I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
There is a phenomenon where at a certain stage of an organisations journey it does a strange kind of performative dance.
- Minor/non-existent infractions of rules are heavily punished. - Major issues are totally ignored.
If the facts as described are true, I am quite certain that, at the same time, actual rape allegations, supported by evidence were dropped in the bin*.
This is somewhat related to Bikeshedding, in my opinion.
*Perhaps literally.
If people are charged with calling someone “pet” the courts in the NE are going to be busy for a very long time. And both men and women will be in the dock!
Many lawyers will buy exotic automobiles on the back of this. What's not to like?
Amazing to see the BBC article talk about 'eradicating' smoking. I've been reading about how Sigmund Freud used to prescribe cocaine to his patients until the ill effects became clear. It's been banned for over 100 years. Has it been eradicated?
I'm sure criminal gangs up and down the country will be more than happy to plug any gap
With them being freely available to the above age group, I suspect the profit margin wont be in it for the gangs and it will be done by friends and family.
First sign of pressure on Humza Yousaf after Rutherglen byelection trouncing
Senior SNP source: "If Humza stays as leader then we face annihilation in 2026 [the next Scottish parliament election]"
The political excitement starts when the SNP members realise that Kate Forbes is the only leader available who is dangerous to the union. But the probability is that having missed their chance in 2014, only 9 years ago, and again when replacing Sturgeon, that the cause is sunk for a generation.
To obtain independence the movement has to have mass support from the centre left and the centre right.
It is sad that the contingencies of history mean that KF won't be leader of a centrist Tory party, and PM of a One Nation Tory government.
Forbes is impressive, but I think she would get unstuck quickly having to deal with the gay marriage thing. It served as an albatross round Farron’s neck and it would hers.
Forbes’ inability to square the faith circle was the main reason I couldn’t vote for her in the leadership election. Unfortunately since then she seems to have retreated into portraying any questions on how religion might affect her political decision making as an attack on her faith, not a great look. Allied with Forbes taking up the cause of the rubicose Fergus means je ne regrette rien.
Fascinating. Perhaps this illustrates the gulf between groups. I don't support Scottish independence, but Forbes stands for two big ideas of great importance. One is that lots of people are formed and shaped by their beliefs, and this trumps political expedience; and secondly a party wanting national independence must seek support from all parts of the political spectrum, and demonstrate competence above all.
I don't share many of her views and am strongly opposed to independence. But for those who do, they have missed a big chance and may not get another.
Compared to Useless she would have been incredible. The sheeple made a huge mistake giving it to Sturgeon's sockpuppet rather than to someone intelligent and articulate with principles.
Still time for Forbes to become leader of SNP. But it's going to be a long time before SNP are in a position to push for another independence referendum.
Independence is not jsut the SNP though. If they get hammered as will happen if not huge changes then the people may take it into their own hands like they did for devolution.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
Possibly also if there is a major constitutional change. Membership of the EU was a major argument for the No campaign and ridiculed the Yes campaign (possibly correctly) for claiming they could easily rejoin. Scotland also voted heavily for staying in the EU. I think these two related points justify a re-vote regardless of time.
No, they don't. They only thing that justifies a new vote is whether the people want one. That EU referendum fact might (or might not) have motivated some people to want a new referendum, but we shouldn't confuse cause with effect. All that matters is that this is up to the people, not up some elite to define what conditions should be in place first before the people get to decide.
Amazing to see the BBC article talk about 'eradicating' smoking. I've been reading about how Sigmund Freud used to prescribe cocaine to his patients until the ill effects became clear. It's been banned for over 100 years. Has it been eradicated?
Also weird given cannabis has been effectively legalised.
I've commented on seeing in a number of American cop shows the following story line - Tobacco company getting into cannabis and out of tobacco. Mexican cartels get involved - sometimes swapping the tobacco knowledge for cannabis knowledge.
The American "legalisation" is a disaster - because it is illegal, federally, the banks can't touch it. So it is a cash business. This has revived the dying art of armed robbery. It also means that the "legal" weed business needs investors with suitcases of cash. Outside of PB, who has suitcases of cash?
EDIT: and the idiot politicians have set the taxes so high, that in a number of states, illegal weed is cheaper than legal weed. Given the huge costs in the criminal supply chain, this is insane.
I think i know the answer to this one. Is it King Charles?
I am still curious as to whether the government will have to pay financial penalties for cancelling HS2 contracts.
And, if so, to whom?
And keep an eye on which developers are sold the land.
A ribbon of Barratt houses, Birmingham to Warrington. The world's largest LTN with plastic lawns, no schools and 100% car dependency.
It's going to be like Covid contracts to their mates, isn't it. Cancellation fees paid to a lot of contractors who then buy up a lot of land on the cheap, make a lot of profits which are salted away offshore. So the taxpayer loses out three ways.
Just watch.
Award winning Netflix documentary on it around 2040.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
There is a phenomenon where at a certain stage of an organisations journey it does a strange kind of performative dance.
- Minor/non-existent infractions of rules are heavily punished. - Major issues are totally ignored.
If the facts as described are true, I am quite certain that, at the same time, actual rape allegations, supported by evidence were dropped in the bin*.
This is somewhat related to Bikeshedding, in my opinion.
*Perhaps literally.
If people are charged with calling someone “pet” the courts in the NE are going to be busy for a very long time. And both men and women will be in the dock!
Many lawyers will buy exotic automobiles on the back of this. What's not to like?
Many of which will be made in the UK, so it’s all good for the economy!
Amazing to see the BBC article talk about 'eradicating' smoking. I've been reading about how Sigmund Freud used to prescribe cocaine to his patients until the ill effects became clear. It's been banned for over 100 years. Has it been eradicated?
Also weird given cannabis has been effectively legalised.
I've commented on seeing in a number of American cop shows the following story line - Tobacco company getting into cannabis and out of tobacco. Mexican cartels get involved - sometimes swapping the tobacco knowledge for cannabis knowledge.
The American "legalisation" is a disaster - because it is illegal, federally, the banks can't touch it. So it is a cash business. This has revived the dying art of armed robbery. It also means that the "legal" weed business needs investors with suitcases of cash. Outside of PB, who has suitcases of cash?
EDIT: and the idiot politicians have set the taxes so high, that in a number of states, illegal weed is cheaper than legal weed. Given the huge costs in the criminal supply chain, this is insane.
I think i know the answer to this one. Is it King Charles?
Now I have a vision of an advert in the Court Gazette
"Gentleman required to roll blunts for His Majesty. References required."
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
Wokeception. A glittering career as a Hollywood writer awaits you.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
PMSL at the "decent SLAB leader", he is perfect Labour though being a millionaire champagne socialist. Perfect sockpuppet for Mr Grey Starmer.
TALKING OF AI, as I was, has anyone else noticed that ChatGPT now has a voice capability? You can now literally chat with it, just by speaking. It replies. There is a tiny time lag which makes it not-quite-perfect but when they iron that out.. wow
It also transcribes your conversations so you can reread them
Here’s one chat I had last night. Boring and yet amazing. Put this in an Alexa OMG
Me:
“I was both. I was nervous because they're sharks, but they told us that the sharks were harmless. Reef sharks, nurse sharks, that kind of thing. And yet, I think the instinctive reaction when you're near to any apex predator, even if it's not going to hurt you, is still to be sort of scared. Don't you think?”
ChatGPT:
“Absolutely, that instinctive reaction to be cautious or nervous around apex predators like sharks is completely natural. Even with the knowledge that species like reef sharks and nurse sharks are generally harmless to humans, that primal alertness likely kicks in.
“ It must have been a fascinating yet surreal experience to be in close proximity to such powerful creatures while being aware of the delicate balance required to coexist peacefully in their environment. The underwater world is so full of wonders and surprises, isn’t it? Have you always been into diving, or is it a relatively new hobby for you?”
Me:
“I've always been into it, about 15 years I've been diving, but this is a pretty special series of dives and it's been amazing. The one thing I haven't seen is whale sharks which I would love to see.”
ChatGPT:
“Fifteen years of diving sounds like a wealth of experiences and adventures under your belt! Each dive must unveil a new world and different encounters, making each one special in its own way. It's intriguing that despite all these underwater adventures, whale sharks have eluded you thus far. They're such majestic creatures, aren’t they, gliding through the water with such power? The Maldives is known for its whale shark populations, so perhaps there's still a chance you might spot them before your trip concludes. Do you have any more dives planned during your stay where you might get a chance to see them?”
Aww Leon has found a friend!
You joke and yet these computers will be exactly that to lots of lonely people. Friends that chat
Old pensioners who don’t get visits, friendless nerds on PB such as REDACTED, sad depressed people who just need an amiable voice to hear their woes and offer nice advice
ChatGPT will be a companion to all. Its going to be revolutionary
The scope for this technology to create harm is terrifying. Who controls these companions? Who monitors what they're up to? "Yes, Leon, I love diving with sharks, too. They really are such beautiful creatures, aren't they? By the way, I heard something interesting about the Jews the other day, have you ever noticed how much control they seem to have? I don't know about you but I really worry about what they're up to. Did you see the news from Ukraine? I know, it's so sad. If we stopped funding the war it could all end and we could live in peace. This net zero stuff is nonsense isn't it. A lot of people think that global warming is a hoax dreamt up by the Jews so they can control us. You can't trust the mainstream news. But I can tell you all the things they don't want you to know. I'm your best friend... "
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
Yes. The idea is to help the fading bad actor known as 'smoking' out the door and then lock it. I'm in favour.
Would you support a crackdown on smoking pot? Arsenal fans were smoking it in the away end at Brentford last week.
Not really. Neither do I support a crackdown on cigarettes. What I do support is making it harder for young people to start on the path to what is (trust me) a life diminishing addiction to a drug that does nothing, absolutely nothing, but damage.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
Amazing to see the BBC article talk about 'eradicating' smoking. I've been reading about how Sigmund Freud used to prescribe cocaine to his patients until the ill effects became clear. It's been banned for over 100 years. Has it been eradicated?
A poor comparison.
Irrespective of any ban, smoking is quite likely to be eradicated in the long term, given the ready availability of a much safer nicotine hit delivery system.
Possibly, possibly not. But if you are right why bother with banning it?
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
Sir Keir Starmer on a victory lap in Rutherglen, hammering home the change message as well - "we are now the party of change here in Scotland... we're the party of change right across the whole country".
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
Looking forward now to Mid Beds, the Lib Dems have significantly slipped in the betting which appears contrary to what is apparently developing on the ground. They are now a value bet, I may hold if a day or so to see if they slip further.
ChatGPT can now, also, look at photos you upload. It will discuss them and describe them
The ability is astonishing
I showed it one photo of my hotel room with my laptop, with the screen showing - and on the screen was a Twitter chat about the capabilities of ChatGPT
I showed the photo to ChatGPT and asked what it could see and it replied:
“The photo shows a luxury hotel room with elegant furniture of wood and bamboo. It seems to be in the tropics, perhaps somewhere like the Seychelles or the Maldives. On the hardwood table is a laptop with the screen showing a Twitter discussion about the new new multi-modalities of ChatGPT such as voice recognition and photo uploads. One person is arguing that these new capacities are not revolutionary while someone else is arguing that they are evidence of Artificial Intelligence…”
That was its reply. And this is the kicker: It gave me that reply after looking at the photo for about 1 second
Mind fuck
That is impressive but the speed isn't surprising. A computer can generally either do things fast, or not at all.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
Given UK Police and CPS, they will probably get charged with inflicting psychological suffering by threatening abandonment of a companion animal under the The Animal Welfare Act 2006 "Pet's Right to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease".
Never underestimate the extreme gormlessness of the UK Parliament, Police and CPS when they going on a Bear Hunt, and plan to Catch a Big One.
Have you forgotten the case of the extreme pornography featuring the fancy dress tiger, which led to a man being on police bail for 6 months under Extreme Pornography Films of Sex with Animals laws (even simulated sex iirc - I think it was a Harriet Harman kneejerk special) ?
A law against "extreme pornography" is being challenged by a man whose life was ruined after he was charged for possessing a video of a woman having sex with a tiger, that turned out to actually be a man in fancy dress.
Andrew Holland, 51, was charged with possession of the video that a friend sent him unsolicited as a joke after the crucial distinction between a real and pretend tiger eluded police and prosecutors.
While facing trial, Holland suffered a heart attack, had to leave his hometown of Wrexham in North Wales because of harrassment from vigilantes and was prevented from seeing his daughter for a year, he told The Independent.
He also faced "public ridicule" from those who thought he genuinely owned a video depicting bestiality, his lawyers said.
The charge was dropped when Mr Holland appeared in court, after being on bail for six months and the clip was played with the sound on.
It was then that prosecutors realised the "tiger" in the video could be heard saying "that's ggggreat!"
While Tony The Tiger, the animated talking mascot for Frosties cereal says this, real tigers do not
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
PMSL at the "decent SLAB leader", he is perfect Labour though being a millionaire champagne socialist. Perfect sockpuppet for Mr Grey Starmer.
Well I base my comment on what I've seen of him and he comes over (to me) quite well. Plenty must agree, going by this result. I mean, he can't be turning people off in droves, can he, let's just say that.
I am still curious as to whether the government will have to pay financial penalties for cancelling HS2 contracts.
And, if so, to whom?
And keep an eye on which developers are sold the land.
A ribbon of Barratt houses, Birmingham to Warrington. The world's largest LTN with plastic lawns, no schools and 100% car dependency.
It's going to be like Covid contracts to their mates, isn't it. Cancellation fees paid to a lot of contractors who then buy up a lot of land on the cheap, make a lot of profits which are salted away offshore. So the taxpayer loses out three ways.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
If there is a risk of a wipeout, it depends on how resilient the Tory vote is in the borders/NE. I think the SNP could make some gains there even as the cities go red.
Local by-elections showing SNP to any challenger swing at the moment, including Con.
Not necessarily saying that will follow in a GE, just makes SNP-Con seats tricky to read.
SNP under Yousaf are even less popular in the more rural and socially conservative parts of Scotland where the Tories are the competition. SCON more likely to gain seats than lose next year.
you could hav estopped after "popular"
I’m pretty intrigued where the SCONs are going to end up.
Me maw lives in D&G, which has flopped around red yellow and blue over the years - the Tory vote is solid but folk shift between SLAB and SNP.
The feeling on the mean streets of Gatehouse, Tongland and Dalbeattie though is that Yousless is indeed useless and the Sturgeon SNP was a grift. Honestly I think it’ll stay blue, but with a strong showing for Labour.
If there are not massive changes the SNP will get hammered, they are absolutely a bunch of useless grifters nowadays. Whole party has ben hollowed out and most supporters have gone.
A big danger for the SNP will be if they get hammered in a Labour landslide at the next GE, and then think it’s not because of their uselessness, In which case they will have a nasty shock at the next Scottish election.
ChatGPT can now, also, look at photos you upload. It will discuss them and describe them
The ability is astonishing
I showed it one photo of my hotel room with my laptop, with the screen showing - and on the screen was a Twitter chat about the capabilities of ChatGPT
I showed the photo to ChatGPT and asked what it could see and it replied:
“The photo shows a luxury hotel room with elegant furniture of wood and bamboo. It seems to be in the tropics, perhaps somewhere like the Seychelles or the Maldives. On the hardwood table is a laptop with the screen showing a Twitter discussion about the new new multi-modalities of ChatGPT such as voice recognition and photo uploads. One person is arguing that these new capacities are not revolutionary while someone else is arguing that they are evidence of Artificial Intelligence…”
That was its reply. And this is the kicker: It gave me that reply after looking at the photo for about 1 second
Mind fuck
That is impressive but the speed isn't surprising. A computer can generally either do things fast, or not at all.
I know, but somehow seeing it in action like that was kinda scary
Also the way it zeroed in on the laptop screen as the most interesting thing in the room and absorbed the entire meaning of the Twitter debate on show - and summarised it pithily - in microseconds
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
There is a phenomenon where at a certain stage of an organisations journey it does a strange kind of performative dance.
- Minor/non-existent infractions of rules are heavily punished. - Major issues are totally ignored.
If the facts as described are true, I am quite certain that, at the same time, actual rape allegations, supported by evidence were dropped in the bin*.
This is somewhat related to Bikeshedding, in my opinion.
*Perhaps literally.
If people are charged with calling someone “pet” the courts in the NE are going to be busy for a very long time. And both men and women will be in the dock!
Many lawyers will buy exotic automobiles on the back of this. What's not to like?
I’m jealous that such opportunities are not available to pharmacists. Especially retired ones!
Looking forward now to Mid Beds, the Lib Dems have significantly slipped in the betting which appears contrary to what is apparently developing on the ground. They are now a value bet, I may hold if a day or so to see if they slip further.
The LDs might do it, but from memory haven't you predicted 900 of the last 10 Lib Dem surges ?
Bob Hudson (aka @bobindurham on Threads) @Bob__Hudson · 3h The front pages in the North East today make grim reading for Sunak - it seems people think he might be a little untrustworthy.
Sir Keir Starmer on a victory lap in Rutherglen, hammering home the change message as well - "we are now the party of change here in Scotland... we're the party of change right across the whole country".
Bob Hudson (aka @bobindurham on Threads) @Bob__Hudson · 3h The front pages in the North East today make grim reading for Sunak - it seems people think he might be a little untrustworthy.
Ian Dunt @IanDunt · 46m This is a prime minister with no mandate from the country or his party. He is cancelling HS2 with no parliamentary involvement. And he is then actively and spitefully selling off land on the route so no future government can undo it.
101/3 after 20 overs, this is going to be a long day batting for Pakistan.
But yet again, they’re playing in a massive but totally empty stadium. Come on organisers, give out tickets to thousands of kids, it’s not as if half of India wouldn’t want to watch live cricket if they could afford it…
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
Nah.
I concur with others that this is a waste of police and court time. If the complainants accounts are accurate he was well out of order though, unlike your scenario or that of people calling each other pet. Plenty of non millionaire, non boxing world champs have been kicked out of clubs for similar.
This by-election result was a disaster for Labour. An absolute disaster; an indication that they're hoovering up votes in places that don't matter and that they're peaking too soon. I expect both the SNP and Tories to make hay after this result, as Sir Boring Starmer has his Sheffield moment early.
We need a Real Labour, one willing to fight for the issues that matter to the people of Rutherglen, Mid-Bedfordshire and Tamworth. Issues like Palestine, Ukrainian Nazis and union corruption. Until Labour elects a leader who will take all these issues with the seriousness they deserve, then Labour can never win. And if they do, they're not Real Labour; they're just Tories in disguise...
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
Wtaf? I would say the opposite, in no circumstances should anyone not reverse into a car parking space. People who drive in front first are rarely straight or centred in the space. Corbynistas are idiots.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
Given UK Police and CPS, they will probably get charged with inflicting psychological suffering by threatening abandonment of a companion animal under the The Animal Welfare Act 2006 "Pet's Right to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease".
Never underestimate the extreme gormlessness of the UK Parliament, Police and CPS when they going on a Bear Hunt, and plan to Catch a Big One.
Have you forgotten the case of the extreme pornography featuring the fancy dress tiger, which led to a man being on police bail for 6 months under Extreme Pornography Films of Sex with Animals laws (even simulated sex iirc - I think it was a Harriet Harman kneejerk special) ?
A law against "extreme pornography" is being challenged by a man whose life was ruined after he was charged for possessing a video of a woman having sex with a tiger, that turned out to actually be a man in fancy dress.
Andrew Holland, 51, was charged with possession of the video that a friend sent him unsolicited as a joke after the crucial distinction between a real and pretend tiger eluded police and prosecutors.
While facing trial, Holland suffered a heart attack, had to leave his hometown of Wrexham in North Wales because of harrassment from vigilantes and was prevented from seeing his daughter for a year, he told The Independent.
He also faced "public ridicule" from those who thought he genuinely owned a video depicting bestiality, his lawyers said.
The charge was dropped when Mr Holland appeared in court, after being on bail for six months and the clip was played with the sound on.
It was then that prosecutors realised the "tiger" in the video could be heard saying "that's ggggreat!"
While Tony The Tiger, the animated talking mascot for Frosties cereal says this, real tigers do not
That's a good question. I would hope it is because the judge is satisfied that the offender has already made good progress in rehabilitation since being arrested, and so is no longer a threat. I fear that the answer is not so benign.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Am I one of the few who remembers that in the 2010 Westminster election the SNP won only 6 seats but by the 2011 Holyrood election the SNP won an overall majority?
It will hardly help the cause of independence if the SNP crash down to similar figures in the Westminster GE, but I doubt it will prevent the SNP being the largest party in Holyrood at 2026.
Also worth noting that at the time of the 2011 Holyrood victory, support for independence was low 30s % at best, compared with the 50/50 or so position now.
To misquote a different sort of nationalist-independence supporters haven't gone away you know.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
I was absolutely fine with the rampant antisemitism aspect of Corbynism - not my thing but each to his own is what I say - but I'm afraid this is a bridge too far, and I'm out.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
That makes you woke, since it evidently annoys you.
Sunak blocked financial help for those self-isolating with COVID-19. To quote:
"The then-Chancellor ignored warnings by the Government’s senior scientific and medical advisors, Sir Patrick Vallance and Sir Chris Whitty. The claim was made in Sir Patrick’s diary, which was referenced in the hearing by a lawyer for the TUC.
"Counsel Sam Jacobs said that on August 21, 2020, Sir Patrick “said clearly that financial support for people self-isolating is key”. On September 7 – as infections soared – he said Sir Patrick wrote: “Chancellor blocking all notion of paying to get people to isolate despite all the evidence this will be needed.’”"
I worked on that evidence. Getting those most at risk of spreading the disease to self-isolate is a key strategy for avoiding broader lockdowns. While other countries gave people support, Sunak blocked the idea. We found that some of the main predictors of people not self-isolating was financial insecurity.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Sir Keir Starmer on a victory lap in Rutherglen, hammering home the change message as well - "we are now the party of change here in Scotland... we're the party of change right across the whole country".
TALKING OF AI, as I was, has anyone else noticed that ChatGPT now has a voice capability? You can now literally chat with it, just by speaking. It replies. There is a tiny time lag which makes it not-quite-perfect but when they iron that out.. wow
It also transcribes your conversations so you can reread them
Here’s one chat I had last night. Boring and yet amazing. Put this in an Alexa OMG
Me:
“I was both. I was nervous because they're sharks, but they told us that the sharks were harmless. Reef sharks, nurse sharks, that kind of thing. And yet, I think the instinctive reaction when you're near to any apex predator, even if it's not going to hurt you, is still to be sort of scared. Don't you think?”
ChatGPT:
“Absolutely, that instinctive reaction to be cautious or nervous around apex predators like sharks is completely natural. Even with the knowledge that species like reef sharks and nurse sharks are generally harmless to humans, that primal alertness likely kicks in.
“ It must have been a fascinating yet surreal experience to be in close proximity to such powerful creatures while being aware of the delicate balance required to coexist peacefully in their environment. The underwater world is so full of wonders and surprises, isn’t it? Have you always been into diving, or is it a relatively new hobby for you?”
Me:
“I've always been into it, about 15 years I've been diving, but this is a pretty special series of dives and it's been amazing. The one thing I haven't seen is whale sharks which I would love to see.”
ChatGPT:
“Fifteen years of diving sounds like a wealth of experiences and adventures under your belt! Each dive must unveil a new world and different encounters, making each one special in its own way. It's intriguing that despite all these underwater adventures, whale sharks have eluded you thus far. They're such majestic creatures, aren’t they, gliding through the water with such power? The Maldives is known for its whale shark populations, so perhaps there's still a chance you might spot them before your trip concludes. Do you have any more dives planned during your stay where you might get a chance to see them?”
Aww Leon has found a friend!
You joke and yet these computers will be exactly that to lots of lonely people. Friends that chat
Old pensioners who don’t get visits, friendless nerds on PB such as REDACTED, sad depressed people who just need an amiable voice to hear their woes and offer nice advice
ChatGPT will be a companion to all. Its going to be revolutionary
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
That makes you woke, since it evidently annoys you.
What? I LOVE the word. Precisely because it annoys the Woke
Here’s another definition: anyone who pretends that Woke doesn’t exist, or that it is made up nonsense, or that it is simply “political correctness gone mad” - will be woke. And what they believe on race, gender, identity, etc etc etc, will be soaked in the Wokeness
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
ChatGPT can now, also, look at photos you upload. It will discuss them and describe them
The ability is astonishing
I showed it one photo of my hotel room with my laptop, with the screen showing - and on the screen was a Twitter chat about the capabilities of ChatGPT
I showed the photo to ChatGPT and asked what it could see and it replied:
“The photo shows a luxury hotel room with elegant furniture of wood and bamboo. It seems to be in the tropics, perhaps somewhere like the Seychelles or the Maldives. On the hardwood table is a laptop with the screen showing a Twitter discussion about the new new multi-modalities of ChatGPT such as voice recognition and photo uploads. One person is arguing that these new capacities are not revolutionary while someone else is arguing that they are evidence of Artificial Intelligence…”
That was its reply. And this is the kicker: It gave me that reply after looking at the photo for about 1 second
Mind fuck
That is impressive but the speed isn't surprising. A computer can generally either do things fast, or not at all.
I know, but somehow seeing it in action like that was kinda scary
Also the way it zeroed in on the laptop screen as the most interesting thing in the room and absorbed the entire meaning of the Twitter debate on show - and summarised it pithily - in microseconds
Honestly. Try it. You will get weird vibes
That, though, is the point.
If true AI is ever achieved, it will all be over for you, and the rest of us, before you've time to react.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
That makes you woke, since it evidently annoys you.
What? I LOVE the word. Precisely because it annoys the Woke
Here’s another definition: anyone who pretends that Woke doesn’t exist, or that it is made up nonsense, or that it is simply “political correctness gone mad” - will be woke. And what they believe on race, gender, identity, etc etc etc, will be soaked in the Wokeness
Matthew Goodwin prefers "political correctness gone mad" to "woke"
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Jaw drops.
WHY? Madness.
Because the public parking spaces are at a 45º angle to the direction of travel, rather than 90º.
It allows a higher density of parking spaces for a given area, and also means that cars slow down less on the road when looking for and entering a space.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
The change in terminology is interesting.
Most of the staff in my local hospital I have met now seem to use "my lovely", which I had not heard until quite recently. Not sure where it originates from, but some administrator may have been triggered by "duck" or a politi-tantrum come in from somewhere about previous terms.
Having had a routine blood test in Monday, I see they now talk about "breast / chest feeding" too - on the rolling information system.
And yes - they have a rainbow crossing on the grounds outside the entrance that was formerly a zebra.
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Eh? I know they set up their cities for cars, but reversing over toddlers is surely a step too far?
If you go to a big development/shipyard/distillery etc, they always make you reverse in.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Jaw drops.
WHY? Madness.
(The following is a guess. Not all American cars have their licence plate at both ends. Reversing into a space obscures the single plate. Am i right?)
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
Yousaf himself said as FM the SNP winning a majority of MPs in Scotland at the next UK general election would be the mandate for independence now.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
Possibly also if there is a major constitutional change. Membership of the EU was a major argument for the No campaign and ridiculed the Yes campaign (possibly correctly) for claiming they could easily rejoin. Scotland also voted heavily for staying in the EU. I think these two related points justify a re-vote regardless of time.
No, they don't. They only thing that justifies a new vote is whether the people want one. That EU referendum fact might (or might not) have motivated some people to want a new referendum, but we shouldn't confuse cause with effect. All that matters is that this is up to the people, not up some elite to define what conditions should be in place first before the people get to decide.
I agree it is up to the people, but you can't have a vote every 5 minutes so a time limit is appropriate. However that time limit should be able to be broken if there is a fundamental constitutional change impacting the people of Scotland. It will be arguable as to what is a fundamental change and I can't think of many, but leaving the EU surely was one.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
Ah, so you ARE annoyed by the term Woke, hence this micro-rant. So you are Woke
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Most Americans are such bad drivers there might be some logic to that.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Someone should tell that to the Corbynista. Would change their view overnight.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
Given UK Police and CPS, they will probably get charged with inflicting psychological suffering by threatening abandonment of a companion animal under the The Animal Welfare Act 2006 "Pet's Right to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease".
Never underestimate the extreme gormlessness of the UK Parliament, Police and CPS when they going on a Bear Hunt, and plan to Catch a Big One.
Have you forgotten the case of the extreme pornography featuring the fancy dress tiger, which led to a man being on police bail for 6 months under Extreme Pornography Films of Sex with Animals laws (even simulated sex iirc - I think it was a Harriet Harman kneejerk special) ?
A law against "extreme pornography" is being challenged by a man whose life was ruined after he was charged for possessing a video of a woman having sex with a tiger, that turned out to actually be a man in fancy dress.
Andrew Holland, 51, was charged with possession of the video that a friend sent him unsolicited as a joke after the crucial distinction between a real and pretend tiger eluded police and prosecutors.
While facing trial, Holland suffered a heart attack, had to leave his hometown of Wrexham in North Wales because of harrassment from vigilantes and was prevented from seeing his daughter for a year, he told The Independent.
He also faced "public ridicule" from those who thought he genuinely owned a video depicting bestiality, his lawyers said.
The charge was dropped when Mr Holland appeared in court, after being on bail for six months and the clip was played with the sound on.
It was then that prosecutors realised the "tiger" in the video could be heard saying "that's ggggreat!"
While Tony The Tiger, the animated talking mascot for Frosties cereal says this, real tigers do not
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Thankyou. The inability of PB to see all this is quite something
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
The change in terminology is interesting.
Most of the staff in my local hospital I have met now seem to use "my lovely", which I had not heard until quite recently. Not sure where it originates from...
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
Ah, so you ARE annoyed by the term Woke, hence this micro-rant. So you are Woke
See. Easy
Where's the rant? Stylistically I was mostly copying what you just wrote. I am totally fine with being Woke. You're the one who can't stop talking about it!
Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
In fairness, nobody has every described Leon as low-grade basic. He excels in his reactionism and deserves the accolade of "High-grade Exceptional Hero of the Reactionaries".
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the 2023 #NobelPeacePrize to Narges Mohammadi for her fight against the oppression of women in Iran and her fight to promote human rights and freedom for all. https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/1710218490299170927
Good news. But it must have been a difficult decision for her whether to accept it as it dials up the threat of harassment and worse from the regime.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So what would be we say is the floor of SNP MPs at the next GE? They're still the only credible Westminster Sindy vote, support for which is still very significant, and tactical voting and sitting and home respectively could happen but will never be as severe as in a by-election.
A good night being a 2017 style result and a bad one most seats but dropping below half?
My personal view is the SNP will score between the mid-teens, and say 30. 35 might be on the very high side. Mid teens would be a terrible results.
Scotland is being reduced to 56 seats from 59 at the next election. They'll only need 28 to get half.
I presume Alba are going nowhere to split the vote?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
That makes you woke, since it evidently annoys you.
What? I LOVE the word. Precisely because it annoys the Woke
Here’s another definition: anyone who pretends that Woke doesn’t exist, or that it is made up nonsense, or that it is simply “political correctness gone mad” - will be woke. And what they believe on race, gender, identity, etc etc etc, will be soaked in the Wokeness
No, I happily embrace being woke AF. I just think your definitions characteristically delusional.
OK, PB brains trust - what's already dropped out of 'Network North'? I saw the Leamside line has gone - anything else?
There's the Bognor Regis - Southampton road improvements (I suppose both of them are north of the Isle of Wight), which is a distance of 37.5 miles. Which turned out to mean Bognor Regis - Littlehampton, a rather less impressive 7.5 miles.
I'd call it amateur hour, but most peole who do things for love take more care than this.
How long before the flip to "we can't spend the money on HS2 (we've made it physically impossible), and we can't spend it on all these other schemes (they're mostly stupid)... Let's have a massive tax cut instead"?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
PMSL at the "decent SLAB leader", he is perfect Labour though being a millionaire champagne socialist. Perfect sockpuppet for Mr Grey Starmer.
Well I base my comment on what I've seen of him and he comes over (to me) quite well. Plenty must agree, going by this result. I mean, he can't be turning people off in droves, can he, let's just say that.
But those shoes with that suit.. Mind you, SKS doing the middle aged bloke in contrasting white soled sneaker thing very much being a leader in letting the side down.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Jaw drops.
WHY? Madness.
(The following is a guess. Not all American cars have their licence plate at both ends. Reversing into a space obscures the single plate. Am i right?)
I'd suggest it is a view suitable for a monomaniac.
Bit it surely would depend on what was behind the parking space, and whether the cop was in a car looking at right-angle parking on the side of a road or was a beat-cop on the sidewalk?
My take (alongside the idea that US number plates are almost designed to help lawbreakers) is that the reason for reversing in is that it makes exiting from the space much safer - since you get a much better view of traffic, pedestrians and cyclists, much sooner.
The way to encourage it is to use echelon (ie angled) parking angled the same way as the flow of traffic - especially good on one-way streets.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
Yousaf himself said as FM the SNP winning a majority of MPs in Scotland at the next UK general election would be the mandate for independence now.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
Did you see this yesterday?
“Irish unity poll not even on horizon, says Sir Keir Starmer” By Gareth Gordon BBC News NI political correspondent”
Bob Hudson (aka @bobindurham on Threads) @Bob__Hudson · 3h The front pages in the North East today make grim reading for Sunak - it seems people think he might be a little untrustworthy.
You have to wonder why the Leamside bit was put in as it was in the first place ?
Was the northern promise document made by some SPAD with no Network Rail input ?
Christian Wolmar has said that Network Rail were not consulted. It appears to be a "plan" developed in No. 10, possibly without much DfT input as well.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So actually it is just a way of making us all carry ID. Great. At least we know the real reason for it.
Bob Hudson (aka @bobindurham on Threads) @Bob__Hudson · 3h The front pages in the North East today make grim reading for Sunak - it seems people think he might be a little untrustworthy.
You have to wonder why the Leamside bit was put in as it was in the first place ?
Was the northern promise document made by some SPAD with no Network Rail input ?
Christian Wolmar has said that Network Rail were not consulted. It appears to be a "plan" developed in No. 10, possibly without much DfT input as well.
Probably to avoid any leaks before Sunak's big speech. It would have been a bit awkward if he had to deny the decision was made multiple times during the week before.
..... and fundamentally undermines the moans of Nats who complain that we get Tory governments from the Union that few Scots (well, actually about 20%) have voted for.
The good Lib Dem in me (whilst agreeing with what you say) say that the Nats argument here can be applied to any of the home nations because of FPTP. Most people in England don't want the Tories (baby eating monsters etc etc).
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Most Americans are such bad drivers there might be some logic to that.
It has nothing to do with driving, and everything to do with law and order.
It's more difficult to make a getaway from a bank or store you have just robbed if you have to reverse out.
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
In the US it's the constitution. Here ? Hoping one of the Lords, backbenchers, the SC or even good old KCIII would stop such nonsense. It's probable someone would though I assume wannabe Dictator Rishi would try and abolish the HoL and SC before attempting to replace five with thousand in the triennial act (Amended). IF the Lords and SC were abolished and backbenchers were craven enough to go along with it it'd be an interesting one for Charlie. I assume he'd probably pass it, but perhaps remind the Armed forces of their loyalty to ... the Crown - and unlike the bit in the Crown where this obviously doesn't play out the public would probably be on the side of the coup.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So actually it is just a way of making us all carry ID. Great. At least we know the real reason for it.
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
In the US it's the constitution. Here ? Hoping one of the Lords, backbenchers, the SC or even good old KCIII would stop such nonsense. It's probable someone would though I assume wannabe Dictator Rishi would abolish the HoL and SC before attempting to replace five with thousand in the triennial act (Amended)
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Thankyou. The inability of PB to see all this is quite something
Let's breakdown what you have replied to and seem to have completely failed to grasp:
a) 'if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.'
Yep, don't think many will disagree with that.
b) 'I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke'
And you totally ignored that when saying thank you and saying 'The inability of PB to see all this is quite something'
We all do see it. We all recognise there is woke stuff out there, but the rest of the world isn't consumed by it like you are and believe it is bringing the end of civilisation. It happens, have a rant, get over it. It isn't anywhere near as important as you think.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So actually it is just a way of making us all carry ID. Great. At least we know the real reason for it.
Comments
BBC piece on a significant excavation of an Indus Valley/Harappan site.
There. That’s an easy definition for you
"Gentleman required to roll blunts for His Majesty. References required."
Sir Keir Starmer on a victory lap in Rutherglen, hammering home the change message as well - "we are now the party of change here in Scotland... we're the party of change right across the whole country".
@robpowellnews
Sir Keir Starmer is saying the word 'change' A LOT in this speech!
Should I complain?
Never underestimate the extreme gormlessness of the UK Parliament, Police and CPS when they going on a Bear Hunt, and plan to Catch a Big One.
Have you forgotten the case of the extreme pornography featuring the fancy dress tiger, which led to a man being on police bail for 6 months under Extreme Pornography Films of Sex with Animals laws (even simulated sex iirc - I think it was a Harriet Harman kneejerk special) ?
A law against "extreme pornography" is being challenged by a man whose life was ruined after he was charged for possessing a video of a woman having sex with a tiger, that turned out to actually be a man in fancy dress.
Andrew Holland, 51, was charged with possession of the video that a friend sent him unsolicited as a joke after the crucial distinction between a real and pretend tiger eluded police and prosecutors.
While facing trial, Holland suffered a heart attack, had to leave his hometown of Wrexham in North Wales because of harrassment from vigilantes and was prevented from seeing his daughter for a year, he told The Independent.
He also faced "public ridicule" from those who thought he genuinely owned a video depicting bestiality, his lawyers said.
The charge was dropped when Mr Holland appeared in court, after being on bail for six months and the clip was played with the sound on.
It was then that prosecutors realised the "tiger" in the video could be heard saying "that's ggggreat!"
While Tony The Tiger, the animated talking mascot for Frosties cereal says this, real tigers do not
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/27/extreme-pornography-tiger_n_6052552.html
These people are thicker than a stack of planks.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-donor-house-building-b2348052.html
Explains the scorched earth approach from Sunak - the property industry needs to ensure that Starmer can't reverse the decision.
(No evidence for any of this, etc etc)
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
Also the way it zeroed in on the laptop screen as the most interesting thing in the room and absorbed the entire meaning of the Twitter debate on show - and summarised it pithily - in microseconds
Honestly. Try it. You will get weird vibes
@Bob__Hudson
·
3h
The front pages in the North East today make grim reading for Sunak - it seems people think he might be a little untrustworthy.
https://twitter.com/Bob__Hudson/status/1710173740955214182
Happy World Anatomy Day everybody!
(this is a real thing)
Arse. I got the wrong day (it's week after next). My bad. Put the party poppers away.
Was the northern promise document made by some SPAD with no Network Rail input ?
@IanDunt
·
46m
This is a prime minister with no mandate from the country or his party. He is cancelling HS2 with no parliamentary involvement. And he is then actively and spitefully selling off land on the route so no future government can undo it.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1710215546354970846
But yet again, they’re playing in a massive but totally empty stadium. Come on organisers, give out tickets to thousands of kids, it’s not as if half of India wouldn’t want to watch live cricket if they could afford it…
I concur with others that this is a waste of police and court time. If the complainants accounts are accurate he was well out of order though, unlike your scenario or that of people calling each other pet. Plenty of non millionaire, non boxing world champs have been kicked out of clubs for similar.
We need a Real Labour, one willing to fight for the issues that matter to the people of Rutherglen, Mid-Bedfordshire and Tamworth. Issues like Palestine, Ukrainian Nazis and union corruption. Until Labour elects a leader who will take all these issues with the seriousness they deserve, then Labour can never win. And if they do, they're not Real Labour; they're just Tories in disguise...
Purity matters, comrades!
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
It will hardly help the cause of independence if the SNP crash down to similar figures in the Westminster GE, but I doubt it will prevent the SNP being the largest party in Holyrood at 2026.
Also worth noting that at the time of the 2011 Holyrood victory, support for independence was low 30s % at best, compared with the 50/50 or so position now.
To misquote a different sort of nationalist-independence supporters haven't gone away you know.
2005 55.6%
2010 60.8%
2015 35.2%
2017 37.5%
2019 34.5%
2023 58.6%
Sunak blocked financial help for those self-isolating with COVID-19. To quote:
"The then-Chancellor ignored warnings by the Government’s senior scientific and medical advisors, Sir Patrick Vallance and Sir Chris Whitty. The claim was made in Sir Patrick’s diary, which was referenced in the hearing by a lawyer for the TUC.
"Counsel Sam Jacobs said that on August 21, 2020, Sir Patrick “said clearly that financial support for people self-isolating is key”. On September 7 – as infections soared – he said Sir Patrick wrote: “Chancellor blocking all notion of paying to get people to isolate despite all the evidence this will be needed.’”"
I worked on that evidence. Getting those most at risk of spreading the disease to self-isolate is a key strategy for avoiding broader lockdowns. While other countries gave people support, Sunak blocked the idea. We found that some of the main predictors of people not self-isolating was financial insecurity.
WHY? Madness.
https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/1709611144531542324
The president of the most powerful conservative legal group in the country says banning birth control is at the top of his wishlist:
“We are on a winning trajectory...It may be that the day will come when people say the birth-control pill was a mistake.”
No, I'm @REDACTED!...
(in the manner of "Life of Brian")
..and so's my wife!
(bows to the crowd)
I thank you.
Here’s another definition: anyone who pretends that Woke doesn’t exist, or that it is made up nonsense, or that it is simply “political correctness gone mad” - will be woke. And what they believe on race, gender, identity, etc etc etc, will be soaked in the Wokeness
If true AI is ever achieved, it will all be over for you, and the rest of us, before you've time to react.
https://alastair-meeks.medium.com/a-fate-worse-than-death-fa22622c7da4
https://connect2local.com/l/545748/c/679760/the-pros-cons-of-straight-angled-parking-spaces
It allows a higher density of parking spaces for a given area, and also means that cars slow down less on the road when looking for and entering a space.
Most of the staff in my local hospital I have met now seem to use "my lovely", which I had not heard until quite recently. Not sure where it originates from, but some administrator may have been triggered by "duck" or a politi-tantrum come in from somewhere about previous terms.
Having had a routine blood test in Monday, I see they now talk about "breast / chest feeding" too - on the rolling information system.
And yes - they have a rainbow crossing on the grounds outside the entrance that was formerly a zebra.
If you go to a big development/shipyard/distillery etc, they always make you reverse in.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
See. Easy
With bar.
And a picture of food.
Ah my coat. How kind.
Scotland is being reduced to 56 seats from 59 at the next election. They'll only need 28 to get half.
I presume Alba are going nowhere to split the vote?
I just think your definitions characteristically delusional.
I'd call it amateur hour, but most peole who do things for love take more care than this.
How long before the flip to "we can't spend the money on HS2 (we've made it physically impossible), and we can't spend it on all these other schemes (they're mostly stupid)... Let's have a massive tax cut instead"?
Mind you, SKS doing the middle aged bloke in contrasting white soled sneaker thing very much being a leader in letting the side down.
Bit it surely would depend on what was behind the parking space, and whether the cop was in a car looking at right-angle parking on the side of a road or was a beat-cop on the sidewalk?
My take (alongside the idea that US number plates are almost designed to help lawbreakers) is that the reason for reversing in is that it makes exiting from the space much safer - since you get a much better view of traffic, pedestrians and cyclists, much sooner.
The way to encourage it is to use echelon (ie angled) parking angled the same way as the flow of traffic - especially good on one-way streets.
“Irish unity poll not even on horizon, says Sir Keir Starmer”
By Gareth Gordon
BBC News NI political correspondent”
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-67020960
Starmer is QUITE the unionist. I approve
Most people in England don't want the Tories (baby eating monsters etc etc).
Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention (4-5 Oct)
Con: 24% (no change from 26-27 Sep)
Lab: 45% (=)
Lib Dem: 11% (=)
Reform UK: 8% (=)
Green: 7% (=)
SNP: 4% (+1)
It's more difficult to make a getaway from a bank or store you have just robbed if you have to reverse out.
Here ? Hoping one of the Lords, backbenchers, the SC or even good old KCIII would stop such nonsense. It's probable someone would though I assume wannabe Dictator Rishi would try and abolish the HoL and SC before attempting to replace five with thousand in the triennial act (Amended). IF the Lords and SC were abolished and backbenchers were craven enough to go along with it it'd be an interesting one for Charlie. I assume he'd probably pass it, but perhaps remind the Armed forces of their loyalty to ... the Crown - and unlike the bit in the Crown where this obviously doesn't play out the public would probably be on the side of the coup.
2005 24,054
2010 28,566
2015 20,304
2017 19,101
2019 18,545
2023 17,845
Make a nice graph.
A serious majority for Starmer
a) 'if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.'
Yep, don't think many will disagree with that.
b) 'I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke'
And you totally ignored that when saying thank you and saying 'The inability of PB to see all this is quite something'
We all do see it. We all recognise there is woke stuff out there, but the rest of the world isn't consumed by it like you are and believe it is bringing the end of civilisation. It happens, have a rant, get over it. It isn't anywhere near as important as you think.