on whether or not Jesus Christ should be declared king of Poland. (Eventually he was, in 2016.)
They trolled you, CycleFree. The law should be left as it is, and the bill binned. The esteemed parliamentarians of the north should look for something useful to parlay about.
Watson abused his position to hound innocent men. That he has been allowed to become a peer disgusts me really. People have, rightly, been all over Clarkson this week. Where is the leftie outrage about Watson? It was an innocent mistake, and as he was attacking nasty old Tories, somehow the tiny mistake was ok? FFS.
Press coneference with Zelensky.
We are we must be inclusive and kind to others, to think of others first, to be accommodating, to avoid offence and hurt. We are told that all it takes to be women is to wear dresses, high heels and lipstick as if womanhood was merely a superficial costume to be put on and discarded at will. Women are being told to behave like good little girls again. If we don’t, we are verbally assaulted or threatened with physical assault, some of it in luridly sexually offensive ways. Or simply ignored or excluded.
No.
It is so tiresome, so wearying, so infuriating to have to go through this again, to be told that if we disagree or protest or ask about our needs, our rights, our demands, our boundaries, our concerns, the risks to us, we are being bigoted or selfish and that these are “not valid”.
That is what I think is going on. That is why the debate about self-ID is so toxic and so important. Women are not being listened to. If it goes through, I fear that it will push back or eliminate many of the rights women have gained during my lifetime. I am seeing changes in attitudes already. I am seeing exemptions created specifically to permit women only spaces not being used for fear they will upset men. I am seeing inclusivity being used to exclude women from places they were previously free to treat as women-only. It will affect not just me but my daughter — and her daughters too. That is why it matters to me.
Men with power bossing women around. This is a very old, very sour wine being offered in a new bottle.
I am so angry about this.
Today the police are investigating abuse allegations in a mixed sex hostel in London 44 years ago. In decades to come some future police force will start investigating abuse allegations as a result of what Holyrood voted through tonight. But the politicians and their appeasers who pushed this through will not be around to face the consequences, the accountability for the harm they caused.
This wasn't a good faith opposition campaign, say in the way Stella Creasy campaign against payday loans was.
Odd how few UK news reports are thrown up by googling Mountbatten kincora.
Watson drove it night and day into the media, and as has been pointed out, did it with narrow party interest at heart. He is an utter slimeball.
From William Roache, where basic checks hadn't been conducted in regards to the properties and cars he had access to, let alone his shooting schedule, which meant as soon as they got to court it quickly became apparent that all the stories couldn't be true because he was on set those days and never had access to the cars or houses where abuse was suppose to take place...through to Rolf Harris, where they hadn't even got proof he attended an event where he had alleged abused a girl and his defence was working that they couldn't provide a single piece of evidence he was there (it was a member of that mid trial wrote in with a photo of that day and luck that the judge allowed it into evidence).
Sex ring involving prince Andrew and bill Clinton? LOL. Mountbatten getting lucky in boys homes? Ridiculous. Etc.