Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Also one might want to bear in mind that in Scotland an adult can mean someone aged 16 or over ...
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
Suella doesn’t want to be PM right now. Suella wants to be LOTO. If Sunak was forced out, I would expect her to ‘graciously’ step aside, let someone else take the loss; and launch her leadership campaign the day after the election.
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
He could be genuinely funny and had an excellent and well developed sense of the absurd. His Bob Dylan/Love Actually political advert was arguably the best we have ever had in this country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-YK3JJCIU
As a result he appealed to a lot of people who regard politics as part of the entertainment industry. The more you knew or cared about politics the less funny the joke was.
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
Good news for Rolls Royce. Government really needs to have them the order for half a dozen units, to get their production line off the ground. There’s a worldwide market of hundreds of these, which could generate billions of pounds of exports.
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
Oh I can easily see Truss being the Tory party's second LOTO...
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
Yes, but our resident pinniped would make a financial profit. Unlike the rest of us.
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
He could be genuinely funny and had an excellent and well developed sense of the absurd. His Bob Dylan/Love Actually political advert was arguably the best we have ever had in this country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-YK3JJCIU
As a result he appealed to a lot of people who regard politics as part of the entertainment industry. The more you knew or cared about politics the less funny the joke was.
You do realise that that ad was stolen from Rosena Allin-Khan, who released the same concept just a few weeks earlier?
I woke up this morning to the Today programme and thought I must be in a parallel universe: Firstly Mick Lynch was sounding sane. The only reassuring bit was Nick Robinson having the same thought and was obviously worried about him saying 'You sound a bit weary' to which Mick Lynch replied 'It is early in the morning'. And then I heard about our Home Secretary's article. Bring back Priti Patel that well known lefty. Honestly.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
I'm sure there are some eggs good amongst lawyers, but the Yanks used to say that lawyers could be used instead of rats as experimental subjects in drug trials because there are more of them, and people prefer the rats.
I'm sure that's an exaggeration as you and Mr Eagles add a lot to this blog, but rats have a major advantage - they don't vomit back an oral, experimental drug.
You’ve forgotten the punch line of that calumny: there are some things that rats just won’t do!
No rat has ever volunteered to work for Trump, for example.
You obviously define "rat" quite narrowly. Doesn't include Rudy Giuliani , for example.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Also one might want to bear in mind that in Scotland an adult can mean someone aged 16 or over ...
And can also, in a different context in Scotland, mean someone over 25.
Yesterday's Post Office witness: a lawyer who actually understands her job and, more importantly, has the decency to apologise for her part in this scandal.
I woke up this morning to the Today programme and thought I must be in a parallel universe: Firstly Mick Lynch was sounding sane. The only reassuring bit was Nick Robinson having the same thought and was obviously worried about him saying 'You sound a bit weary' to which Mick Lynch replied 'It is early in the morning'. And then I heard about our Home Secretary's article. Bring back Priti Patel that well known lefty. Honestly.
The Dorries section was full on Majorie Taylor Greene with added paranoia.
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
He could be genuinely funny and had an excellent and well developed sense of the absurd. His Bob Dylan/Love Actually political advert was arguably the best we have ever had in this country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-YK3JJCIU
As a result he appealed to a lot of people who regard politics as part of the entertainment industry. The more you knew or cared about politics the less funny the joke was.
You do realise that that ad was stolen from Rosena Allin-Khan, who released the same concept just a few weeks earlier?
Yesterday's Post Office witness: a lawyer who actually understands her job and, more importantly, has the decency to apologise for her part in this scandal.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
You'd think nowadays they'd just use an AI mock-up of Mel Gibson in a kilt lobbing a firework while brandishing a can of Tennent's Super.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Sunak’s going out with a whimper in this final year of government seems to ensure the party will turn even further right after the election. The narrative is being set up, with Braverman doing much of the heavy lifting, that he’s too weak and centrist. We even have Lucky Guy here claiming he’s the plant of a social democratic coup. So the next leader will be the next chapter in the party’s drift towards MAGA. So overnight I’ve changed my mind on Cleverly. I’m not sure he’s capable to going far right enough with a straight face. He’s more of a bog standard Thatcherite.
I don’t think Braverman will be the leader though. She’s too divisive even within the party. She’ll do the groundwork for someone more palatable to move in. Who though?
You may recall my ongoing theme (not yet a rant, but I will get there) about the gradual destruction of the internet. A combination of platform death, dynamic page decay, "improvement", Wikipedia brigading, alternates such as WhatsApp, enshittification/platform decay, age verification, Online Safety Act, paywalls, bots, SEO and algorithm changes result in the destruction of online data, increase in fake data, and greater difficulty in finding anything
With that in mind, you may wish to know that Omegle has now shut itself down. As PB is dominated by the older wealthy ("www.pensionersbitching.com") you may not be familiar with it. A social media site where one could search for people with a specific interest and then talk to them (like an Internet version of Teams or Zoom or Skype), it was harrowed in later years by conservative bots and concerns about child porn (I have no idea if the latter was based in fact), and has now voluntarily shuttered itself.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
We do also have to note that plenty of politicians in recent times have been very keen to pile onto the police when it has been politically expedient to do so, so I take some of the protestations from some quarters with a giant dose of salt.
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
Braverman would absolutely love to be sacked for "saying the unsayable" and is doing everything she can to goad Sunak into it. I think eventually she will, if not over this then over something else.
That way she distances herself from Sunak's election defeat in a way Cabinet ministers cannot as easily, and positions herself to say "told you so... go woke, go broke" etc in the post-election leadership bloodbath.
Actually doing the job of being Home Secretary, making difficult decisions and solving real problems, isn't something she's ever shown the slightest interest in. She's not a problem solver or a serious politician in any way - she likes to generate headlines by talking up problems and blaming other people for them.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
In fact, I am going to go further. The police in this country needs a root and branch overhaul. It is not fit for purpose on multiple levels. That will be one of the most important tasks for the next government. Judging by Cooper's and Sunak's responses they will not be up to it, just as this government has not been up to the job either.
Of course, the same thing can be said for another trouble spit: Peace is impossible while Hamas denies Israel's right to exist...
I'm not sure Israel is completely sound on Hamas's right to exist after the 7th October outrages, which is where the parallel with Russia/Ukraine breaks down.
Indeed, there are many members of Israel's governing coalition who (publicly) believe in the River to the Sea, only for the State of Israel, rather than the State of Palestine.
Israel is a democracy, and in democracies people have all sorts of views.
Its not the stated or public view of Israel in general or most Israelis even if a few extremists hold that view.
Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Jewish Power, and a member of the Israeli cabinet.
Yes, and we have Jacob Rees Mogg who's been a member of the British cabinet.
Democracies have a broad spectrum of elected politicians, Israel is no different. It is a democracy, democracies aren't supposed to only have a single view on subjects.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis vote for parties still at least theoretically in favour of a two state solution, as even Netanyahu and Likud still claim to be.
Though there's a world of difference between denying an existing state's right to exist (like Israel), and a potential theoretical future state's right to exist (like Palestine, Kurdistan etc).
Turkey deny Kurdistan's right to exist, is that outrageous of them?
Yes, it is outrageous of them. However, the Kurdish PKK is also regarded as a terrorist organisation in Turkey. Following the example of Israel, this presumably means you would regard Turkey as being justified in waging all-out war on the Kurds after the next PKK attack?
On the Kurds, no, on the PKK, yes of course.
Just as Israel is not launching an all out war on Palestinians, or even Gazans, Hamas launched a war on Israel and Israel are fighting back which they are perfectly entitled to do.
If some Gazans/Kurds get killed in the crossfire because Hamas/PKK use them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical in war. What is neither legal nor ethical is deliberately targeting civilians alone without targeting the enemy.
How many times does this need explaining before you can grasp the distinction?
Presumably you would agree that if the Israeli hostages get killed by the Israelis because Hamas are using them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical for the Israelis in war?
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Think "Big Fire"
Ah well, just a couple of unfortunate accidents, nothing to do with falsely reinforcing a narrative. Thanks for putting my mind at rest.
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
I have never called for the reinstatement of Liz Truss.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Think "Big Fire"
Ah well, just a couple of unfortunate accidents, nothing to do with falsely reinforcing a narrative. Thanks for putting my mind at rest.
That's a bit like the Russians who believe that everything that goes bump in the night is exquisitely planned by British SIS.
Of course, the same thing can be said for another trouble spit: Peace is impossible while Hamas denies Israel's right to exist...
I'm not sure Israel is completely sound on Hamas's right to exist after the 7th October outrages, which is where the parallel with Russia/Ukraine breaks down.
Indeed, there are many members of Israel's governing coalition who (publicly) believe in the River to the Sea, only for the State of Israel, rather than the State of Palestine.
Israel is a democracy, and in democracies people have all sorts of views.
Its not the stated or public view of Israel in general or most Israelis even if a few extremists hold that view.
Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Jewish Power, and a member of the Israeli cabinet.
Yes, and we have Jacob Rees Mogg who's been a member of the British cabinet.
Democracies have a broad spectrum of elected politicians, Israel is no different. It is a democracy, democracies aren't supposed to only have a single view on subjects.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis vote for parties still at least theoretically in favour of a two state solution, as even Netanyahu and Likud still claim to be.
Though there's a world of difference between denying an existing state's right to exist (like Israel), and a potential theoretical future state's right to exist (like Palestine, Kurdistan etc).
Turkey deny Kurdistan's right to exist, is that outrageous of them?
Yes, it is outrageous of them. However, the Kurdish PKK is also regarded as a terrorist organisation in Turkey. Following the example of Israel, this presumably means you would regard Turkey as being justified in waging all-out war on the Kurds after the next PKK attack?
On the Kurds, no, on the PKK, yes of course.
Just as Israel is not launching an all out war on Palestinians, or even Gazans, Hamas launched a war on Israel and Israel are fighting back which they are perfectly entitled to do.
If some Gazans/Kurds get killed in the crossfire because Hamas/PKK use them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical in war. What is neither legal nor ethical is deliberately targeting civilians alone without targeting the enemy.
How many times does this need explaining before you can grasp the distinction?
Presumably you would agree that if the Israeli hostages get killed by the Israelis because Hamas are using them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical for the Israelis in war?
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
You'd kill a lot less Palestinians by going in on the ground, to do Fort Drum.
I wonder what the world would make of that though.
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
I have never called for the reinstatement of Liz Truss.
Indeed. I think DougSeal is alone in his belief that Mary Elizabeth Truss will one day be Prime Minister again.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
What love in ? They just happen to be right on this particular issue. Which doesn't even mean they won't screw up the policing of it.
What's being defended is the separation of powers, and the need for the Home Secretary to respect the rules - some of which she herself had a hand in making.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Think "Big Fire"
Don't give a shit about columns A or C but column B is...
F-16D (E2A: Could be F-16I Hospital Destroyer) Fresco Tomcat (❤️) in 20 wing F-35C Su-27U or Su-30MKK or Su-30MKV (NOT Su-30 or Su-30MKI or Su-30MKA)
We have two immovable objects: the gargantuan Labour lead, and the unwillingness of the Tories to remove Sunak.
Something will have to give, and I don't think it will be the Labour lead. I keep reading political hacks quoting Tory MPs saying that Sunak has given up. Question is whether the Tory MPs have also given up.
One last roll of the dice boys and girls. If only Suella was Prime Minister. That would show the wokies who is boss...
And make Truss look like a sane choice for Tory party leader going into an election....
DougSeal and Luckyguy may yet end up vindicated in their impassioned calls for Truss2.
I have never called for the reinstatement of Liz Truss.
She's no more ridiculous than any of the likely alternatives.
Sunak’s going out with a whimper in this final year of government seems to ensure the party will turn even further right after the election. The narrative is being set up, with Braverman doing much of the heavy lifting, that he’s too weak and centrist. We even have Lucky Guy here claiming he’s the plant of a social democratic coup. So the next leader will be the next chapter in the party’s drift towards MAGA. So overnight I’ve changed my mind on Cleverly. I’m not sure he’s capable to going far right enough with a straight face. He’s more of a bog standard Thatcherite.
I don’t think Braverman will be the leader though. She’s too divisive even within the party. She’ll do the groundwork for someone more palatable to move in. Who though?
Journalistic ignorance always reminds me of the 7/7 bombers' videos. One of them was described by a BBC twonk as having a 'broad Yorkshire' accent. He didn't. Broad Yorkshire is incomprehensible to most people from Yorkshire. He had a Yorkshire accent. But the idea of knowing something the mythical far realms of Yorkshire was obviously silly.
As an aside, Yorkshire dialect is apparently rising in popularity, with lessons in it available. No idea why.
I'm sure there are some eggs good amongst lawyers, but the Yanks used to say that lawyers could be used instead of rats as experimental subjects in drug trials because there are more of them, and people prefer the rats.
I'm sure that's an exaggeration as you and Mr Eagles add a lot to this blog, but rats have a major advantage - they don't vomit back an oral, experimental drug.
You’ve forgotten the punch line of that calumny: there are some things that rats just won’t do!
No rat has ever volunteered to work for Trump, for example.
You obviously define "rat" quite narrowly. Doesn't include Rudy Giuliani , for example.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Think "Big Fire"
Ah well, just a couple of unfortunate accidents, nothing to do with falsely reinforcing a narrative. Thanks for putting my mind at rest.
That's a bit like the Russians who believe that everything that goes bump in the night is exquisitely planned by British SIS.
A touching kind of faith, really.
Fair enough, I can't really argue with your unparelleled knowledge of the set ups of Scottish local newspapers and a provincial branch of the BBC. I will add it to your bulging portfolio of unparalleled knowledge.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
We do also have to note that plenty of politicians in recent times have been very keen to pile onto the police when it has been politically expedient to do so, so I take some of the protestations from some quarters with a giant dose of salt.
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
We are back to the good faith / bad faith criticisms divide again. Her motives may well be questionable. This is a time to reduce tensions not raise them - not least for the benefit of the Jewish community here who have expressed concerns about their safety - and that is what a HS should be focused on. But suggestions of partiality by the police and a failure to understand the law or apply it consistently are points to be raised and properly addressed.
The real criticism of her - as of many in this government - is that they behave like the passers-by at the scene of an accident, endlessly bewailing how terrible everything is without realising that it is their job to do something about it. Or not bothering to do anything about it because wailing and whining is good for them personally.
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
He could be genuinely funny and had an excellent and well developed sense of the absurd. His Bob Dylan/Love Actually political advert was arguably the best we have ever had in this country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-YK3JJCIU
As a result he appealed to a lot of people who regard politics as part of the entertainment industry. The more you knew or cared about politics the less funny the joke was.
You do realise that that ad was stolen from Rosena Allin-Khan, who released the same concept just a few weeks earlier?
1. AZ was not shit. It was a decent vaccine. 2. There were very rare side effects. At a country level (or even at an individual level for anyone above about 30), these risks were a price well worth paying. 3. The mRNA vaccines are easier to tailor to new variants and cheaper to make. They therefore have taken essentially all the market.
If mRNA had never happened, AZ would have succeeded in the principle goal: it would have made Covid non-novel.
The government chose Oxford's vaccine over Imperial's mRNA technology. Favouring the alma mater or on genuine scientific or commercial grounds, who knows? Perhaps it should have pursued both.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
We do also have to note that plenty of politicians in recent times have been very keen to pile onto the police when it has been politically expedient to do so, so I take some of the protestations from some quarters with a giant dose of salt.
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
We are back to the good faith / bad faith criticisms divide again. Her motives may well be questionable. This is a time to reduce tensions not raise them - not least for the benefit of the Jewish community here who have expressed concerns about their safety - and that is what a HS should be focused on. But suggestions of partiality by the police and a failure to understand the law or apply it consistently are points to be raised and properly addressed.
The real criticism of her - as of many in this government - is that they behave like the passers-by at the scene of an accident, endlessly bewailing how terrible everything is without realising that it is their job to do something about it. Or not bothering to do anything about it because wailing and whining is good for them personally.
They've caused many of the accidents. But rather than do anything to help, or even flee the scene, they are loudly screaming that it's all someone else to blame.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
We do also have to note that plenty of politicians in recent times have been very keen to pile onto the police when it has been politically expedient to do so, so I take some of the protestations from some quarters with a giant dose of salt.
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
We are back to the good faith / bad faith criticisms divide again...
We shouldn't be. The decision whether or not to ban a protest is entirely an operational one from the POV of the police isn't it ? It becomes a political matter if they want to ban one and seek her approval, as they are required to do.
If she doesn't think they can make operational decisions on good faith, then she has powers to address that. Which don't involve publishing extended moans in the Daily Telegraph.
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
Part of the weird dynamics of the current situation.
It's jolly hard to deprogram someone after they have been in a cult. Alternatively, slightly less provocatively, it's very hard to persuade the victim of a confidence trick that they have been conned.
Boris conned pretty much all of us- I voted for him in London 2008/12, as did some of his other critics here. It's not until a specific something comes up that individuals conclude that he doesn't give a flying one for anyone else.
(Me? The Garden Bridge fiasco was probably the first sign, and the prorogation mess the moment to think He Must Be Stopped.)
The only surefire protection against Boris seems to have been vaccination with his type i early adulthood. I fortunately got my jabs and booster early when I stumbled upon the Bullingdon crowd at university so my lymph glands were already flooding out killer T-cells every time he appeared on telly during his Spectator years.
It seems that a number of people have long-Johnson. I assume the only cure to that is rest, and the passage of time.
Just how long is "long-Johnson"? Enquiring minds want to know!
Michael Gove is said to be well endowed, as was John Major back in the day.
I have Googled and do not understand the reference. Explain plz.
When recapturing Fort Drum (AKA The Concrete Battleship) in the Philippines, the Americans didn’t assault the place hand to hand.
Instead they pumped multiple tons of 2 parts diesel to 1 part petrol into a hole they made, and followed up with some white phosphorus mortar bomb rounds (chucked in by hand, on a time fuse) to set it off.
They did similar at several other fortifications - as did the Russians - but Fort Drum was the best known. Filmed IIRC.
1. AZ was not shit. It was a decent vaccine. 2. There were very rare side effects. At a country level (or even at an individual level for anyone above about 30), these risks were a price well worth paying. 3. The mRNA vaccines are easier to tailor to new variants and cheaper to make. They therefore have taken essentially all the market.
If mRNA had never happened, AZ would have succeeded in the principle goal: it would have made Covid non-novel.
The government chose Oxford's vaccine over Imperial's mRNA technology. Favouring the alma mater or on genuine scientific or commercial grounds, who knows? Perhaps it should have pursued both.
We did this at the time, the problem was that Imperials mRNA technology was not even close, let alone any idea how to scale up / manufacturing, which proved to be very hard for even the organisations / companies who were much further along with this technology. Basically it wasn't a viable option for a vaccine in the near term.
Now should that be a kickup the arse to fund research this, absolutely...is it happening?
I’ve read Braverman’s opinion piece. What is so awful about it? She’s been deeply provocative in the past - “lifestyle choice” was a highlight - but this isn’t even in the top 20
What intrigues me most about my tory friends is that 2 of the 4 I regularly post about would vote Conservative like a shot ... if Boris Johnson were leader.
I find it bewildering, bizarre, but it’s the case. They ‘still’ love him. Both are female. The third, the one whom I was hiking with this past week, thinks that what Boris did ‘wasn’t really very bad.’
Boris was a cult figure.
Part of the weird dynamics of the current situation.
It's jolly hard to deprogram someone after they have been in a cult. Alternatively, slightly less provocatively, it's very hard to persuade the victim of a confidence trick that they have been conned.
Boris conned pretty much all of us- I voted for him in London 2008/12, as did some of his other critics here. It's not until a specific something comes up that individuals conclude that he doesn't give a flying one for anyone else.
(Me? The Garden Bridge fiasco was probably the first sign, and the prorogation mess the moment to think He Must Be Stopped.)
The only surefire protection against Boris seems to have been vaccination with his type i early adulthood. I fortunately got my jabs and booster early when I stumbled upon the Bullingdon crowd at university so my lymph glands were already flooding out killer T-cells every time he appeared on telly during his Spectator years.
It seems that a number of people have long-Johnson. I assume the only cure to that is rest, and the passage of time.
Just how long is "long-Johnson"? Enquiring minds want to know!
Yesterday's Post Office witness: a lawyer who actually understands her job and, more importantly, has the decency to apologise for her part in this scandal.
"I understand there were discussions at board level about reliability of the Horizon system and that was not filtered down to the criminal law team."
She was talking about a prosecution relating to events in 2002 - 2003.
Board level. That puts them in the frame for knowing about the unreliability of the evidence at a time when the PO was actively pursuing prosecutions. It fingers the GC - and other Board members as well.
During the 2002 - 2003 period these were the directors of the Post Office: Allan Leighton, David Miller, David Mills, Gordon Steele, Jonathan Evans, Alan Barrie, Maria Cassoni, Peter Corbett. This scandal is not just about Paula Vennells.
Meanwhile if one is not convinced enough that Scotland is crap (not really a problem on PB) the media is helpfully doing whatever is the opposite of polishing a turd.
The state broadcaster was at it as well.
As the Gaza hospital incident demonstrated, a great deal of "news" is down to the which intern is reading what Twatter feed.
Maybe, but that's a different problem from deliberately choosing a completely unconnected photo to heighten a story.
The photo was undoubtedly chosen with a search of a photo database by some random junior, based on a couple of keywords. It's of a piece with getting your news from a Twatter feed.
Undoubtedly?
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
Think "Big Fire"
Ah well, just a couple of unfortunate accidents, nothing to do with falsely reinforcing a narrative. Thanks for putting my mind at rest.
That's a bit like the Russians who believe that everything that goes bump in the night is exquisitely planned by British SIS.
A touching kind of faith, really.
Fair enough, I can't really argue with your unparelleled knowledge of the set ups of Scottish local newspapers and a provincial branch of the BBC. I will add it to your bulging portfolio of unparalleled knowledge.
Consider the incompetence we are discussing in this thread.
Government, Police, Post Office…
What makes you think that another large organisation would be different?
Always assume incompetence (with a big dollop of inept cover up) over conspiracy.
Of course, the same thing can be said for another trouble spit: Peace is impossible while Hamas denies Israel's right to exist...
I'm not sure Israel is completely sound on Hamas's right to exist after the 7th October outrages, which is where the parallel with Russia/Ukraine breaks down.
Indeed, there are many members of Israel's governing coalition who (publicly) believe in the River to the Sea, only for the State of Israel, rather than the State of Palestine.
Israel is a democracy, and in democracies people have all sorts of views.
Its not the stated or public view of Israel in general or most Israelis even if a few extremists hold that view.
Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Jewish Power, and a member of the Israeli cabinet.
Yes, and we have Jacob Rees Mogg who's been a member of the British cabinet.
Democracies have a broad spectrum of elected politicians, Israel is no different. It is a democracy, democracies aren't supposed to only have a single view on subjects.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis vote for parties still at least theoretically in favour of a two state solution, as even Netanyahu and Likud still claim to be.
Though there's a world of difference between denying an existing state's right to exist (like Israel), and a potential theoretical future state's right to exist (like Palestine, Kurdistan etc).
Turkey deny Kurdistan's right to exist, is that outrageous of them?
Yes, it is outrageous of them. However, the Kurdish PKK is also regarded as a terrorist organisation in Turkey. Following the example of Israel, this presumably means you would regard Turkey as being justified in waging all-out war on the Kurds after the next PKK attack?
On the Kurds, no, on the PKK, yes of course.
Just as Israel is not launching an all out war on Palestinians, or even Gazans, Hamas launched a war on Israel and Israel are fighting back which they are perfectly entitled to do.
If some Gazans/Kurds get killed in the crossfire because Hamas/PKK use them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical in war. What is neither legal nor ethical is deliberately targeting civilians alone without targeting the enemy.
How many times does this need explaining before you can grasp the distinction?
Presumably you would agree that if the Israeli hostages get killed by the Israelis because Hamas are using them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical for the Israelis in war?
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
Some people here obviously believe that so long as the stated aim is "eliminating bad people" then anything done is by definition legal and right. Presumably up to and including the destruction of all life on earth. There's no point trying to discuss it with them. Sane people understand it is a question of proportionality (which is also where the law is) and where you draw the line.
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
We do also have to note that plenty of politicians in recent times have been very keen to pile onto the police when it has been politically expedient to do so, so I take some of the protestations from some quarters with a giant dose of salt.
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
We are back to the good faith / bad faith criticisms divide again...
We shouldn't be. The decision whether or not to ban a protest is entirely an operational one from the POV of the police isn't it ? It becomes a political matter if they want to ban one and seek her approval, as they are required to do.
If she doesn't think they can make operational decisions on good faith, then she has powers to address that. Which don't involve publishing extended moans in the Daily Telegraph.
I agree. Which is why I wrote this -
"The real criticism of her - as of many in this government - is that they behave like the passers-by at the scene of an accident, endlessly bewailing how terrible everything is without realising that it is their job to do something about it. Or not bothering to do anything about it because wailing and whining is good for them personally."
The latest rail usage statistics are out, and usage is increasing:
390 million rail passenger journeys were recorded in Great Britain (GB) in the latest quarter (1 April to 30 June 2023). This is a 19% increase on the 328 million journeys in the same quarter in the previous year. There were 1,447 million journeys in the year to 30 June 2023. This is a 5% increase on the 1,385 million journeys made in the previous 12 months (April 2022 to March 2023).
A total of 14.9 billion passenger kilometres were recorded in GB in the latest quarter. This equates to a 10% increase on the 13.5 billion kilometres in the previous year.
Total passenger revenue in GB in the latest quarter was £2.6 billion. This is 10% more than the £2.3 billion in the previous year (adjusted for inflation).
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
In the desire not to "complicate the message" / fight back against antivax propaganda, a number of things were either downplayed, twisted or banned from discussion on social media. The problem is by not treating the public as adults it plays into the Wusselly Brand types whose narrative is the globalist governance always lies to you, grand conspiracy to keep you poor and in check.
I sense the recent US election results are making the removal of democracy even more attaractive to some people. Cometh the hour, cometh the Trump.
Even Trump though only wants to reduce the abortion time limit by a few weeks though, which is a bit wet for most evangelicals who want to ban abortion again completely
Sunak has a real problem with Braverman, her most ardent supporters are the very core of Tory support. But now she's starting to push away the right of centre but not that far right Nick Ferrari types (He referenced it directly on his show this morning). Her words against the homeless and attacks on the police recently are frankly unbecoming of a Home Secretary; and views aside she's not been particularly good at her current job. Can't sack her, can't not sack her.
Mind you when the Met police don't arrest some who shout Jihad and allow a protest march on Armistice Day some may think she has a point. It also means the Met will now have to allow the EDL march to go ahead too or else they prove Braverman's point
All the covid vaccines had some issues but AZ caused more side effects this is a fact supported by the NHS reporting of these on its site . The problem at the time was the beatification of Astra Zeneca where any criticism became part of the Brexit wars .
Of course, the same thing can be said for another trouble spit: Peace is impossible while Hamas denies Israel's right to exist...
I'm not sure Israel is completely sound on Hamas's right to exist after the 7th October outrages, which is where the parallel with Russia/Ukraine breaks down.
Indeed, there are many members of Israel's governing coalition who (publicly) believe in the River to the Sea, only for the State of Israel, rather than the State of Palestine.
Israel is a democracy, and in democracies people have all sorts of views.
Its not the stated or public view of Israel in general or most Israelis even if a few extremists hold that view.
Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Jewish Power, and a member of the Israeli cabinet.
Yes, and we have Jacob Rees Mogg who's been a member of the British cabinet.
Democracies have a broad spectrum of elected politicians, Israel is no different. It is a democracy, democracies aren't supposed to only have a single view on subjects.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis vote for parties still at least theoretically in favour of a two state solution, as even Netanyahu and Likud still claim to be.
Though there's a world of difference between denying an existing state's right to exist (like Israel), and a potential theoretical future state's right to exist (like Palestine, Kurdistan etc).
Turkey deny Kurdistan's right to exist, is that outrageous of them?
Yes, it is outrageous of them. However, the Kurdish PKK is also regarded as a terrorist organisation in Turkey. Following the example of Israel, this presumably means you would regard Turkey as being justified in waging all-out war on the Kurds after the next PKK attack?
On the Kurds, no, on the PKK, yes of course.
Just as Israel is not launching an all out war on Palestinians, or even Gazans, Hamas launched a war on Israel and Israel are fighting back which they are perfectly entitled to do.
If some Gazans/Kurds get killed in the crossfire because Hamas/PKK use them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical in war. What is neither legal nor ethical is deliberately targeting civilians alone without targeting the enemy.
How many times does this need explaining before you can grasp the distinction?
Presumably you would agree that if the Israeli hostages get killed by the Israelis because Hamas are using them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical for the Israelis in war?
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
Some people here obviously believe that so long as the stated aim is "eliminating bad people" then anything done is by definition legal and right. Presumably up to and including the destruction of all life on earth. There's no point trying to discuss it with them. Sane people understand it is a question of proportionality (which is also where the law is) and where you draw the line.
Strawman and reductio ad absurdum - two logical fallacies in one!
Has this war made everyone on here forget how to argue properly?
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
Hang on, did they really? That seems to be a bit of an overstatement.
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
Did they - all I'm seeing is a conspiracy nut desperately trying to find evidence that matches their (inaccurate) world view.
The Telegraph story is sad but doesn't tell me anything that isn't true of every other vaccine ever created - the method of delivery carries a slight risk...
I have Googled and do not understand the reference. Explain plz.
When recapturing Fort Drum (AKA The Concrete Battleship) in the Philippines, the Americans didn’t assault the place hand to hand.
Instead they pumped multiple tons of 2 parts diesel to 1 part petrol into a hole they made, and followed up with some white phosphorus mortar bomb rounds (chucked in by hand, on a time fuse) to set it off.
They did similar at several other fortifications - as did the Russians - but Fort Drum was the best known. Filmed IIRC.
Well there's handy. No need for actual facts when you can just go with perceptions. Makes research so much easier.
I am not going to join in with today's love in for the police, I'm afraid. If we want evidence of the police not understanding the law on protests we need only remind ourselves of the various legal cases they lost in relation to the Everard protests.
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
I think that, on balance, it’s probably best that such decisions that might restrict freedom of speech and of assembly, are made by someone elected, who answers directly to the people at an election.
There’s also the small problem that it appears to be almost impossible to hold a senior police officer truly accountable for their actions and decisions.
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
One of the depressing things about the Post Office fiasco is that losing any individual case didn’t put off PO management & lawyers from continuing to prosecute the rest. They knew where the holes in their prosecution case were & it seems (if I understand correctly?) that the few individuals who looked like they were targeting discovery at those weak spots were bought off & silenced with an NDA attached to the payoff.
Using NDAs to hide your wrongdoing seems like it ought to be something we shouldn’t allow to be honest, especially in these incredibly one-sided situations where one party has effectively unlimited capacity to wait out the other in court if they choose to, giving the wronged party a “take it or leave it” choice of payout + NDA or no payout & endless legal fees.
But more full on than Laura K sitting with BoJo on a bench.
Also, NYT (re)hired a guy in Gaza who they previously sacked for making numerous statements of how great Hitler was, with their central criticism being he failed on the final solution. Again, not exactly primed for impartial coverage
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
Yes, as 100,000s of people march around the country calling for jihad, and the police are too scared to arrest them; and as 100,000s of white girls are raped by Asian grooming gangs, and the police are too scared to arrest them (at least until recently) let’s just sit back and congratulate ourselves on how fab everything is
Either way I think Braverman is POSSIBLY worth a punt on 10/1 as next Tory leader
Badenoch feels lightweight Mordaunt has blown it and she’s Woke Cleverly doesn’t inspire Braverman is positioning herself smartly
Definitely worth a punt, in my view.
She should be the favourite. The only thing holding me back slightly as per my post this morning, is whether she has sufficient support in the parliamentary party. But I think she would get the ERG on board easily, and with a rump party after the election it’s much easier to see.
The latest rail usage statistics are out, and usage is increasing:
390 million rail passenger journeys were recorded in Great Britain (GB) in the latest quarter (1 April to 30 June 2023). This is a 19% increase on the 328 million journeys in the same quarter in the previous year. There were 1,447 million journeys in the year to 30 June 2023. This is a 5% increase on the 1,385 million journeys made in the previous 12 months (April 2022 to March 2023).
A total of 14.9 billion passenger kilometres were recorded in GB in the latest quarter. This equates to a 10% increase on the 13.5 billion kilometres in the previous year.
Total passenger revenue in GB in the latest quarter was £2.6 billion. This is 10% more than the £2.3 billion in the previous year (adjusted for inflation).
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
No, they are still talking shit.
If you actually followed back to the actual story, it’s about suing over an adverse reaction. All medicines have a possibility of adverse reactions. The vaccine in question has a lower rate of adverse reactions than many other medicines.
While all such things are a tragedy to those effected, the real question is the ratio of good vs harm. Which is scientifically quantified and assessed.
Edit: the crap that Macron was taking by the way, was about effectiveness, not safety. On which he was 100% wrong.
Of course, the same thing can be said for another trouble spit: Peace is impossible while Hamas denies Israel's right to exist...
I'm not sure Israel is completely sound on Hamas's right to exist after the 7th October outrages, which is where the parallel with Russia/Ukraine breaks down.
Indeed, there are many members of Israel's governing coalition who (publicly) believe in the River to the Sea, only for the State of Israel, rather than the State of Palestine.
Israel is a democracy, and in democracies people have all sorts of views.
Its not the stated or public view of Israel in general or most Israelis even if a few extremists hold that view.
Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Jewish Power, and a member of the Israeli cabinet.
Yes, and we have Jacob Rees Mogg who's been a member of the British cabinet.
Democracies have a broad spectrum of elected politicians, Israel is no different. It is a democracy, democracies aren't supposed to only have a single view on subjects.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis vote for parties still at least theoretically in favour of a two state solution, as even Netanyahu and Likud still claim to be.
Though there's a world of difference between denying an existing state's right to exist (like Israel), and a potential theoretical future state's right to exist (like Palestine, Kurdistan etc).
Turkey deny Kurdistan's right to exist, is that outrageous of them?
Yes, it is outrageous of them. However, the Kurdish PKK is also regarded as a terrorist organisation in Turkey. Following the example of Israel, this presumably means you would regard Turkey as being justified in waging all-out war on the Kurds after the next PKK attack?
On the Kurds, no, on the PKK, yes of course.
Just as Israel is not launching an all out war on Palestinians, or even Gazans, Hamas launched a war on Israel and Israel are fighting back which they are perfectly entitled to do.
If some Gazans/Kurds get killed in the crossfire because Hamas/PKK use them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical in war. What is neither legal nor ethical is deliberately targeting civilians alone without targeting the enemy.
How many times does this need explaining before you can grasp the distinction?
Presumably you would agree that if the Israeli hostages get killed by the Israelis because Hamas are using them as human shields then that's an unavoidable tragedy but perfectly legal and ethical for the Israelis in war?
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
Some people here obviously believe that so long as the stated aim is "eliminating bad people" then anything done is by definition legal and right. Presumably up to and including the destruction of all life on earth. There's no point trying to discuss it with them. Sane people understand it is a question of proportionality (which is also where the law is) and where you draw the line.
Strawman and reductio ad absurdum - two logical fallacies in one!
Has this war made everyone on here forget how to argue properly?
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Before multiculturalism we had anti-racism. As for Suella Braverman, she seems to be following GOP talking points, not least on tent cities. Was she at that recent conference?
Either way I think Braverman is POSSIBLY worth a punt on 10/1 as next Tory leader
Badenoch feels lightweight Mordaunt has blown it and she’s Woke Cleverly doesn’t inspire Braverman is positioning herself smartly
Definitely worth a punt, in my view.
She should be the favourite. The only thing holding me back slightly as per my post this morning, is whether she has sufficient support in the parliamentary party. But I think she would get the ERG on board easily, and with a rump party after the election it’s much easier to see.
The Tory party has been (unwisely) searching for a new thatcher ever since they dumped thatcher
Well, here is someone who does come quite close to fitting the thatcher mould. Unapologetically right wing; smart; articulate; self confident, well educated - but also divisive, combative and loathed by the left
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
Yes, as 100,000s of people march around the country calling for jihad, and the police are too scared to arrest them; and as 100,000s of white girls are raped by Asian grooming gangs, and the police are too scared to arrest them (at least until recently) let’s just sit back and congratulate ourselves on how fab everything is
More hyperbole . Most of those on marches are not calling for jihad . I’m not saying everything is fab but we’re doing a lot better than many other countries .
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
In the desire not to "complicate the message" / fight back against antivax propaganda, a number of things were either downplayed, twisted or banned from discussion on social media. The problem is by not treating the public as adults it plays into the Wusselly Brand types whose narrative is the globalist governance always lies to you, grand conspiracy to keep you poor and in check.
I agree with that. Also - in general I have very little patience with anri-vaxxers, but I was a bit disappointed with the Covid vaccines. When they first came out there was talk of reaching herd immunity by getting everyone vaccinated. Maybe it took a while to become clear that was never on the cards as the vaccines don't do enough to stop people getting infected and then infecting others. But there was, I think, sometimes an exaggerated claim as to how important it was to get vaccinated *to protect others* by preventing yourself from spreading the virus. Of course I am super happy and grateful that vaccines became available so quickly - there's a good chance it saved my parents' lives. But how does it go? "success=reality minus expectations" expectations management should have been better from the start.
I have precision objections to TLDR News (they refuse to distinguish between "England and Wales" and Britain/UK, the idiots) but they have issued an explainer on this and it's the best I could get without digging. As ever, DYOR
Anyone else shocked that the vaccine from Oxford University turned out to be shit?
#ThirdRateDump
I would once have been shocked that anyone could take the anti-vaccine shit they read in the Telegraph at face value, but following the rise of MAGA and Trump, it's nowadays hard to be shocked at any of the crap that some on the right kid themselves into believing.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
The trouble (with an eye to future pandemics) is that the anti-vaxxers turned out to be right in at least some of their criticisms, as did the President of France.
No, they are still talking shit.
If you actually followed back to the actual story, it’s about suing over an adverse reaction. All medicines have a possibility of adverse reactions. The vaccine in question has a lower rate of adverse reactions than many other medicines.
While all such things are a tragedy to those effected, the real question is the ratio of good vs harm. Which is scientifically quantified and assessed.
The Telegraph's anti-lockdown / anti-vax stance from the get go of the pandemic was very odd for a supposed serious newspaper of the right. There are certainly arguments around cost benefit of particularly later lockdowns, but the risk / reward on vaccine is undeniable massively on the positive, yet they still prime these bad faith articles spinning the Russell Brand esque stuff.
Either way I think Braverman is POSSIBLY worth a punt on 10/1 as next Tory leader
Badenoch feels lightweight Mordaunt has blown it and she’s Woke Cleverly doesn’t inspire Braverman is positioning herself smartly
Also Mordaunt will lose her seat so be ineligible. I think the odds are much shorter than that. Are there two other less crazy candidates who can both beat her in the MPs poll? If she goes to the members, she's in.
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
Yes, as 100,000s of people march around the country calling for jihad, and the police are too scared to arrest them; and as 100,000s of white girls are raped by Asian grooming gangs, and the police are too scared to arrest them (at least until recently) let’s just sit back and congratulate ourselves on how fab everything is
More hyperbole . Most of those on marches are not calling for jihad . I’m not saying everything is fab but we’re doing a lot better than many other countries .
We’re doing better than some, worse than others
But that’s not really the point. The whole philosophy underpinning multiculturalism is collapsing - you can see it everywhere. When that goes a whole lot of political norms and assumptions will topple over, with it
That will make space for unexpected events and people
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
Denmark has the problem that fully integrating is hard. A friend who is going through the process describes it as taking a Masters in Being Danish.
So you have migrants giving up, not learning the language and grouping together. Without the language and full citizenship, they are naturally (self) excluded from wider society.
Yesterday's Post Office witness: a lawyer who actually understands her job and, more importantly, has the decency to apologise for her part in this scandal.
As every day goes by the more I believe Braverman has a decent shot at PM
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
Britain is far better than many other countries in terms of integration. Instead of loathsome creatures like Braverman trying to cause division we should instead be highlighting how well the country has done .
Yes, as 100,000s of people march around the country calling for jihad, and the police are too scared to arrest them; and as 100,000s of white girls are raped by Asian grooming gangs, and the police are too scared to arrest them (at least until recently) let’s just sit back and congratulate ourselves on how fab everything is
More hyperbole . Most of those on marches are not calling for jihad . I’m not saying everything is fab but we’re doing a lot better than many other countries .
According to the Crime Survey for England and Wales, current crime rates in the those nations are lower than they have ever been, so we really aren't doing too badly when it comes to law and order. I think people tend to have a perception of worsening crime because they generally become more fearful of crime as they get older.
Comments
https://unherd.com/2023/11/the-forgotten-earl-who-can-save-the-tories/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-YK3JJCIU
As a result he appealed to a lot of people who regard politics as part of the entertainment industry. The more you knew or cared about politics the less funny the joke was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN36tn2RTmQ
As for Tom Winsor criticising Braverman, this is the man - who despite his role as HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary during many of the Met's worst scandals (Operation Midland, for instance) - managed to avoid saying anything critical at all.
I hold no brief for Braverman but the idea that the police are or should be beyond criticism or that there is nothing in their recent history to suggest that they ever behave other than impeccably, lawfully and without showing partiality is wrong, dangerous and naive.
I'd like to see the search algorithm that provides a pic of the Maidan riots if you put in the keywords Niddrie and disturbance.
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/08/post-office-horizon-inquiry-lawyer
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/nothing-personal-mr-castleton-its-just-justice/
You have a narrative being set up
etc. etc.
With that in mind, you may wish to know that Omegle has now shut itself down. As PB is dominated by the older wealthy ("www.pensionersbitching.com") you may not be familiar with it. A social media site where one could search for people with a specific interest and then talk to them (like an Internet version of Teams or Zoom or Skype), it was harrowed in later years by conservative bots and concerns about child porn (I have no idea if the latter was based in fact), and has now voluntarily shuttered itself.
https://www.omegle.com/
However, I do think it is beneath a HS to raise reactionary concerns from the bully pulpit of a national newspaper, purely from what I can see to stoke divisions and continue to shape her profile as a populist demagogue.
That way she distances herself from Sunak's election defeat in a way Cabinet ministers cannot as easily, and positions herself to say "told you so... go woke, go broke" etc in the post-election leadership bloodbath.
Actually doing the job of being Home Secretary, making difficult decisions and solving real problems, isn't something she's ever shown the slightest interest in. She's not a problem solver or a serious politician in any way - she likes to generate headlines by talking up problems and blaming other people for them.
Things will not get better.
It may come to that because I can't see Hamas giving up their human shield hostages. The Israelis may have to sacrifice them by burning or gassing the tunnels to eliminate Hamas. 200 Israeli hostages and 10,000 innocent Palestinians, but all legal and ethical in war?
A touching kind of faith, really.
I wonder what the world would make of that though.
They just happen to be right on this particular issue. Which doesn't even mean they won't screw up the policing of it.
What's being defended is the separation of powers, and the need for the Home Secretary to respect the rules - some of which she herself had a hand in making.
F-16D (E2A: Could be F-16I Hospital Destroyer)
Fresco
Tomcat (❤️) in 20 wing
F-35C
Su-27U or Su-30MKK or Su-30MKV (NOT Su-30 or Su-30MKI or Su-30MKA)
Journalistic ignorance always reminds me of the 7/7 bombers' videos. One of them was described by a BBC twonk as having a 'broad Yorkshire' accent. He didn't. Broad Yorkshire is incomprehensible to most people from Yorkshire. He had a Yorkshire accent. But the idea of knowing something the mythical far realms of Yorkshire was obviously silly.
As an aside, Yorkshire dialect is apparently rising in popularity, with lessons in it available. No idea why.
The real criticism of her - as of many in this government - is that they behave like the passers-by at the scene of an accident, endlessly bewailing how terrible everything is without realising that it is their job to do something about it. Or not bothering to do anything about it because wailing and whining is good for them personally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKuHYO9TM5A
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12729271/Bungling-Mark-Drakeford-admits-does-WhatsApp-row-Covid-messages.html
These are to scale.
But rather than do anything to help, or even flee the scene, they are loudly screaming that it's all someone else to blame.
The decision whether or not to ban a protest is entirely an operational one from the POV of the police isn't it ?
It becomes a political matter if they want to ban one and seek her approval, as they are required to do.
If she doesn't think they can make operational decisions on good faith, then she has powers to address that. Which don't involve publishing extended moans in the Daily Telegraph.
Instead they pumped multiple tons of 2 parts diesel to 1 part petrol into a hole they made, and followed up with some white phosphorus mortar bomb rounds (chucked in by hand, on a time fuse) to set it off.
They did similar at several other fortifications - as did the Russians - but Fort Drum was the best known. Filmed IIRC.
Now should that be a kickup the arse to fund research this, absolutely...is it happening?
"I understand there were discussions at board level about reliability of the Horizon system and that was not filtered down to the criminal law team."
She was talking about a prosecution relating to events in 2002 - 2003.
Board level. That puts them in the frame for knowing about the unreliability of the evidence at a time when the PO was actively pursuing prosecutions. It fingers the GC - and other Board members as well.
During the 2002 - 2003 period these were the directors of the Post Office: Allan Leighton, David Miller, David Mills, Gordon Steele, Jonathan Evans, Alan Barrie, Maria Cassoni, Peter Corbett. This scandal is not just about Paula Vennells.
Government, Police, Post Office…
What makes you think that another large organisation would be different?
Always assume incompetence (with a big dollop of inept cover up) over conspiracy.
The AstraZeneca vaccine was not shit. It was and is an excellent vaccine and, crucially, saved countless lives as a consequence of being first on the scene. What is now established is that the vaccines that followed it months later were even better.
"The real criticism of her - as of many in this government - is that they behave like the passers-by at the scene of an accident, endlessly bewailing how terrible everything is without realising that it is their job to do something about it. Or not bothering to do anything about it because wailing and whining is good for them personally."
390 million rail passenger journeys were recorded in Great Britain (GB) in the latest quarter (1 April to 30 June 2023). This is a 19% increase on the 328 million journeys in the same quarter in the previous year. There were 1,447 million journeys in the year to 30 June 2023. This is a 5% increase on the 1,385 million journeys made in the previous 12 months (April 2022 to March 2023).
A total of 14.9 billion passenger kilometres were recorded in GB in the latest quarter. This equates to a 10% increase on the 13.5 billion kilometres in the previous year.
Total passenger revenue in GB in the latest quarter was £2.6 billion. This is 10% more than the £2.3 billion in the previous year (adjusted for inflation).
https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/passenger-rail-usage/
These figures will include a lot of strike days.
Has this war made everyone on here forget how to argue properly?
The entire edifice of multiculturalism is collapsing. The process has only just begun in Britain, it is much further ahead elsewhere. In Denmark - Denmark! - they are literally bulldozing ethnic ghettoes
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/1/15/denmarks-ghetto-plan-and-the-communities-it-targets
Larger countries like France and Britain will follow, in different ways
What will replace multiculti? It has been with us so long it is hard to image a post-multicultural society. But it’s coming. And someone like Braverman might benefit
The Telegraph story is sad but doesn't tell me anything that isn't true of every other vaccine ever created - the method of delivery carries a slight risk...
https://twitter.com/HonestReporting/status/1722309273940611406
Turns out the answer might be that the line between journalists and terrorists in Gaza isn't as simple as you might hope.
There’s also the small problem that it appears to be almost impossible to hold a senior police officer truly accountable for their actions and decisions.
Badenoch feels lightweight
Mordaunt has blown it and she’s Woke
Cleverly doesn’t inspire
Braverman is positioning herself smartly
Using NDAs to hide your wrongdoing seems like it ought to be something we shouldn’t allow to be honest, especially in these incredibly one-sided situations where one party has effectively unlimited capacity to wait out the other in court if they choose to, giving the wronged party a “take it or leave it” choice of payout + NDA or no payout & endless legal fees.
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1722366710173347992?t=8Gc-Y27aKXA3iWorkWUKcQ&s=19
But more full on than Laura K sitting with BoJo on a bench.
Also, NYT (re)hired a guy in Gaza who they previously sacked for making numerous statements of how great Hitler was, with their central criticism being he failed on the final solution. Again, not exactly primed for impartial coverage
She should be the favourite. The only thing holding me back slightly as per my post this morning, is whether she has sufficient support in the parliamentary party. But I think she would get the ERG on board easily, and with a rump party after the election it’s much easier to see.
If you actually followed back to the actual story, it’s about suing over an adverse reaction. All medicines have a possibility of adverse reactions. The vaccine in question has a lower rate of adverse reactions than many other medicines.
While all such things are a tragedy to those effected, the real question is the ratio of good vs harm. Which is scientifically quantified and assessed.
Edit: the crap that Macron was taking by the way, was about effectiveness, not safety. On which he was 100% wrong.
“Tank”, as journalists call it.
It was a The Tory party has been (unwisely) searching for a new thatcher ever since they dumped thatcher
Well, here is someone who does come quite close to fitting the thatcher mould. Unapologetically right wing; smart; articulate; self confident, well educated
- but also divisive, combative and loathed by the left
They will be tempted
Also - in general I have very little patience with anri-vaxxers, but I was a bit disappointed with the Covid vaccines. When they first came out there was talk of reaching herd immunity by getting everyone vaccinated. Maybe it took a while to become clear that was never on the cards as the vaccines don't do enough to stop people getting infected and then infecting others. But there was, I think, sometimes an exaggerated claim as to how important it was to get vaccinated *to protect others* by preventing yourself from spreading the virus.
Of course I am super happy and grateful that vaccines became available so quickly - there's a good chance it saved my parents' lives. But how does it go? "success=reality minus expectations" expectations management should have been better from the start.
I have precision objections to TLDR News (they refuse to distinguish between "England and Wales" and Britain/UK, the idiots) but they have issued an explainer on this and it's the best I could get without digging. As ever, DYOR
"Why Did Portugal's PM Just Resign?", TLDR News EU, Nov 9 2023, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR2xn58tMC4
But that’s not really the point. The whole philosophy underpinning multiculturalism is collapsing - you can see it everywhere. When that goes a whole lot of political norms and assumptions will topple over,
with it
That will make space for unexpected events and people
So you have migrants giving up, not learning the language and grouping together. Without the language and full citizenship, they are naturally (self) excluded from wider society.
He’d have a great career at Mishcon de Reya.