If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
I wouldn't believe anything either of those people said but we don't need to because we know what Russia was offering (a promise of peace in return for Ukraine disarming itself) and we know that it didn't need Boris to show the Ukrainians what would happen next if they took that deal.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
Yes it’s surely rubbish. I can believe Boris was out there giving them some oomph, it’s what he does, but beyond that…
I read an interesting take the other day. The pro-Putin western hard right are weirdly like the pro-hamas far left - ‘queers for Palestine’ makes as much sense as American nationalists for Putin. Putin clearly detests and fears America, he wouldn’t make exceptions for American nutters in bullhorn helmets
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
But on YouTube it is actually being spread, in the main, by western news media - often outraged or derisory - but they are spreading it - eg the guardian take on it - with excerpts - has nearly 1m views
This is my point. The interview has the classic ingredients of virality. It will greatly please some, greatly intrigue others, and greatly annoy many more, so everyone talks about it or shares it, so it is ubiquitous
This is what I predicted would happen. I never made any comment on the morality of it or the veracity of the dyad involved. Indeed I can see an argument, morally, why you shouldn’t interview Putin - tho on the whole I do not agree, it is better to see our enemy and understand how he thinks, even if it risks him smuggling his ideas into our discourse
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.
I think it is. Possibly from the posher/richer schools and universities.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.
I think it is. Possibly from the posher/richer schools and universities.
Carlson always looks a like a confused dog, head cocked to one side and eyebrows knitted.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.
I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.
I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."
My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.
It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.
I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.
I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."
My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.
It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.
I am not the one squirming here...or making stuff up.
Just to confirm - you accept you were wrong about which organisations he leads, in order to promote a false picture of his views?
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.
I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.
I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."
My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.
It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.
I am not the one squirming here...or making stuff up.
So you agree My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
Survives in what sense? Labour can suspend the campaign and expel him, but surely it is too late to remove him as a candidate? Most likely he will sit as an independent MP (if elected!) until the general election next January.
Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.
The record to beat for this bet is the 15.8% margin in the second round in 2000 between Livingstone and Norris. That margin was 11.9% in the first round, giving some indication of how much harder it will be to reach a high margin in a FPTP contest.
That said, the 2024 election is perfectly timed to create the maximum margin of victory. If Khan had only stood aside after two terms to allow for a fresh candidate and we might then expect a real blowout.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
Survives in what sense? Labour can suspend the campaign and expel him, but surely it is too late to remove him as a candidate? Most likely he will sit as an independent MP (if elected!) until the general election next January.
That is the most likely outcome yes.
I am also pretty sure these words were from November ie before the selection in which case bad due diligence rather than unlucky.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
No again you are wrong the remarks were made soon after the October 7th attacks the shortlisting was well after that.
The problem with Galloway running “for Gaza” in Rochdale is that it drives division. Like many post-cotton towns, Rochdale has had race issues - amplified by the grooming gangs issue.
Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.
The problem with Galloway running “for Gaza” in Rochdale is that it drives division. Like many post-cotton towns, Rochdale has had race issues - amplified by the grooming gangs issue.
Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.
I would agree with that.
Will be interesting to see what percentage of the electorate vote for him rather than Labour
Free focus group stuff for SKS in that type of ward with that type of demographics.
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
It never ceases to me amaze me just how stupid some candidates can be . They either forget they made a load of stupid tweets or say something which ends up being filmed .
Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.
A group of men charged with, and paid for by the body, the task of searching the Thames for this purpose is a recurring theme in Paul Doherty's 'Brother Athelstan' long crime/detection series, set in the London of the late 14th century. The books are not bad if you like that sort of thing.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
No again you are wrong the remarks were made soon after the October 7th attacks the shortlisting was well after that.
Bad due diligence not unlucky
0/10 try harder
Tony Lloyd died on 17th January 2024 so Labour shortlisting was clearly after that.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
Tony Lloyd wasn’t even dead when he made these statements.
Labour have screwed up with the selection.
BJO’s statement on Luke Akehurst is a fact, it is hardly anti semitic.
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
Perhaps
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Yes, Tucker on Twitter is the new What.Three.Words.
Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
Yes, the govt has got many things wrong but seems to be doing better on Gaza than labour. The govt is a critical friend of the Israeli govt, Labour is a just a devotee of Likud.
Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
If Labour didn't have a history of being the friend of Hamas and anti Semitism it would be easier for Starmer to steer a different course. BTW Labour supports the two state solution.
Anyone still a Trump fan is outing themselves as pro-Russia/Putin at this point. If there was ever a doubt about Trump being a dangerous idiot that is surely over now.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
Of course there is an alternative to George “For Rochdale, for Gaza” Galloway and to the shamed Labour and Green and ReFUK candidates. Rochdale had a LibDem MP as recently as 2010. Time for another.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia' https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
In the context of questions over Biden's infirmity, it is perhaps unfortunate that a new video has emerged where Kamala Harris seems to be six large martinis into a speech
There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
There are.
There aren’t. We need the fighting to stop and some kind of international peacekeeping (likely led by the Saudis as I suggested when this started).
Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.
In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
Who gives a monkey's chuff. 2 hours of a mental murdering despot, being butt licked by a thick publicity hungry American crapbag, as he talks verbal diahorrea. I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
Who gives a monkey's chuff. 2 hours of a mental murdering despot, being butt licked by a thick publicity hungry American crapbag, as he talks verbal diahorrea. I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
There are.
There aren’t. We need the fighting to stop and some kind of international peacekeeping (likely led by the Saudis as I suggested when this started).
Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.
In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
No solution and teh worst players are the Arab nations who are a bunch of self seeking cowardly rats. Not one of them lifting a hand to help and most if not all funding nutters of one stripe or colour.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
I said on here, around a month or so ago, labours stance on Gaza could cost it Muslim votes and was derided for saying so.
This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.
If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
I think the maths shows that the 15-20 seats impacted have such a significant Labour majority that it makes no difference.
Plus I simply don't see the point of the protest - it's not like we can nuke Israel to stop them executing their plan - which is about the only thing that would stop the current Israeli government from continuing it's current plan.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
I do hope Biden can be persuaded to stand aside but somehow I doubt it.
(Although, I did forecast way back that if Biden was going to pull out he wouldn't do so until February 24; still two and a half weeks to go.)
There's a theory on TwiX - quite plausible - that Biden realised he was a bit old for the job in 2016, so didn't go for it, then thought he should have a go nonetheless to stop Trump in 2020, but he's now SO demented he doesn't realise he's demented, so he ploughs on
In the context of questions over Biden's infirmity, it is perhaps unfortunate that a new video has emerged where Kamala Harris seems to be six large martinis into a speech
Distinct echoes of the London mayoral race here. Biden-Harris, like Khan, are more than distinctly flawed. But when the alternative is as bad as it is, that's less important.
Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Probably Carlson is happy with the extra publicity. He might not care that lots of it is bad publicity, but it hasn't done his claim to be a journalist much good.
But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.
And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?
Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
Perhaps
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
It's not the NYT 'turning' at all. It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Yes, Tucker on Twitter is the new What.Three.Words.
It will change the world.
And the Oscar for the most gullible person on the planet goes to @Leon
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
Perhaps
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
It's not the NYT 'turning' at all. It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
Yup, it's the exact same setup as their Hillary emails coverage. Were they gunning for Hillary Clinton back then? Well, I'm sure they don't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business but no, that's not what was happening.
To be fair it’s becoming rapidly more difficult to be sympathetic with Israel. They seem to have done, or at least achieved, nothing whatsoever towards their stated aim of ‘getting the hostages back’ while at the same time slaughtering Palestinians. I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a safe home for the Jewish people, and can well understand why they want it in Palestine. However the Palestinians were there legally and historically and indeed I suspect that many of them have at least as good a ‘historical’ and ‘genetic’ right to be there as many of the more recent ‘Jewish’ immigrants.
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
Perhaps
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
It's not the NYT 'turning' at all. It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
I know people that work on the NYT. It is absolutely the Democrats' Journal of Record, and is the most influential legacy media voice in Democrat circles
Tho it is perhaps more like the Guardian vis a vis Labour (only more powerful), than the Telegraph vis a vis Tories
But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.
Even MAGA idiots on Reddit are asking "is Carlson making us look bad by interviewing this nutter?" The only thing unfiltered Putin persuades people of is that the man is a crank.
Hotel business must be really struggling if he's thinking of going to those lengths to collect on debts.
Trump seems to see everything as transactional, and 'zero sum game'. He wins, you have to lose. If you lose, he's won. The idea of 'win-win' doesn't enter his head.
If you have a 'contract' then you need to do what you say immediately, or else he won't keep up his end of the deal (and indeed, often won't keep up his end of the deal anyway because he should be allowed to shout 'bankrupt' and get away with everything scott-free).
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Probably Carlson is happy with the extra publicity. He might not care that lots of it is bad publicity, but it hasn't done his claim to be a journalist much good.
But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.
And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?
Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
The most significant point in this whole debate is that I said this would be a massive media shitstorm and possibly the most watched political interview in history, and I was right
All that matters is that I was righr
Fuck what Putin said. Who cares. Let him invade Mongolia and nuke the Bahamians. It's just ME BEING RIGHT. ME ME ME ME ME MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
To be fair it’s becoming rapidly more difficult to be sympathetic with Israel. They seem to have done, or at least achieved, nothing whatsoever towards their stated aim of ‘getting the hostages back’ while at the same time slaughtering Palestinians. I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a safe home for the Jewish people, and can well understand why they want it in Palestine. However the Palestinians were there legally and historically and indeed I suspect that many of them have at least as good a ‘historical’ and ‘genetic’ right to be there as many of the more recent ‘Jewish’ immigrants.
My problem with Israel is that in attempting to achieve their aim they are systematically inflicting on Gaza what the Nazis did to them in Europe...
The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
Perhaps
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
It's not the NYT 'turning' at all. It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
Yup, it's the exact same setup as their Hillary emails coverage. Were they gunning for Hillary Clinton back then? Well, I'm sure they don't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business but no, that's not what was happening.
I mean, this is just completely mad
Of course the NYT care if Trump gets elected. They really really really don't want him elected. I get that they are running a business and Trump is good box office, but they are also sincere about their Democrat, left of centre beliefs, and they are probably in actual fear of what Trump might do to them, if elected
You are the delusional one here, sorry. The NYT loathes and fears Donald Trump
There's a new study out in the likelihood if the collapse of the AMOC. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/09/atlantic-ocean-circulation-nearing-devastating-tipping-point-study-finds ..Until now there has been no consensus about how severe this will be. One study last year, based on changes in sea surface temperatures, suggested the tipping point could happen between 2025 and 2095. However, the UK Met Office said large, rapid changes in Amoc were “very unlikely” in the 21st century.
The new paper, published in Science Advances, has broken new ground by looking for warning signs in the salinity levels at the southern extent of the Atlantic Ocean between Cape Town and Buenos Aires. Simulating changes over a period of 2,000 years on computer models of the global climate, it found a slow decline can lead to a sudden collapse over less than 100 years, with calamitous consequences.
The paper said the results provided a “clear answer” about whether such an abrupt shift was possible: “This is bad news for the climate system and humanity as up till now one could think that Amoc tipping was only a theoretical concept and tipping would disappear as soon as the full climate system, with all its additional feedbacks, was considered.”..
Whether we'll live to see this is a matter if doubt; it's not unlikely our children or grandchildren will.
Comments
The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20
And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo
Another 10m on Russian YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg
And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
And that’s not the main platform. X is
Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
Carlson’s Youtube
https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0
12m
Russian YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg
10m
Russel brand’s take
https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s
2m
Telegraph
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg
3m
Arabic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1m
Live reaction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
2.9m
Fox now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1m
Times radio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
1.2m
Some weird Russian thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==
Nearly 1m
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.
A somewhat different view:
https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
https://twitter.com/CourierBoyUK/status/1756339975820374181
Well I thought it was funny.
I read an interesting take the other day. The pro-Putin western hard right are weirdly like the pro-hamas far left - ‘queers for Palestine’ makes as much sense as American nationalists for Putin. Putin clearly detests and fears America, he wouldn’t make exceptions for American nutters in bullhorn helmets
What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
This is my point. The interview has the classic ingredients of virality. It will greatly please some, greatly intrigue others, and greatly annoy many more, so everyone talks about it or shares it, so it is ubiquitous
This is what I predicted would happen. I never made any comment on the morality of it or the veracity of the dyad involved. Indeed I can see an argument, morally, why you shouldn’t interview Putin - tho on the whole I do not agree, it is better to see our enemy and understand how he thinks, even if it risks him smuggling his ideas into our discourse
Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.
As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you...
As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that.
ETA it could be a prediction that Paddy Power will pay out early, in exactly one or two months
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
We done Luke.
Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
https://www.sealionpress.co.uk/post/other-ideologies-ii-georgism
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.
Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?
And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
(Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)
I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.
I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.224220834
https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.
I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."
My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.
It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.
Just to confirm - you accept you were wrong about which organisations he leads, in order to promote a false picture of his views?
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25858745/river-thames-abdul-ezedi-clapham-attack/
Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.
That said, the 2024 election is perfectly timed to create the maximum margin of victory. If Khan had only stood aside after two terms to allow for a fresh candidate and we might then expect a real blowout.
I am also pretty sure these words were from November ie before the selection in which case bad due diligence rather than unlucky.
Bad due diligence not unlucky
0/10 try harder
Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.
Will be interesting to see what percentage of the electorate vote for him rather than Labour
Free focus group stuff for SKS in that type of ward with that type of demographics.
On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)
Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
Ali made his remarks in October or November.
The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre
Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
Tony Lloyd wasn’t even dead when he made these statements.
Labour have screwed up with the selection.
BJO’s statement on Luke Akehurst is a fact, it is hardly anti semitic.
But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
It will change the world.
This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.
If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
The govt have already expressed their concerns. Labour will probably sit on their hands given current form.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68266335
https://x.com/The_Real_Feisty/status/1756311591459365353?s=20
Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.
In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
What does Gaza have to do with Wardleworth or Kirkholt?
I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
I do hope Biden can be persuaded to stand aside but somehow I doubt it.
(Although, I did forecast way back that if Biden was going to pull out he wouldn't do so until February 24; still two and a half weeks to go.)
Plus I simply don't see the point of the protest - it's not like we can nuke Israel to stop them executing their plan - which is about the only thing that would stop the current Israeli government from continuing it's current plan.
It sounds painfully believable
Distinct echoes of the London mayoral race here. Biden-Harris, like Khan, are more than distinctly flawed. But when the alternative is as bad as it is, that's less important.
But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.
And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?
Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
There is just one terse column from Paul Krugman trying to defend him, but it is feeble and doesn't persuade, and has been hidden away
It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.
The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
If they were engaging in journalism, rather than opinion, they would have reported this, too.
https://www.justsecurity.org/92090/the-real-robert-hur-report-versus-what-you-read-in-the-news/
To be fair it’s becoming rapidly more difficult to be sympathetic with Israel. They seem to have done, or at least achieved, nothing whatsoever towards their stated aim of ‘getting the hostages back’ while at the same time slaughtering Palestinians.
I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a safe home for the Jewish people, and can well understand why they want it in Palestine. However the Palestinians were there legally and historically and indeed I suspect that many of them have at least as good a ‘historical’ and ‘genetic’ right to be there as many of the more recent ‘Jewish’ immigrants.
Tho it is perhaps more like the Guardian vis a vis Labour (only more powerful), than the Telegraph vis a vis Tories
He wins, you have to lose. If you lose, he's won. The idea of 'win-win' doesn't enter his head.
If you have a 'contract' then you need to do what you say immediately, or else he won't keep up his end of the deal (and indeed, often won't keep up his end of the deal anyway because he should be allowed to shout 'bankrupt' and get away with everything scott-free).
All that matters is that I was righr
Fuck what Putin said. Who cares. Let him invade Mongolia and nuke the Bahamians. It's just ME BEING RIGHT. ME ME ME ME ME MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Of course the NYT care if Trump gets elected. They really really really don't want him elected. I get that they are running a business and Trump is good box office, but they are also sincere about their Democrat, left of centre beliefs, and they are probably in actual fear of what Trump might do to them, if elected
You are the delusional one here, sorry. The NYT loathes and fears Donald Trump
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/09/atlantic-ocean-circulation-nearing-devastating-tipping-point-study-finds
..Until now there has been no consensus about how severe this will be. One study last year, based on changes in sea surface temperatures, suggested the tipping point could happen between 2025 and 2095. However, the UK Met Office said large, rapid changes in Amoc were “very unlikely” in the 21st century.
The new paper, published in Science Advances, has broken new ground by looking for warning signs in the salinity levels at the southern extent of the Atlantic Ocean between Cape Town and Buenos Aires. Simulating changes over a period of 2,000 years on computer models of the global climate, it found a slow decline can lead to a sudden collapse over less than 100 years, with calamitous consequences.
The paper said the results provided a “clear answer” about whether such an abrupt shift was possible: “This is bad news for the climate system and humanity as up till now one could think that Amoc tipping was only a theoretical concept and tipping would disappear as soon as the full climate system, with all its additional feedbacks, was considered.”..
Whether we'll live to see this is a matter if doubt; it's not unlikely our children or grandchildren will.