Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
I'd like to see you and Topping go head to head on detecting anti-Israel bias in a vacuum chamber. It'd be absolutely titanic.
First palpable lie I have seen this yr. There is a sign in the Nat West in Horsham, and no doubt in all branches...which says ...Our staff are here to help.... there was one person on the Counter and I was told it was due to staff shortage.... queued for neatly 40 minutes.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
I'd like to see you and Topping go head to head on detecting anti-Israel bias in a vacuum chamber. It'd be absolutely titanic.
Why did the Guardian change its report. What POSSIBLE reason could there have been for that.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
A complete non-sequitur, since there is zero evidence linking Israel to this incident in the first place.
Which is the point.
Really? Thought YOUR "point" was, to label Nigel an anti-Semite.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
The Guardian seems to have thought that it was inappropriate for whatever reason otherwise why on earth would they have edited their report to remove the "offending" line.
My comment is with reference to what Nigel objected to, which was NOT what the Guardian said or didn't say.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
A complete non-sequitur, since there is zero evidence linking Israel to this incident in the first place.
Which is the point.
Really? Thought YOUR "point" was, to label Nigel an anti-Semite.
Definitely didn't say that.
At worst, I labelled him an apologist. More realistically, someone who is blind to it.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
First palpable lie I have seen this yr. There is a sign in the Nat West in Horsham, and no doubt in all branches...which says ...Our staff are here to help.... there was one person on the Counter and I was told it was due to staff shortage.... queued for neatly 40 minutes.
Try ringing them - when I worked there they were happy with the quoted time for telephone call handling - pointing out that first direct didn’t have me waiting on the phone for 20 minutes did not go down well
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
The Guardian seems to have thought that it was inappropriate for whatever reason otherwise why on earth would they have edited their report to remove the "offending" line.
One thinks of the witching stool. Will the Guardian edit or not edit? Will they float or sink?
First palpable lie I have seen this yr. There is a sign in the Nat West in Horsham, and no doubt in all branches...which says ...Our staff are here to help.... there was one person on the Counter and I was told it was due to staff shortage.... queued for neatly 40 minutes.
I see you. And raise you Arriva Northumbria's ubiquitous "Most buses have free WiFi" signs.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
A complete non-sequitur, since there is zero evidence linking Israel to this incident in the first place.
Which is the point.
Really? Thought YOUR "point" was, to label Nigel an anti-Semite.
I started this because I thought it interesting that the Graun should have inserted that line into their report. It was not apropos of nothing, given the ongoing situation in the middle east and the recent apparent assassination of a leading Hamas Freedom Fighter, but for a supposed piece of neutral journalism it was strange.
Because the original line took it as read that it was for Israel to prove that it had nothing to do with the explosions.
Is that anti-Israel? Anti-semitic? No idea. But we are in a world where the president of Harvard recently resigned not only over claims of plagiarism but also for having trouble over condemning what people accept is anti-semitism so it isn't a huge leap to think it was one of those antis.
And the Graun evidently agreed with me because they changed the wording in the report, omitting that line. Why on earth would they have done that if Nigel's bollocks was true.
I am very pleased to disclose that Starbucks has had to struggle on without my custom for some 8 years or so. Even way back in my teens when I was into those horrible iced things, Starbucks ones were all gritty and sugary, whereas Coffee Republic they were smooth and tasted of coffee.
I can't stand Starbucks.
They impertinently ask for your name and then announce it several times loudly and publicly.
Just give a random pseudonym instead. Something like Mike Hunt works well.
Whilst not implying anything, "cui bono" would suggest more likely a Sunni Palestinian sympathetic group desperate to drag Hezbollah into a 2 front conflict.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
The Guardian seems to have thought that it was inappropriate for whatever reason otherwise why on earth would they have edited their report to remove the "offending" line.
One thinks of the witching stool. Will the Guardian edit or not edit? Will they float or sink?
Which is not answering the question. What do you suppose the answer is.
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
The Guardian seems to have thought that it was inappropriate for whatever reason otherwise why on earth would they have edited their report to remove the "offending" line.
My comment is with reference to what Nigel objected to, which was NOT what the Guardian said or didn't say.
Nigel was at pains to point out that the original report blaming Israel (which it sort of was as a default position) was perfectly understandable because a lot of Iranians had said it was Israel's fault.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
Happy to do a video series
Would it be a mini series?
And on the coffee, is it definitely both a different size and cheaper? Or more expensive as bespoke perhaps?
I haven't been to Starbucks for a few years, but I always used to ask for small filter coffee - by which I meant the smallest size they did, whatever they called it. Only the most pedantic insisted on correcting me to whatever Starbucks call it. Similarly when ordering a McDonalds I will do so without inserting 'Mc' everywhere. This isn't me sticking it to the man, this is me trying not to feel ridiculous.
My wife and I have been catching up on Mr Bates v The Post Office and, while thanks in a large part to @Cyclefree for highlighting this scandal, the documentary is so raw and shocking that my wife is absolutely seething about it and the corruption at the top causing such misery to decent sub postmasters/mistresses who have been caught up in what must be the biggest scandal in our post war history
Congratulations to ITV for their dramatisation of this true story, and nothing could be more effective in communicating it to the public who must demand compensation for those affected, including those families whose loved ones have died without knowing of their innocence, and then the eventual imprisonment of those responsible for this horrible injustice
I would just say how lovely Llandudno and Eryri looks but then I am rather prejudiced
As a side, the hospital phoned to say I am to have my pacemaker fitted on the 5th February, but if I feel unwell in the meantime to go to A& E, so hopefully by mid February I should see an improvement and be able to drive again
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
Happy to do a video series
Would it be a mini series?
And on the coffee, is it definitely both a different size and cheaper? Or more expensive as bespoke perhaps?
I haven't been to Starbucks for a few years, but I always used to ask for small filter coffee - by which I meant the smallest size they did, whatever they called it. Only the most pedantic insisted on correcting me to whatever Starbucks call it. Similarly when ordering a McDonalds I will do so without inserting 'Mc' everywhere. This isn't me sticking it to the man, this is me trying not to feel ridiculous.
First palpable lie I have seen this yr. There is a sign in the Nat West in Horsham, and no doubt in all branches...which says ...Our staff are here to help.... there was one person on the Counter and I was told it was due to staff shortage.... queued for neatly 40 minutes.
I see you. And raise you Arriva Northumbria's ubiquitous "Most buses have free WiFi" signs.
But do they promise that WiFi can connect to the internet? Ahah!
My wife and I have been catching up on Mr Bates v The Post Office and, while thanks in a large part to @Cyclefree for highlighting this scandal, the documentary is so raw and shocking that my wife is absolutely seething about it and the corruption at the top causing such misery to decent sub postmasters/mistresses who have been caught up in what must be the biggest scandal in our post war history
Congratulations to ITV for their dramatisation of this true story, and nothing could be more effective in communicating it to the public who must demand compensation for those affected, including those families whose loved ones have died without knowing of their innocence, and then the eventual imprisonment of those responsible for this horrible injustice
I would just say how lovely Llandudno and Eryri looks but then I am rather prejudiced
As a side, the hospital phoned to say I am to have my pacemaker fitted on the 5th February, but if I feel unwell in the meantime to go to A& E, so hopefully by mid February I should see an improvement and be able to drive again
For anyone particularly interested in the early development of Starbucks, may I recommend the book "Starbucked - A Double Tall Tale of Caffeine, Commerce & Culture" by Taylor Clark. I proudly own a copy (purchased second hand from Ealing Oxfam).
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I am very pleased to disclose that Starbucks has had to struggle on without my custom for some 8 years or so. Even way back in my teens when I was into those horrible iced things, Starbucks ones were all gritty and sugary, whereas Coffee Republic they were smooth and tasted of coffee.
I can't stand Starbucks.
They impertinently ask for your name and then announce it several times loudly and publicly.
Just give a random pseudonym instead. Something like Mike Hunt works well.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
Happy to do a video series
Would it be a mini series?
And on the coffee, is it definitely both a different size and cheaper? Or more expensive as bespoke perhaps?
I haven't been to Starbucks for a few years, but I always used to ask for small filter coffee - by which I meant the smallest size they did, whatever they called it. Only the most pedantic insisted on correcting me to whatever Starbucks call it. Similarly when ordering a McDonalds I will do so without inserting 'Mc' everywhere. This isn't me sticking it to the man, this is me trying not to feel ridiculous.
This is now reminding me of an English middle-class equivalent of the 'in car' conversations between hitmen Travolta and L Jackson in Pulp Fiction.
My wife and I have been catching up on Mr Bates v The Post Office and, while thanks in a large part to @Cyclefree for highlighting this scandal, the documentary is so raw and shocking that my wife is absolutely seething about it and the corruption at the top causing such misery to decent sub postmasters/mistresses who have been caught up in what must be the biggest scandal in our post war history
Congratulations to ITV for their dramatisation of this true story, and nothing could be more effective in communicating it to the public who must demand compensation for those affected, including those families whose loved ones have died without knowing of their innocence, and then the eventual imprisonment of those responsible for this horrible injustice
I would just say how lovely Llandudno and Eryri looks but then I am rather prejudiced
As a side, the hospital phoned to say I am to have my pacemaker fitted on the 5th February, but if I feel unwell in the meantime to go to A& E, so hopefully by mid February I should see an improvement and be able to drive again
Your like an old Timex watch - takes a licking and keeps on ticking.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I could understand that, it is people getting takeaways that seems extraordinary to me. Paper cup, same price, and not even very nice coffee.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
My personal fave is caffe nero. Comfortable seating plus a better atmosphere than the likes of costa coffee.
“Meanwhile, campaigning in Surrey where the Liberal Democrats are hoping to win a number of Conservative-held seats at the next general election, party leader Sir Ed Davey said he regretted not asking "tougher questions" of Post Office managers when he was postal affairs minister in the coalition government from 2010 to 2012. Asked why he refused to meet Alan Bates, the postmaster who led the campaign to expose the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, he said: "It is a national scandal... dreadful and it's been going on for so long. The Conservative government really needs to sort out the compensation. "I regret not having asked the Post Office managers even tougher questions than I did." Asked why he accepted the Post Office's assertions at face value, Sir Ed replied: "I asked really tough questions of Post Office managers and indeed the officials. I wish I'd gone further." He congratulated Mr Bates for his campaign, he added.”
My wife and I have been catching up on Mr Bates v The Post Office and, while thanks in a large part to @Cyclefree for highlighting this scandal, the documentary is so raw and shocking that my wife is absolutely seething about it and the corruption at the top causing such misery to decent sub postmasters/mistresses who have been caught up in what must be the biggest scandal in our post war history
Congratulations to ITV for their dramatisation of this true story, and nothing could be more effective in communicating it to the public who must demand compensation for those affected, including those families whose loved ones have died without knowing of their innocence, and then the eventual imprisonment of those responsible for this horrible injustice
I would just say how lovely Llandudno and Eryri looks but then I am rather prejudiced
As a side, the hospital phoned to say I am to have my pacemaker fitted on the 5th February, but if I feel unwell in the meantime to go to A& E, so hopefully by mid February I should see an improvement and be able to drive again
Best wishes to my fellow octogenarian (almost, anyway) and Mrs C and I agree with you. What a piece of work Ms Vennels is! I can’t equal a pacemaker, but I’m now waiting for an XRay. I’ve no doubt the procedure will come quickly, but how long the assessment of the result will take is another matter.
My teenage daughter was on at me for ages to use a false name in Starbucks - preferably ridiculous. We eventually came to agreement on Giles, inspired by the character from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. This is mildly amusing, and we have carried it on - but the main information i have gained from this is that there is a generation of Starbucks staff who were not born when BtVS was first on TV, who love the show to death - the almost is invariable comment is, 'Ooh, like the Buffy character - I love him!'
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I could understand that, it is people getting takeaways that seems extraordinary to me. Paper cup, same price, and not even very nice coffee.
That to me is the definition of frivolous spending. Do that 5 days a week and the cost is more than a sky subscription
On topic, like a decent striker a politician has to make his own luck. You have to be in the right position to take advantage of defensive and tactical errors, and be there enough times to make the odd inevitable miss not matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
Borrowers' pain eased as lenders cut mortgage rates
Some 1.6 million homeowners will see their current fixed-rate deal expire over the next 12 months, the vast majority of whom could see their monthly repayments rise quite sharply.
My teenage daughter was on at me for ages to use a false name in Starbucks - preferably ridiculous. We eventually came to agreement on Giles, inspired by the character from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. This is mildly amusing, and we have carried it on - but the main information i have gained from this is that there is a generation of Starbucks staff who were not born when BtVS was first on TV, who love the show to death - the almost is invariable comment is, 'Ooh, like the Buffy character - I love him!'
Does your daughter place her Starbucks orders as "Buffy"?
And IF not, then why the heck not??
Personally my nom de caffeine is "Raoul" (emphasis on the "oooooouuuuul").
My teenage daughter was on at me for ages to use a false name in Starbucks - preferably ridiculous. We eventually came to agreement on Giles, inspired by the character from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. This is mildly amusing, and we have carried it on - but the main information i have gained from this is that there is a generation of Starbucks staff who were not born when BtVS was first on TV, who love the show to death - the almost is invariable comment is, 'Ooh, like the Buffy character - I love him!'
My dog is called Buffy after the eponymous heroine. Full name is Buffy the Biscuit Slayer and is often used in full at the vets…
Interesting Guardian coverage of the explosions in Iran. I mean who could blame them for it but they include the line:
"It was not immediately clear if the apparent attack was a result of an domestic group or a group directed by Israel."
Now I am no crime scene investigator and equally I am aware of stuff going on in the middle east right now but I thought that was a bit previous for a news report.
Only if you omit the following paragraphs.
...Iran only recently said it had eradicated a group backed by the Mossad, the Israeli state secret service.
A representative of Kerman province accused agents of Israel of committing the offence, the first elected representative reported to make such an attribution. Separately, Kianush Jahanpur, the former spokesman of Iran’s health ministry, said on social media: “The answer to this crime should only be in Tel Aviv, Haifa.”
Some analysts said it was unusual for Israel to undertake a generalised attack on civilians with no high-level military targets and so did not fit a previous pattern of behaviour in what Israel has done to date inside Iran. Israel rarely comments on international operations...
It is variably standard in a number of middle eastern countries to claim that all opposition groups are funded/controlled by Mossad/CIA/MI6 (sometimes all three at once).
One of the ways that Israel has been useful to the dictatorships, is in providing a bogeyman to justify the repression in the name of State Security.
Absolutely - and it's fairly unlikely that Israel is responsible, or even involved, in this case. But it's far from impossible, as they do have history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_proxy_conflict
I don't think there are any proven - or even reasonably likely - cases of Israel carrying out, or inciting, mass bombing attacks such as this one. All Israel's previous involvement wrt Iran has been in the form of cyber attacks, targeted assassinations or precision guided missiles aimed at military targets. That is very much a hallmark of Islamist terrorist groups.
But it's okay, we get the message: you don't personally subscribe to the well-known antisemitic trope that everything is always the fault of the Jews, but have zero issues with a major UK news outlet insinuating as such. Well done you.
I don't know his you manage to read that into what I wrote, but frankly you can fuck right off with that insinuation of your own.
OK, I'll make this as simple as I can then:
- There is a well-known antisemitic trope that Jews are responsible for anything and everything that happens in a geopolitical context (usually bad stuff) - The Guardian, in implicitly blaming Israel for today's bombing, were keying into that trope, and "justifying" it by quoting people who are clearly themselves motivated by antisemitism (ie, Iranian officials) - You, for whatever reason, are defending their "right" to do so
I assume your point in response is that you disagree with the second bullet, since the other two are unarguable. In which case we are back to Topping's comment that you're apparently determined not to get the point, and your (incorrect) retort that the point is dishonest.
Concept that even slightest criticism of Israel is ipso facto antisemitism, is ipso facto bullshit.
A complete non-sequitur, since there is zero evidence linking Israel to this incident in the first place.
Which is the point.
Indeed, isn't it more likely to be people linked to the protests and counter revolutionaries sick of living in Iran under Islamic rule?
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I could understand that, it is people getting takeaways that seems extraordinary to me. Paper cup, same price, and not even very nice coffee.
That to me is the definition of frivolous spending. Do that 5 days a week and the cost is more than a sky subscription
I fell into this trap 20 years ago, and as soon as I realised, I popped into woolworths and bought a mug with a permanent filter and made my own at work every morning. Probably about 10 coffees for the price of a shop bought one. And stronger.
Borrowers' pain eased as lenders cut mortgage rates
Some 1.6 million homeowners will see their current fixed-rate deal expire over the next 12 months, the vast majority of whom could see their monthly repayments rise quite sharply.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
Does anyone think (as opposed to wish) that charges will eventually arise from this performance, and, if so, when? My guess is yes, and shortly after the GE date is announced.
Have to be charges Red, teh £600K alone is gone, not to mention all the other stuff found, will SNP be bankrupt before then. They have now taken all the branches money and will burn through that quickly, only income they have now is the short money and no chance they will find £1.5M for the election. Good few court cases coming up as well, judge will not be happy they have shredded all the evidence, she is toast one way or another, almost as many cases as Trump.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
@Big_G_NorthWales has been sounding the alarm on this for years. Labour has worked very hard to destroy health provision in Wales, let's hope the national party has a better go of it when they take over later this year.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
@Big_G_NorthWales has been sounding the alarm on this for years. Labour has worked very hard to destroy health provision in Wales, let's hope the national party has a better go of it when they take over later this year.
I do not expect any improvement in Wales even with Starmer in no 10
On topic, like a decent striker a politician has to make his own luck. You have to be in the right position to take advantage of defensive and tactical errors, and be there enough times to make the odd inevitable miss not matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
Good post. SKS is doing exactly what he needs to do to secure power imo. He's de-risking the election rather than chasing likes.
The guiding sentiment is not "let's get people enthusiastic about voting Labour!", it's "let's give floating voters no excuse whatsoever for voting Conservative. The country has made up its mind to kick them out. We'll do nothing to stand in their way."
This is the big picture strategy and I think it's going to work. The upshot will be a chunky majority combined with an absence of high expectations. You couldn't have a better platform on which to take office than that.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
@Big_G_NorthWales has been sounding the alarm on this for years. Labour has worked very hard to destroy health provision in Wales, let's hope the national party has a better go of it when they take over later this year.
I do not expect any improvement in Wales even with Starmer in no 10
"I do not expect any improvement in Wales" - King Edward I
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
ADDENDUM - this is precisely the kind of reason, why PB needs a fully-operational, well-maintained (ditto -stocked) By-Election Bottle Bus!!
When not wheeling from one post-scandal by-election to another every fortnight or so, could be on standby for situations such as Big G's.
On topic, like a decent striker a politician has to make his own luck. You have to be in the right position to take advantage of defensive and tactical errors, and be there enough times to make the odd inevitable miss not matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
Good post. SKS is doing exactly what he needs to do to secure power imo. He's de-risking the election rather than chasing likes.
The guiding sentiment is not "let's get people enthusiastic about voting Labour!", it's "let's give floating voters no excuse whatsoever for voting Conservative. The country has made up its mind to kick them out. We'll do nothing to stand in their way."
This is the big picture strategy and I think it's going to work. The upshot will be a chunky majority combined with an absence of high expectations. You couldn't have a better platform on which to take office than that.
Yes it's all about reassurance and especially targetting the current crop of ex-Conservative voters in the "Don't Know" column. While I'm sure Starmer would love them to vote Labour, having them staying at home also works if you want a big Labour majority.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
To be fair, in some parts of the country, a lifeboat might be a good way of getting around currently.
Starbucks is absolute gash. I can’t believe anyone would voluntarily choose their burnt ditchwater, and their food offer is astonishingly poor quality as well.
Even their interiors are often old and abused looking.
I was a big Pret fan, but their recent price hike puts them in the “not worth it” bucket now. They seem to be expanding in the US (a new outlet just opened at Penn Station) but prices here are even more grotesque.
Wales is, in a way, Labour’s biggest achilles heel. Place has been a shit-show since forever, and there appears no desire amongst the Welsh ruling class (nor the Welsh at large, tbh) to address it.
Borrowers' pain eased as lenders cut mortgage rates
Some 1.6 million homeowners will see their current fixed-rate deal expire over the next 12 months, the vast majority of whom could see their monthly repayments rise quite sharply.
Borrowers' pain eased as lenders cut mortgage rates
Some 1.6 million homeowners will see their current fixed-rate deal expire over the next 12 months, the vast majority of whom could see their monthly repayments rise quite sharply.
Starbucks is absolute gash. I can’t believe anyone would voluntarily choose their burnt ditchwater, and their food offer is astonishingly poor quality as well.
Even their interiors are often old and abused looking.
I was a big Pret fan, but their recent price hike puts them in the “not worth it” bucket now. They seem to be expanding in the US (a new outlet just opened at Penn Station) but prices here are even more grotesque.
I’ve simply stopped buying coffee, really.
Main reason why I go daily to my fav coffee shop, is because it's a mile-and-a-half walk there and back.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
To be fair, in some parts of the country, a lifeboat might be a good way of getting around currently.
So I hear. Hope zero PBers get flooded in, or out. Esp. later. Can be brutal, that's for sure.
Starbucks is absolute gash. I can’t believe anyone would voluntarily choose their burnt ditchwater, and their food offer is astonishingly poor quality as well.
Even their interiors are often old and abused looking.
I was a big Pret fan, but their recent price hike puts them in the “not worth it” bucket now. They seem to be expanding in the US (a new outlet just opened at Penn Station) but prices here are even more grotesque.
I’ve simply stopped buying coffee, really.
Main reason why I go daily to my fav coffee shop, is because it's a mile-and-a-half walk there and back.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
ADDENDUM - this is precisely the kind of reason, why PB needs a fully-operational, well-maintained (ditto -stocked) By-Election Bottle Bus!!
When not wheeling from one post-scandal by-election to another every fortnight or so, could be on standby for situations such as Big G's.
Seriously, all the best Big guy to you and yours!
Thank you and re my son and the RNLI, he is fully trained in all aspects of CPR and using a defibrillator even operationally at sea so it is a comfort though hopefully not required
Mind you I have a retired heart surgeon living two doors away
My teenage daughter was on at me for ages to use a false name in Starbucks - preferably ridiculous. We eventually came to agreement on Giles, inspired by the character from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. This is mildly amusing, and we have carried it on - but the main information i have gained from this is that there is a generation of Starbucks staff who were not born when BtVS was first on TV, who love the show to death - the almost is invariable comment is, 'Ooh, like the Buffy character - I love him!'
Does your daughter place her Starbucks orders as "Buffy"?
And IF not, then why the heck not??
Personally my nom de caffeine is "Raoul" (emphasis on the "oooooouuuuul").
She has used Cordelia and Faith, but Buffy is a bit _too_ obvious. She has also used Riley or Oz, to confuse things a bit more.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
To be fair, in some parts of the country, a lifeboat might be a good way of getting around currently.
Starmer lucky? I'd say Sunak was lucky - first managing to marry into the billionaire bracket, then dropping into Number 10 after he lost a leadership vote but, whaddayaknow, to an opponent who turned out to be the most disastrously incompetent PM anyone can remember.
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
My teenage daughter was on at me for ages to use a false name in Starbucks - preferably ridiculous. We eventually came to agreement on Giles, inspired by the character from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. This is mildly amusing, and we have carried it on - but the main information i have gained from this is that there is a generation of Starbucks staff who were not born when BtVS was first on TV, who love the show to death - the almost is invariable comment is, 'Ooh, like the Buffy character - I love him!'
Does your daughter place her Starbucks orders as "Buffy"?
And IF not, then why the heck not??
Personally my nom de caffeine is "Raoul" (emphasis on the "oooooouuuuul").
She has used Cordelia and Faith, but Buffy is a bit _too_ obvious. She has also used Riley or Oz, to confuse things a bit more.
Spike? At least they'd be sure to take care with HER order!
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
Barbecue sauce on any pizza is lovely, but goes superbly with a pineapple topped extravaganza!
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
IIRC tomatos are NOT traditional to traditional made-in-Napoli pizza? (Cyclefree knows for sure!)
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
ADDENDUM - this is precisely the kind of reason, why PB needs a fully-operational, well-maintained (ditto -stocked) By-Election Bottle Bus!!
When not wheeling from one post-scandal by-election to another every fortnight or so, could be on standby for situations such as Big G's.
Seriously, all the best Big guy to you and yours!
Thank you and re my son and the RNLI, he is fully trained in all aspects of CPR and using a defibrillator even operationally at sea so it is a comfort though hopefully not required
Mind you I have a retired heart surgeon living two doors away
Sounds like you're in good hands, not even counting Mrs BigG AND your natural heartiness (pun intended).
On topic, like a decent striker a politician has to make his own luck. You have to be in the right position to take advantage of defensive and tactical errors, and be there enough times to make the odd inevitable miss not matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
Good post. SKS is doing exactly what he needs to do to secure power imo. He's de-risking the election rather than chasing likes.
The guiding sentiment is not "let's get people enthusiastic about voting Labour!", it's "let's give floating voters no excuse whatsoever for voting Conservative. The country has made up its mind to kick them out. We'll do nothing to stand in their way."
This is the big picture strategy and I think it's going to work. The upshot will be a chunky majority combined with an absence of high expectations. You couldn't have a better platform on which to take office than that.
Yup. Although I do think a degree of inspiration and panache can help seal the deal eventually. But it just really doesn't matter until then when your main job is reassurance - and you can do it pretty late in the day.
If Labour comes out with two or three fairly bombproof policies that the right people quite like and that don't blow up the whole package of reassurance in the run up to the election, then the Tories are almost certainly toast. Steven Toast.
Does anyone think (as opposed to wish) that charges will eventually arise from this performance, and, if so, when? My guess is yes, and shortly after the GE date is announced.
Have to be charges Red, teh £600K alone is gone, not to mention all the other stuff found, will SNP be bankrupt before then. They have now taken all the branches money and will burn through that quickly, only income they have now is the short money and no chance they will find £1.5M for the election. Good few court cases coming up as well, judge will not be happy they have shredded all the evidence, she is toast one way or another, almost as many cases as Trump.
It will be interesting to see how they fight an election with no money, no donors and having pissed off most of their activists. Hope their SPADs are good at canvassing!
Flood report, we left the south coast early, got home about three, couldn't get into our village. We cadged a lift on a fire service 4X4 (the FRS were evacuating the island) and inspected our place. Our garden is a good foot under water, but the house is still a couple of foot above the water that's flowing under our building. The rest of the island is proper fecked, unfortunately. Loughborough and surrounding villages have been hammered. The road into our village...
I never understood why call a bucket of coffee a Venti....until one of my American colleagues explained. Going back to World War 2 - American soldiers in Italy always complained that their coffees (espresso) were too small and asked for water to be added - hence Americano coffee.
Starbucks then followed American Italian traditions and invented the Grande, or large.
The biggest large - a Venti then refers to 20 ounces. I had no idea how much that was so had to look it up - a Pint. That I understand, even though I dont use pints for anything except beer.
Lost on me and most Europeans.
Even the Brexity gammons dont get it - because while they yearn for ounces, fathoms and groats - they dont speak forrin...
Starmer lucky? I'd say Sunak was lucky - first managing to marry into the billionaire bracket, then dropping into Number 10 after he lost a leadership vote but, whaddayaknow, to an opponent who turned out to be the most disastrously incompetent PM anyone can remember.
Question for Sunak is whether his political career would have been better served by being a junior Cabinet minister now (say Gillian Keegan level), then being the next Conservative leader but one. In with a decent chance of being PM in 2032 or so, and probably a better PM for the decade of tempering.
Flood report, we left the south coast early, got home about three, couldn't get into our village. We caged a lift on a fire service 4X4 and inspected our place. Our garden is a good foot under water, but the house is still a couple of foot above the water that's flowing under our building. The rest of the island is proper fecked, unfortunately. Loughborough and surrounding villages have been hammered. The road into our village...
Sorry to read your report, but thanks for posting. Hope your house foundation is OK.
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
I have been saying this for some time and in my present circumstances my son is on standby to take me into hospital if needed before my pacemaker operation on the 5th February
Hopefully NOT by lifeboat?
To be fair, in some parts of the country, a lifeboat might be a good way of getting around currently.
So I hear. Hope zero PBers get flooded in, or out. Esp. later. Can be brutal, that's for sure.
Flooding in Nortgern France too. We were driving towards Calais this evening when my phone suddenly let out a piercing shriek and a big warning flashed up on the screen.
“Alert Crue! Crue exceptionelle pouvait dépasser les niveaux historiques sur le basin de l’Aa”
(the Aa is the most weirdly named valley in France. It’s like it wanted to be the first river in the pages jaunes.)
Starbucks is absolute gash. I can’t believe anyone would voluntarily choose their burnt ditchwater, and their food offer is astonishingly poor quality as well.
Even their interiors are often old and abused looking.
I was a big Pret fan, but their recent price hike puts them in the “not worth it” bucket now. They seem to be expanding in the US (a new outlet just opened at Penn Station) but prices here are even more grotesque.
I’ve simply stopped buying coffee, really.
Main reason why I go daily to my fav coffee shop, is because it's a mile-and-a-half walk there and back.
It's my quasi-health club.
The cafe on Middlesbrough railway station does excellent coffee.
Enjoy a cup to accompany the pleasant thought that in a few minutes time you will be boarding a train and leaving Middlesbrough.
On topic, like a decent striker a politician has to make his own luck. You have to be in the right position to take advantage of defensive and tactical errors, and be there enough times to make the odd inevitable miss not matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
Good post. SKS is doing exactly what he needs to do to secure power imo. He's de-risking the election rather than chasing likes.
The guiding sentiment is not "let's get people enthusiastic about voting Labour!", it's "let's give floating voters no excuse whatsoever for voting Conservative. The country has made up its mind to kick them out. We'll do nothing to stand in their way."
This is the big picture strategy and I think it's going to work. The upshot will be a chunky majority combined with an absence of high expectations. You couldn't have a better platform on which to take office than that.
Yup. Although I do think a degree of inspiration and panache can help seal the deal eventually. But it just really doesn't matter until then when your main job is reassurance - and you can do it pretty late in the day.
If Labour comes out with two or three fairly bombproof policies that the right people quite like and that don't blow up the whole package of reassurance in the run up to the election, then the Tories are almost certainly toast. Steven Toast.
I never understood why call a bucket of coffee a Venti....until one of my American colleagues explained. Going back to World War 2 - American soldiers in Italy always complained that their coffees (espresso) were too small and asked for water to be added - hence Americano coffee.
Starbucks then followed American Italian traditions and invented the Grande, or large.
The biggest large - a Venti then refers to 20 ounces. I had no idea how much that was so had to look it up - a Pint. That I understand, even though I dont use pints for anything except beer.
Lost on me and most Europeans.
Even the Brexity gammons dont get it - because while they yearn for ounces, fathoms and groats - they dont speak forrin...
Probably explains why American coffee is often reckoned to be weak. You can buy a venti Flat White, of all things, which if it were made to the correct proportions, should contain more than 6 espresso shots.
Interesting chat with our mortgage provider. Existing 5yr fix ends 31st Jan. Had agreed new 2yr fix from 1st Feb, but rates now tumbling. So instead of +£246 vs current they're now offering -£30.
Great! But to get it we need to cancel the previously accepted deal and do 90 mins of mortgage advisor interview to get back to the deal offered verbally.
"We don't need proof of income sir, you're an existing customer and our risk is lower if we get your interest rate lower". So why make me go through all that? To be fair though, a £6,600 saving over 2 years for 90 minutes of faff...
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I could understand that, it is people getting takeaways that seems extraordinary to me. Paper cup, same price, and not even very nice coffee.
That to me is the definition of frivolous spending. Do that 5 days a week and the cost is more than a sky subscription
There is a coffee shop on the ground floor of our office building. I see people walking in to the office with a cup in their hand, despite the presence of two bean to cup machines in our office that are free to use.
Not only are they pissing their money away, they are creating rubbish with unnecessary disposable cups.
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
I make a very nice Roman pizza with no tomato sauce, with potato, rosemary, mozzarella, hard cheese, capers and red onion. Mmm. Almost as good as my goats cheese and caramelised onion one... I love pizza.
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
I am very pleased to disclose that Starbucks has had to struggle on without my custom for some 8 years or so. Even way back in my teens when I was into those horrible iced things, Starbucks ones were all gritty and sugary, whereas Coffee Republic they were smooth and tasted of coffee.
Back when I was infesting your shores, was reasonably impressed (for hard-to-impress-coffee-wiseguy Seattlite) with Coffee Republic.
Also with Pret for what that's worth (half a wooden farthing?)
Best place to patronize a Starbucks, is somewhere where Starbuckian coffee kulture ain't ubiquitious. Such as Ulaan Bator or Parkersburg WV.
Why? Because in such places, the baristas tend to be very serious and conscientious when it comes to making your order. And also tend NOT to shout out your name, esp. if you are sole customer.
Cafe Neros are usually OK too. My American housemate was fond of the brand so a gang of us used to go there quite a bit.
So Amazon Prime video is now introducing adverts unless you agree to pay extra….
If you pay extra, do you get Amazon Prime Prime?
This reminds me of what Starbucks call their smallest size coffee. "Tall".
I've always been infuriated by that. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge it. If for some reason I find myself in Starbucks (which sometimes despite best efforts I do) I will make a point to freight my coffee order with "your smallest size" please.
Standard practice. At McDonalds when I worked there you always asked if customers wanted a large this, that, or the other. There was no small, just medium or large.
Although there are small and medium options there (eg on the chips) even if the staff are trained to steer you away from them. And on the coffee they describe their smallest as "regular" which is not a complete lie. But this thing of Starbucks, calling their actual smallest available coffee "tall" is just gratuitous mendacity as far as I can see. If they have a good reason for it I'm all ears but I bet they haven't.
"Tall" used to be the second smallest size and there was a "small", but when they added "venti", they didn't want too many size options and "small" got dropped.
Starbucks still sells "short" drinks, they're just not listed on the menu. I always have a "short latte".
Keen to roadtest this but I'm skeptical. Only celebs can usually order off menu.
It works. Short filter for me, on the rare occasions there isn't a better place nearby...
I too will avoid Starbucks.
But there are times when it is the best - or only - option.
Small Airports in the US, for example. There Starbucks is often the best chance of getting a coffee that isn't flavoured in some weird and deeply unpleasant way.
The other thing with Starbucks is that if you have to, exploit them. Make lengthy use of their facility. You're paying silly money to support their exciting tax arrangements and twatty naming of product. So get best value by staying a long time.
You’re not really paying for the coffee, you’re primarily paying for somewhere reasonably comfortable to sit, with wifi, that they’re happy to let you use for at least an hour.
I could understand that, it is people getting takeaways that seems extraordinary to me. Paper cup, same price, and not even very nice coffee.
That to me is the definition of frivolous spending. Do that 5 days a week and the cost is more than a sky subscription
There is a coffee shop on the ground floor of our office building. I see people walking in to the office with a cup in their hand, despite the presence of two bean to cup machines in our office that are free to use.
Not only are they pissing their money away, they are creating rubbish with unnecessary disposable cups.
That is madness. My work has free tea and coffee and I don't drink coffee anyway, it is the devil's work, so I spend no money in Starbucks.
Does anyone think (as opposed to wish) that charges will eventually arise from this performance, and, if so, when? My guess is yes, and shortly after the GE date is announced.
Have to be charges Red, teh £600K alone is gone, not to mention all the other stuff found, will SNP be bankrupt before then. They have now taken all the branches money and will burn through that quickly, only income they have now is the short money and no chance they will find £1.5M for the election. Good few court cases coming up as well, judge will not be happy they have shredded all the evidence, she is toast one way or another, almost as many cases as Trump.
It will be interesting to see how they fight an election with no money, no donors and having pissed off most of their activists. Hope their SPADs are good at canvassing!
Problem SNP have is that they won't be able to focus their resources in certain key target seats in the way that Labour, Con and LibDem will. The downside to their previous success. I guess, in practice, they will have to respond to the demands of sitting MPs, which will be good news for the incumbents in the seats the Scottish Tories and LibDems are defending.
Comments
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-in-talks-with-congo-and-other-countries-on-gaza-voluntary-migration-plan/
At worst, I labelled him an apologist. More realistically, someone who is blind to it.
And raise you Arriva Northumbria's ubiquitous "Most buses have free WiFi" signs.
Because the original line took it as read that it was for Israel to prove that it had nothing to do with the explosions.
Is that anti-Israel? Anti-semitic? No idea. But we are in a world where the president of Harvard recently resigned not only over claims of plagiarism but also for having trouble over condemning what people accept is anti-semitism so it isn't a huge leap to think it was one of those antis.
And the Graun evidently agreed with me because they changed the wording in the report, omitting that line. Why on earth would they have done that if Nigel's bollocks was true.
And what name do you use in Starbucks?
Hardly journalism of the highest order.
This isn't me sticking it to the man, this is me trying not to feel ridiculous.
My wife and I have been catching up on Mr Bates v The Post Office and, while thanks in a large part to @Cyclefree for highlighting this scandal, the documentary is so raw and shocking that my wife is absolutely seething about it and the corruption at the top causing such misery to decent sub postmasters/mistresses who have been caught up in what must be the biggest scandal in our post war history
Congratulations to ITV for their dramatisation of this true story, and nothing could be more effective in communicating it to the public who must demand compensation for those affected, including those families whose loved ones have died without knowing of their innocence, and then the eventual imprisonment of those responsible for this horrible injustice
I would just say how lovely Llandudno and Eryri looks but then I am rather prejudiced
As a side, the hospital phoned to say I am to have my pacemaker fitted on the 5th February, but if I feel unwell in the meantime to go to A& E, so hopefully by mid February I should see an improvement and be able to drive again
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/jan/03/scientists-new-class-antibiotic-kill-drug-resistant-bacteria
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/67872375
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-world-test-championship-2019-2021-1195334/england-vs-australia-3rd-test-1152848/full-scorecard
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67873197
“Meanwhile, campaigning in Surrey where the Liberal Democrats are hoping to win a number of Conservative-held seats at the next general election, party leader Sir Ed Davey said he regretted not asking "tougher questions" of Post Office managers when he was postal affairs minister in the coalition government from 2010 to 2012.
Asked why he refused to meet Alan Bates, the postmaster who led the campaign to expose the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, he said: "It is a national scandal... dreadful and it's been going on for so long. The Conservative government really needs to sort out the compensation.
"I regret not having asked the Post Office managers even tougher questions than I did."
Asked why he accepted the Post Office's assertions at face value, Sir Ed replied: "I asked really tough questions of Post Office managers and indeed the officials. I wish I'd gone further."
He congratulated Mr Bates for his campaign, he added.”
I can’t equal a pacemaker, but I’m now waiting for an XRay. I’ve no doubt the procedure will come quickly, but how long the assessment of the result will take is another matter.
In Starmer's case he very much isn't flashy. Sometimes you wonder if he needs to get in the game more and make things happen. But he's dragged Labour to a place where it's been perfectly placed to become a reasonable receptacle of votes for the wide variety of people the Tories have royally peeved with both unforced and tactical errors.
An easy comparison is his predecessor. Who faced one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern political history (2017) but started from such a bad position even a very good campaign wasn't quite enough.
By 2019 he was unable to take advantage of the Tories' chaos because some terrible judgments and being unable to deal with his baggage had switched people he needed to win over off. In addition to that, he'd failed to set his own solid Brexit strategy from the position of strength he had after 2017 - so was left picking one for reasons of party management and damage limitation.
It may not be pretty, but getting to a place where your opponents don't have easy targets and aren't united against you (A big contributor to the Tories uniting behind Boris was horror at the alternative if they fought their inevitable civil war) can also play a role in opponents self-immolating. In relation to the SNP, Labour's initial GB-wide polling recovery left it with some difficult existential questions it appears very divided on when it's not just able to claim the alternative is eternal Tory rule.
And IF not, then why the heck not??
Personally my nom de caffeine is "Raoul" (emphasis on the "oooooouuuuul").
🚨 BREAKING: The @WelshAmbulance service has declared a business continuity incident this afternoon due to system wide pressure on hospitals across Wales, meaning ambulances are stuck at hospital A&E depts risking delays to 999 calls
https://ambulance.nhs.wales/news/nhs/2023/help-us-help-you-says-the-welsh-ambulance-service/
Welsh Docs are not striking until the 15th.
Good few court cases coming up as well, judge will not be happy they have shredded all the evidence, she is toast one way or another, almost as many cases as Trump.
The guiding sentiment is not "let's get people enthusiastic about voting Labour!", it's "let's give floating voters no excuse whatsoever for voting Conservative. The country has made up its mind to kick them out. We'll do nothing to stand in their way."
This is the big picture strategy and I think it's going to work. The upshot will be a chunky majority combined with an absence of high expectations. You couldn't have a better platform on which to take office than that.
(Wonder who KEI stole it from?)
ADDENDUM - this is precisely the kind of reason, why PB needs a fully-operational, well-maintained (ditto -stocked) By-Election Bottle Bus!!
When not wheeling from one post-scandal by-election to another every fortnight or so, could be on standby for situations such as Big G's.
Seriously, all the best Big guy to you and yours!
I can’t believe anyone would voluntarily choose their burnt ditchwater, and their food offer is astonishingly poor quality as well.
Even their interiors are often old and abused looking.
I was a big Pret fan, but their recent price hike puts them in the “not worth it” bucket now. They seem to be expanding in the US (a new outlet just opened at Penn Station) but prices here are even more grotesque.
I’ve simply stopped buying coffee, really.
Place has been a shit-show since forever, and there appears no desire amongst the Welsh ruling class (nor the Welsh at large, tbh) to address it.
It's my quasi-health club.
Mind you I have a retired heart surgeon living two doors away
We all know that pineapple on pizza is a food of the Gods. I've just made my son a pizza that used barbecue sauce rather than tomato sauce. Where does this rank in PB's dream foods?
And can a pizza without tomato sue be called a pizza?
If Labour comes out with two or three fairly bombproof policies that the right people quite like and that don't blow up the whole package of reassurance in the run up to the election, then the Tories are almost certainly toast. Steven Toast.
Loughborough and surrounding villages have been hammered.
The road into our village...
Starbucks then followed American Italian traditions and invented the Grande, or large.
The biggest large - a Venti then refers to 20 ounces. I had no idea how much that was so had to look it up - a Pint. That I understand, even though I dont use pints for anything except beer.
Lost on me and most Europeans.
Even the Brexity gammons dont get it - because while they yearn for ounces, fathoms and groats - they dont speak forrin...
“Alert Crue!
Crue exceptionelle pouvait dépasser les niveaux historiques sur le basin de l’Aa”
(the Aa is the most weirdly named valley in France. It’s like it wanted to be the first river in the pages jaunes.)
Enjoy a cup to accompany the pleasant thought that in a few minutes time you will be boarding a train and leaving Middlesbrough.
John Rentoul
@JohnRentoul
·
1h
Farage as leader would increase Reform vote from 11% to 14%, leaving Lab lead unchanged at 21pts:
@YouGov
for Times
Great! But to get it we need to cancel the previously accepted deal and do 90 mins of mortgage advisor interview to get back to the deal offered verbally.
"We don't need proof of income sir, you're an existing customer and our risk is lower if we get your interest rate lower". So why make me go through all that? To be fair though, a £6,600 saving over 2 years for 90 minutes of faff...
But I would not rule out a campaign focused on one or two specific seats which Reform thought winnable.
Not only are they pissing their money away, they are creating rubbish with unnecessary disposable cups.
Return to Blue School in Wells delayed by concrete problem
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-67834519
Bring on the hot cross buns...