50 points plus. Was this an unpublished part of this week's agreement? Seriously, though. This is a side brought up to catch and pass at speed and look for space as basics. Versus ones brought up in gyms and with tactics boards.
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
No I didn't once, I said not supporting grammar schools and wanting to close the existing ones made you on the wettest Heathite wing of the party, didn't mean you weren't a Tory though, just a dripping wet one
The worst English defeat since the Battle of Maldon, it looks like.
At the same time as the worst bribe since Aethelred [edit] the Unready.
At least in 991 AD or whatever it was, they had to wait a year or two to get the news in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Even if there turned out to be a blank space where Brother Gary had been caught makign rude remarks about the Royal policy.
Now, it's all happening at once. Be interesting to see the mood.
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
There *are* no true Tories but HYUFD. His definition (from a posting a few days ago IIRC) is based on slavish royalism, unthinking unionism and the establishment of the C of E. Hard luck if you want stuff like sound money, or low tax, or probity in public life.
You can still be a modern day Conservative if you back all that but not the former. However you can only be a Tory if you back the monarchy, the C of E as the established Church and hereditary peers in the House of Lords
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
There *are* no true Tories but HYUFD. His definition (from a posting a few days ago IIRC) is based on slavish royalism, unthinking unionism and the establishment of the C of E. Hard luck if you want stuff like sound money, or low tax, or probity in public life.
You can still be a modern day Conservative if you back all that but not the former. However you can only be a Tory if you back the monarchy, the C of E as the established Church and hereditary peers in the House of Lords
Eh? IT's 'Conservative' to be a republican campaigning for disestablishment and the abolition of the Lords?
50 points plus. Was this an unpublished part of this week's agreement? Seriously, though. This is a side brought up to catch and pass at speed and look for space as basics. Versus ones brought up in gyms and with tactics boards.
Not really a fan of the kicking game but France have made it look exciting. DuPont is fantastic.
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
There *are* no true Tories but HYUFD. His definition (from a posting a few days ago IIRC) is based on slavish royalism, unthinking unionism and the establishment of the C of E. Hard luck if you want stuff like sound money, or low tax, or probity in public life.
You can still be a modern day Conservative if you back all that but not the former. However you can only be a Tory if you back the monarchy, the C of E as the established Church and hereditary peers in the House of Lords
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
No I didn't once, I said not supporting grammar schools and wanting to close the existing ones made you on the wettest Heathite wing of the party, didn't mean you weren't a Tory though, just a dripping wet one
The worst English defeat since the Battle of Maldon, it looks like.
At the same time as the worst bribe since Aethelred and the Unready.
At least in 991 AD or whatever it was, they had to wait a year or two to get the news in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Even if there turned out to be a blank space where Brother Gary had been caught makign rude remarks about the Royal policy.
Now, it's all happening at once. Be interesting to see the mood.
Maldon is, at least, considered to be an heroic - if very bloody - defeat. This is more akin to the fall of Chippenham.
I was going to stretch the analogy by saying that the re-enactment of Hastings is scheduled for Dublin next week, but I doubt that this shower will resist as well as Harold's army. They'll be lucky not to be 50 points down by the end of the first half.
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled Normandy and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
Savile was cunning enough to curry favour right across the establishment as a whole as part of cultivating the impression for complainants, the media, and the Police that he was untouchable.
He was, however, vocally Thatcherite for many years and he and she personally got on well. I don't actually criticise Thatcher for that myself. She pretty clearly didn't know he was a prolific sex offender and believed he was simply a supportive media personality. Indeed, it was pretty easy to believe that Savile was an English eccentric rather than a dangerous pervert, and most people did at the time.
But the point is that there have been people who have been overtly political whilst working for the BBC as presenters outside the sphere of news/current affairs, including on the pro-Conservative side, and Savile happens to be one.
Saville was not a true Tory, a true Tory would have supported Heath in 1970 and 1974, Saville didn't, he supported and campaigned for Thorpe's Liberals. He backed Thatcher's Tories yes but then like Alan B'Stard (also not a true Tory) he switched over time to New Labour, even if he was back with the Tories once Cameron took over.
Ideologically Saville was basically a libertarian unsurprisingly
Hang on, the other day you said the Heath govt weren't true Tories. This is going around in circles.
There *are* no true Tories but HYUFD. His definition (from a posting a few days ago IIRC) is based on slavish royalism, unthinking unionism and the establishment of the C of E. Hard luck if you want stuff like sound money, or low tax, or probity in public life.
You can still be a modern day Conservative if you back all that but not the former. However you can only be a Tory if you back the monarchy, the C of E as the established Church and hereditary peers in the House of Lords
Eh? IT's 'Conservative' to be a republican campaigning for disestablishment and the abolition of the Lords?
The modern day Conservative and Unionist Party is a coalition of those who would have been 18th and 19th century Tories who were joined by those who would have been 18th century Whigs and 19th century free market Liberals to keep out Labour in the 20th century as well as Unionists in Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
On topic, if they scrap the 3pm rule, then we can all watch football live and there would be no need for a highlights show.
Its not just the 3pm rule, its also the fact they won't televise 2 games at the same time. When 2 games kick off at 2pm on a Sunday, the Americans can watch their choice of game live but we can't.
Today, @BenFerencz turns 103. At age 27, with no prior trial experience, he prosecuted “the biggest murder trial in history.” Bringing Nazis to justice shaped the course of his life. He is the last living Nuremberg war crimes prosecutor. Learn why his motto is "never give up." https://twitter.com/HolocaustMuseum/status/1634569883064102913
On topic, if they scrap the 3pm rule, then we can all watch football live and there would be no need for a highlights show.
Its not just the 3pm rule, its also the fact they won't televise 2 games at the same time. When 2 games kick off at 2pm on a Sunday, the Americans can watch their choice of game live but we can't.
Yep, my local bar in the sandpit shows every single PL game live, and I can personally subscribe to the TV package that shows them all.
As the BBC collapsed into crisis after suspending Gary Lineker, one staffer said the situation had become “so farcical” that it wouldn’t have been believable as a plotline in the mockumentary about the corporation, W1A. “The writers wouldn’t have dared do this — it’s too insane and incompetent,” he said.
Tim Davie, the director-general, had hoped his decision on Friday would draw a line under the criticism sparked by Lineker’s tweets about asylum seekers; instead, it unleashed 24 hours of chaos that wreaked havoc on its sports coverage, culminating in Match of the Day being cut to 20 minutes. As presenters and pundits pulled out of their shows in solidarity with the former footballer, one source dubbed it an “I am Sportacus!” moment.
Inside the BBC, the condemnation of Davie’s handling of Lineker was fierce: “No one can mishandle a crisis quite like the BBC,” said a critic. Staff hopes for a swift resolution so that it did not affect Sunday’s programming — including Match of the Day 2 — were dashed. It didn’t help that the two main players were on opposite sides of the Atlantic: Davie is in Washington DC visiting the BBC’s offices, while Lineker had headed to Leicester to watch his team play. “This is a terrible day for the BBC,” said one correspondent. “BBC Sport and Match of the Day are the jewels in its crown. There could be a risk of losing Premier League rights if this isn’t sorted quickly.”
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was [edit] at least 50% French!
Edit: he wasn't Rollo's son, so he was mostly French.
Acording to our amateur ethnological research from a thread a few months ago, Katherine Deneuve looks a bit like Penny Mordaunt, and Mordaunt is a Norman name ; ergo the Normans must have been at least a bit frenchy.
Acording to our amateur ethnological research from a thread a few months ago, Katherine Deneuve looks a bit like Penny Mordaunt, and Mordaunt is a Norman name ; ergo the Normans must have been at least a bit frenchy.
Intriguingly, when we asked respondents, "Which political party do you feel closest to?" and examined those who would vote for Labour in a hypothetical General Election, a striking pattern emerged that could shed light on potential tactical voting in the future. A significant 15.9% of those who identify most with the Liberal Democrats, along with comparable shares among Green (15.1%) and SNP voters (12.9%), indicated a preference for Labour in the next election. Notably, Labour also garnered the highest percentage of votes among unaffiliated voters, with a notable 45.5% expressing support for the party.
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
On topic, if they scrap the 3pm rule, then we can all watch football live and there would be no need for a highlights show.
What makes you think that? Few people would watch all of the games. There's a cricket highlights programme on the BBC but all test matches and one day internationals are shown in full.
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Excellent, that is very helpful. Ta muchly. (And I did correct my slip. But this is useful to know too.)
PS: if Hastings was really Viking vs Saxon, then why aren't we speaking posh Danish when it comes to talking about beef and pork and mutton?
As the BBC collapsed into crisis after suspending Gary Lineker, one staffer said the situation had become “so farcical” that it wouldn’t have been believable as a plotline in the mockumentary about the corporation, W1A. “The writers wouldn’t have dared do this — it’s too insane and incompetent,” he said.
Tim Davie, the director-general, had hoped his decision on Friday would draw a line under the criticism sparked by Lineker’s tweets about asylum seekers; instead, it unleashed 24 hours of chaos that wreaked havoc on its sports coverage, culminating in Match of the Day being cut to 20 minutes. As presenters and pundits pulled out of their shows in solidarity with the former footballer, one source dubbed it an “I am Sportacus!” moment.
Inside the BBC, the condemnation of Davie’s handling of Lineker was fierce: “No one can mishandle a crisis quite like the BBC,” said a critic. Staff hopes for a swift resolution so that it did not affect Sunday’s programming — including Match of the Day 2 — were dashed. It didn’t help that the two main players were on opposite sides of the Atlantic: Davie is in Washington DC visiting the BBC’s offices, while Lineker had headed to Leicester to watch his team play. “This is a terrible day for the BBC,” said one correspondent. “BBC Sport and Match of the Day are the jewels in its crown. There could be a risk of losing Premier League rights if this isn’t sorted quickly.”
What line did Davie imagine he was drawing ? He surely can’t expect everyone who ever appears on the BBC to refrain from political comment in a private capacity ? If that’s not the case, then WTF is “the line” ?
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Well to be fair the Saxons were really German and Danish on that basis too, the only true British were ancient Britons and Celts at that time
The Down Hill MTB last year at Fort William was absolutely top drawer, our first time in Scotland and if the planets allign, we'll be there for it this year. Apart from a weird encounter with a comedy English hating, tweed wearing fuck who ruined a chat I was having with Aaron Gwin and Dakota North in the Wildcat Vegan Cafe in the town centre, it was bloody lovely!
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Excellent, that is very helpful. Ta muchly. (And I did correct my slip. But this is useful to know too.)
PS: if Hastings was really Viking vs Saxon, then why aren't we speaking posh Danish when it comes to talking about beef and pork and mutton?
Indeed. Obviously in case my post wasn't clear, it wasn't you that I was suggesting was engaging in blood and soil nonsense.
Incidentally though, I think we should go back to the olden tradition of naming monarchs with a nickname that describes them. I wonder if our current monarch would even earn a name like "the Simple".
I see Big G is back astroturfing for Sunak. The Betws-y-Coed Conservative Club petty cash box is one helluva drug.
"I might vote Labour" ROFL
I voted Blair twice but sadly Starmer is no Blair
That's nice but you're advocating a terrible PM with a terrible policy, so I'll take Starmer any day of the week.
Presumably when it goes downhill you will proclaim something new.
You say I have a Damascene conversion but you've had so many conversions I'm dizzy. For Johnson, against, for again then against, for Truss then against, then for again, then against Sunak then for again.
What line did Davie imagine he was drawing ? He surely can’t expect everyone who ever appears on the BBC to refrain from political comment in a private capacity ? If that’s not the case, then WTF is “the line” ?
It sure as hell hasn’t been made public.
The line is "Don't say anything that upsets the Tory government"
The chairman of the BBC is under growing pressure to resign with a predecessor criticising him for failing to be open about his links to Boris Johnson and staying silent on the Gary Lineker crisis.
Richard Sharp has faced scrutiny since The Sunday Times revealed he helped facilitate a loan of up to £800,000 for Johnson, then prime minister, who weeks later appointed him to his role at the broadcaster. A committee of MPs found Sharp made “significant errors of judgment” by failing to disclose the potential conflict of interest. It said he should consider the effect that had on trust in him, the BBC and the public appointments process.
Sharp, 67, remains under investigation by the Whitehall appointments watchdog. His future could be resolved sooner because of the crisis engulfing the broadcaster.
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Excellent, that is very helpful. Ta muchly. (And I did correct my slip. But this is useful to know too.)
PS: if Hastings was really Viking vs Saxon, then why aren't we speaking posh Danish when it comes to talking about beef and pork and mutton?
Indeed. Obviously in case my post wasn't clear, it wasn't you that I was suggesting was engaging in blood and soil nonsense.
Incidentally though, I think we should go back to the olden tradition of naming monarchs with a nickname that describes them. I wonder if our current monarch would even earn a name like "the Simple".
Oh, not at all - it didn't even occur to me. Was pretty obvious who was meant.
Edit: if one goes for the Viking and French traditions, they had some pretty brutal bynames - the Vikings especially.
Ooh dear. An English humiliation as profound as Hastings?
Hastings was technically Viking v Saxon really, most on the Norman side including William the Conqueror were descended from Vikings led by Rollo who raided and settled the area and were granted it ultimately by the King of France
No they weren’t HYUFD. Read “The Normans and Their Myth” by Ralph Davis. The idea of shared Viking ancestry was made up in the 12th Century.
That doesn't really dispute the point William the Conqueror was descended from Rollo the Viking not the Kings of France
He was 50% French!
He was 100% French.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Excellent, that is very helpful. Ta muchly. (And I did correct my slip. But this is useful to know too.)
PS: if Hastings was really Viking vs Saxon, then why aren't we speaking posh Danish when it comes to talking about beef and pork and mutton?
Indeed. Obviously in case my post wasn't clear, it wasn't you that I was suggesting was engaging in blood and soil nonsense.
Incidentally though, I think we should go back to the olden tradition of naming monarchs with a nickname that describes them. I wonder if our current monarch would even earn a name like "the Simple".
“the double breasted” (referring to his suits of course)
Exactly, the thing that sticks out from that statement is the 45000 per year bit. That is the same as the population of Lancaster, coming in every year on dinghies.
Net migration is at 500,000, that is the population of Manchester or Bristol.
Net additional housing units per year is at 232,280.
I see Big G is back astroturfing for Sunak. The Betws-y-Coed Conservative Club petty cash box is one helluva drug.
Predicable silly response but adds nothing to genuine debate
Why not address the issues in a mature manner
The issue is that the Tories are playing you like a fiddle. Bereft of any achievement whatsoever, they hope to claw back support in the form of a bleating about the boats and a French bung.
Intriguingly, when we asked respondents, "Which political party do you feel closest to?" and examined those who would vote for Labour in a hypothetical General Election, a striking pattern emerged that could shed light on potential tactical voting in the future. A significant 15.9% of those who identify most with the Liberal Democrats, along with comparable shares among Green (15.1%) and SNP voters (12.9%), indicated a preference for Labour in the next election. Notably, Labour also garnered the highest percentage of votes among unaffiliated voters, with a notable 45.5% expressing support for the party.
That is good news for Labour in seats they are targeting but bad news for the LDs in seats they are targeting and bad news for the SNP in seats they want to hold.
13% of 2019 LD voters now feel closer to the Conservatives, little different to the 16% who now feel closer to Labuir.
7% of 2019 Conservative voters now feel closer to RefUK and 12% to Starmer Labour, so Rishi is gaining some 2019 LDs but losing some 2019 Conservatives to Labour and RefUK albeit 59.5% of 2019 Conservatives still feel closer to the Conservatives
The Down Hill MTB last year at Fort William was absolutely top drawer, our first time in Scotland and if the planets allign, we'll be there for it this year. Apart from a weird encounter with a comedy English hating, tweed wearing fuck who ruined a chat I was having with Aaron Gwin and Dakota North in the Wildcat Vegan Cafe in the town centre, it was bloody lovely!
The chairman of the BBC is under growing pressure to resign with a predecessor criticising him for failing to be open about his links to Boris Johnson and staying silent on the Gary Lineker crisis.
Richard Sharp has faced scrutiny since The Sunday Times revealed he helped facilitate a loan of up to £800,000 for Johnson, then prime minister, who weeks later appointed him to his role at the broadcaster. A committee of MPs found Sharp made “significant errors of judgment” by failing to disclose the potential conflict of interest. It said he should consider the effect that had on trust in him, the BBC and the public appointments process.
Sharp, 67, remains under investigation by the Whitehall appointments watchdog. His future could be resolved sooner because of the crisis engulfing the broadcaster.
Genius stuff from the Tories to bring Sharp to the public's attention again. And as I said earlier, this drama hasn't done much good for the prospects of a Boris comeback.
Comments
When Cymru wins
And England lose...
Oh Cymru...youve got me singing les bleus...
Was this an unpublished part of this week's agreement?
Seriously, though.
This is a side brought up to catch and pass at speed and look for space as basics.
Versus ones brought up in gyms and with tactics boards.
At the same time as the worst bribe since Aethelred [edit] the Unready.
At least in 991 AD or whatever it was, they had to wait a year or two to get the news in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Even if there turned out to be a blank space where Brother Gary had been caught makign rude remarks about the Royal policy.
Now, it's all happening at once. Be interesting to see the mood.
https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1634543925351395328?t=OwdDCMZu_Y70ewZdcKyJjA&s=19
You are in your own party of 1
I was going to stretch the analogy by saying that the re-enactment of Hastings is scheduled for Dublin next week, but I doubt that this shower will resist as well as Harold's army. They'll be lucky not to be 50 points down by the end of the first half.
IF yours truly was spin-doctoring for the PM & Etc., doubt I'd appreciate the linkage overmuch.
Large movement though
Sure they'd already retained the Ashes by then, but any victory against the Aussies in the 90s was worth cherishing.
More problematically, how do we know - given that they don't want to say anything?
Important to stress how unusual it is for the prime minister to issue a statement at 6pm on a Saturday night.
Suggests No10 are worried about the political blowback from the Lineker row.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1634619166547226624
https://twitter.com/HolocaustMuseum/status/1634569883064102913
💥 NEW
@IpsosUK
POLL 💥
Conservatives have regained trust of their 2019 voters on immigration
% 2019 Conservative voters Trust Cons on…
Asylum seekers: 59% (+21 since Feb)
Immigration: 61% (+24)
Channel crossings: 52% (+18)
Making harder to enter illegally: 56% (+19)'
https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1634543925351395328?s=20
and, crucially, the Scottish subsamples.
This I understand has also been the case with Norman Cook, a.k.s Fatboy Slim, and also applies in the case of Norman Wisdom.
Tim Davie, the director-general, had hoped his decision on Friday would draw a line under the criticism sparked by Lineker’s tweets about asylum seekers; instead, it unleashed 24 hours of chaos that wreaked havoc on its sports coverage, culminating in Match of the Day being cut to 20 minutes. As presenters and pundits pulled out of their shows in solidarity with the former footballer, one source dubbed it an “I am Sportacus!” moment.
Inside the BBC, the condemnation of Davie’s handling of Lineker was fierce: “No one can mishandle a crisis quite like the BBC,” said a critic. Staff hopes for a swift resolution so that it did not affect Sunday’s programming — including Match of the Day 2 — were dashed. It didn’t help that the two main players were on opposite sides of the Atlantic: Davie is in Washington DC visiting the BBC’s offices, while Lineker had headed to Leicester to watch his team play. “This is a terrible day for the BBC,” said one correspondent. “BBC Sport and Match of the Day are the jewels in its crown. There could be a risk of losing Premier League rights if this isn’t sorted quickly.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/weve-gone-full-w1a-how-gary-lineker-sparked-24-hours-of-bbc-chaos-35k69jpxr
The Betws-y-Coed Conservative Club petty cash box is one helluva drug.
Immigration and the boats is now front and centre of debate maybe as he wants
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1634615180159070209?s=20
1) Like a tough policy on the boats
2) Don't like Suella Braverman
Edit: he wasn't Rollo's son, so he was mostly French.
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1634627513753169920
Intriguingly, when we asked respondents, "Which political party do you feel closest to?" and examined those who would vote for Labour in a hypothetical General Election, a striking pattern emerged that could shed light on potential tactical voting in the future. A significant 15.9% of those who identify most with the Liberal Democrats, along with comparable shares among Green (15.1%) and SNP voters (12.9%), indicated a preference for Labour in the next election. Notably, Labour also garnered the highest percentage of votes among unaffiliated voters, with a notable 45.5% expressing support for the party.
Rollo swore fealty to Charles the Simple, so he and his descendants were from that day forwards French.
The idea that a descendent over 150 years later wasn't French because their ancestor wasn't born a nationality a century and a half earlier is the most bizarre blood and soil racism. Like saying Abraham Lincoln wasn't really American.
Ins. That means 25 mins of bullshit not broadcast
Marvellous
Why not address the issues in a mature manner
PS: if Hastings was really Viking vs Saxon, then why aren't we speaking posh Danish when it comes to talking about beef and pork and mutton?
He surely can’t expect everyone who ever appears on the BBC to refrain from political comment in a private capacity ?
If that’s not the case, then WTF is “the line” ?
It sure as hell hasn’t been made public.
I voted Blair twice but sadly Starmer is no Blair
Incidentally though, I think we should go back to the olden tradition of naming monarchs with a nickname that describes them. I wonder if our current monarch would even earn a name like "the Simple".
Presumably when it goes downhill you will proclaim something new.
You say I have a Damascene conversion but you've had so many conversions I'm dizzy. For Johnson, against, for again then against, for Truss then against, then for again, then against Sunak then for again.
Are you some some rudimentary AI?
The latter are shown in the tweet below, and don’t appear as enthusiastic.
Richard Sharp has faced scrutiny since The Sunday Times revealed he helped facilitate a loan of up to £800,000 for Johnson, then prime minister, who weeks later appointed him to his role at the broadcaster. A committee of MPs found Sharp made “significant errors of judgment” by failing to disclose the potential conflict of interest. It said he should consider the effect that had on trust in him, the BBC and the public appointments process.
Sharp, 67, remains under investigation by the Whitehall appointments watchdog. His future could be resolved sooner because of the crisis engulfing the broadcaster.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/richard-sharp-bbc-crisis-fuels-calls-for-chairman-to-quit-8n6x9dlcz
Edit: if one goes for the Viking and French traditions, they had some pretty brutal bynames - the Vikings especially.
Net migration is at 500,000, that is the population of Manchester or Bristol.
Net additional housing units per year is at 232,280.
@EdwardJDavey
The MOTD saga has shown failure at the top of the BBC and the need to urgently protect its independence.
We need leadership that can uphold British values and withstand Conservative attacks.
Under Richard Sharp’s leadership this hasn't been the case. He must resign.
13% of 2019 LD voters now feel closer to the Conservatives, little different to the 16% who now feel closer to Labuir.
7% of 2019 Conservative voters now feel closer to RefUK and 12% to Starmer Labour, so Rishi is gaining some 2019 LDs but losing some 2019 Conservatives to Labour and RefUK albeit 59.5% of 2019 Conservatives still feel closer to the Conservatives
Figures.
And as I said earlier, this drama hasn't done much good for the prospects of a Boris comeback.