You would have to prove the individuals concerned committed war crimes against civilians or the unarmed, shooting armed Hamas terrorists who haven't surrendered and who massacred 100s of Israelis earlier this year does not count!
Kaivan Shroff @KaivanShroff · Feb 19 Some delusional scenario where the party instead anoints a Biden replacement at the Democratic National Convention in August, just over 3 months away from election day, and then that candidate goes on to defeat Trump is beyond even Aaron Sorkin’s imagination.
Kaivan Shroff @KaivanShroff · Feb 19 Joe Biden is the best candidate to beat Donald Trump in just 9 months. Even if he wasn’t, there is no time left and there are no alternatives.
The judges and juries in Trump's criminal trials may have more influence on the election result than whoever the Democratic nominee is, Biden or not
Unless he is barred from running somehow through legal processes he is the nominee.
GOP will make him nominee even if he is in prison.
Yes but Independents will be far more likely to hold their nose and vote for Biden again if Trump is sent to jail, even if 30-40% of US voters still vote for Trump even if he is in jail on election day ie his MAGA core vote
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
You would have to prove the individuals concerned committed war crimes against civilians or the unarmed, shooting armed Hamas terrorists who haven't surrendered and who massacred 100s of Israelis earlier this year does not count!
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
That's one way to describe the Duke of Buccleuch
Mainly farming gentry around Essex though (in the rural areas north of Loughton, Rochford, Basildon and Brentwood anyway), a few Lords and Barons is about the highest aristocracy you get in this county
You would have to prove the individuals concerned committed war crimes against civilians or the unarmed, shooting armed Hamas terrorists who haven't surrendered and who massacred 100s of Israelis earlier this year does not count!
Israel has massacred THOUSANDS of Palestinians!
There were tens of thousands of Hamas terrorists hiding under the Palestinians
How many Hamas terrorists do you want Israel to spare?
Shame, The Spectator will never be able to employ him now.
He must have been well over 80. So not really a surprise.
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Given Blackpool South is only 65th in the Labour target list and a seat Labour could win and still see the Tories win most seats, the pressure in this by election may be more on Starmer than Sunak.
It is a must win for Labour, less so for the Tories and Sunak has already brushed off by election losses in far safer Tory seats than this one
The by election is not happening HY. No more by elections this Parliament are happening, even if the GE is December. This became clear to us all hours ago.
Your party won’t set a date for it, arguing the waste of money involved so close to the General Election.
And it’s the right decision, so no real opposition to it.
Given this starts as a marginal and one that Electoral Calculus has a 30% margin Labour win, that 7.6% local election lead is quite low.
Labour is typically gaining a further 2-8% swing over and above local results in by-elections, much depending on third party, including Independent, vote squeeze. The prospects for that are quite modest here (for the sake of argument I'm ignoring the effect of Benton as an independent here).
So, if this occurs, I wonder if we could see a lower swing than we've been used to, maybe around 12%, as I'd expect some RefUK showing.
I'm sure such a result might be interpreted as improvement for the Tories, but I think that would be a mistake.
Labour will win, but likely with their least convincing mainstream result since Uxbridge.
Shame, The Spectator will never be able to employ him now.
He must have been well over 80. So not really a surprise.
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Not quite... I think his first book was in 1968 about the controversial PQ17 Convoy. It resulted in a court case - Broome -v- Cassell & Co Ltd (1970).
Shame, The Spectator will never be able to employ him now.
He must have been well over 80. So not really a surprise.
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Not quite... I think his first book was in 1968 about the controversial PQ17 Convoy. It resulted in a court case - Broome -v- Cassell & Co Ltd (1970).
His first book was Und Deutsche Städte Starben Nicht in 1962. The Destruction of Dresden was a development of that published by Kimber the following year.
PQ17 was five years after that. I think it was his first court case though. He had to pay £40,000 damages including £25,000 in exemplary damages.
I am glad you're finally understanding what Boris Johnson is like.
Compare Cameron's response to Russian agression with Johnson's.
Cameron has been spot on the thug running the Israeli Government. For that he has my support.
Voted for his party before, would do so again if he was the leader.
That's also style over substance. Cameron supports dismantling Gaza's military capability, so his criticism of Netanyahu is superficial.
There's a good article on this (Cameron's long standing tendency to say whatever sounds good at any one moment before any one audience) over on Conhome. He was always a massive lightweight.
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
Exactly. Sunak does have an odd habit of going around the country proudly displaying his very limited knowledge of various industries, regional identities etc. He just doesn't seem too bright.
Shame, The Spectator will never be able to employ him now.
He must have been well over 80. So not really a surprise.
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Not quite... I think his first book was in 1968 about the controversial PQ17 Convoy. It resulted in a court case - Broome -v- Cassell & Co Ltd (1970).
His first book was Und Deutsche Städte Starben Nicht in 1962. The Destruction of Dresden was a development of that published by Kimber the following year.
PQ17 was five years after that. I think it was his first court case though. He had to pay £40,000 damages including £25,000 in exemplary damages.
Thanks, Ydoethur - I am happy to stand corrected. Incidentally, and for the record, I don't make a study of the writings of fascistic wannabe historians - it's just that my grandparents had a copy, and I remember the fuss at the time.
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
Exactly. Sunak does have an odd habit of going around the country proudly displaying his very limited knowledge of various industries, regional identities etc. He just doesn't seem too bright.
Shame, The Spectator will never be able to employ him now.
He must have been well over 80. So not really a surprise.
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Not quite... I think his first book was in 1968 about the controversial PQ17 Convoy. It resulted in a court case - Broome -v- Cassell & Co Ltd (1970).
His first book was Und Deutsche Städte Starben Nicht in 1962. The Destruction of Dresden was a development of that published by Kimber the following year.
PQ17 was five years after that. I think it was his first court case though. He had to pay £40,000 damages including £25,000 in exemplary damages.
Thanks, Ydoethur - I am happy to stand corrected. Incidentally, and for the record, I don't make a study of the writings of fascistic wannabe historians - it's just that my grandparents had a copy, and I remember the fuss at the time.
I do.
But for the record, that is because one of my early jobs was to rebut them...
Incidentally, we had commentary on Richard Carrier a few days ago from @148grss - Carrier's use of Irving as a reliable source to support an untenable thesis was what alerted me to the fact that Carrier is a loon...
How can you prosecute people fighting voluntarily for the Israeli army, the IDF is not listed as a terrorist organisation in the UK?
Of course you can't, its clear nonsense. An attention whore and money making scam by someone.
British law is entirely clear that British citizens (both dual national and exclusively British nationals) are perfectly entitled to fight for other countries legal armies.
And if those British nationals are dual-nationals, they might be in their own (other) nation's army in which case what on earth do you think you're going to do about it?
Who actually decides what is legal in this case? The United Nations?
What if the other countries legal army were actually the villains of the piece, stolen someone’s land, and the other protagonist were the good guys fighting for land and freedom?
I’ll give you an example, going back quite a few thousand years, if the UN existed, do you think it would have sided with Egyptian Pharaohs against the stateless Jews?
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
Exactly. Sunak does have an odd habit of going around the country proudly displaying his very limited knowledge of various industries, regional identities etc. He just doesn't seem too bright.
He's not dim, but unfortunately he does seem to see most of the country as cells on a spreadsheet. (There's a line in Alan Clark's diaries about his view that very intelligent people can only think very short term or very long term with nothing in between. I wonder if there's something similar here.)
How can you prosecute people fighting voluntarily for the Israeli army, the IDF is not listed as a terrorist organisation in the UK?
Of course you can't, its clear nonsense. An attention whore and money making scam by someone.
British law is entirely clear that British citizens (both dual national and exclusively British nationals) are perfectly entitled to fight for other countries legal armies.
And if those British nationals are dual-nationals, they might be in their own (other) nation's army in which case what on earth do you think you're going to do about it?
Who actually decides what is legal in this case? The United Nations?
What if the other countries legal army were actually the villains of the piece, stolen someone’s land, and the other protagonist were the good guys fighting for land and freedom?
I’ll give you an example, going back quite a few thousand years, if the UN existed, do you think it would have sided with Egyptian Pharaohs against the stateless Jews?
Never mind the UN, it's covered by UK law. The Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 covers fighting wars. Or if it isn't, I'd like to see a reasoned argument why not.
I notice electoral calculus is showing the Tories on 99. That must be the fewest seats on the website, surely?
They, Electoral Calculus, do have a rather broad spread. Their current prediction is basically that Labour will get a majority of between 24 and 420. Even this broad prediction is outside what I think the result (NOM) will be.
Someone else who thinks the likelihood of the Torypocalypse, as much as they deserve it, has been overdone. There aren't many of us left!
But yes, the boundaries on Electoral Calculus are vast. It'd be mildly interesting to know whom the shell shocked 99 survivors are meant to be, though I'd bet one of them would be ours. Two factors discourage me from bothering to turn out to vote: the conviction that Labour are unlikely to do much better than the current dross, and the total immovability of the incumbent.
Given that you expect NoM can you tell me how that is going to be achieved based on the current polling (15-20% gap in party polling and a 40+% gap in net approval rating)?
These ratings have now been consistent for over a year - I just can't see anything that is going to shift them especially the amount needed to end up with a hung Parliament...
It's a guess. That's how the future is. I think something like this will happen: Dirty and long campaign; Labour are subject to external attack on left and other issues; many DKs and Reform voters return to the Tories; Labour find ways of shooting themselves in the foot over tax, anti semitism, Islamism, Burgon appears on tellyism; very low turnout by the centre and the left; Starmer fails to galvanise the young vote to turn out; less tactical voting than expected. Also, between now and the election another black swan of some sort. This will be bad for Labour because they start so well they have no upside. Tories unite to fight campaign.
Result: Labour about 310 seats - a gain of 108 seats, which is remarkable but still a NOM.
One sliver of evidence: Kingswood swing only 16%. Labour have said nothing, but actually PB and Labour expected a much better result.
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
Not all, plenty of multi millionaire farmers round here whose families have owned their farms for generations, who live in big rustic old farmhouses and often have multiple tenants
Exactly. Sunak does have an odd habit of going around the country proudly displaying his very limited knowledge of various industries, regional identities etc. He just doesn't seem too bright.
He's not dim, but unfortunately he does seem to see most of the country as cells on a spreadsheet. (There's a line in Alan Clark's diaries about his view that very intelligent people can only think very short term or very long term with nothing in between. I wonder if there's something similar here.)
I notice electoral calculus is showing the Tories on 99. That must be the fewest seats on the website, surely?
They, Electoral Calculus, do have a rather broad spread. Their current prediction is basically that Labour will get a majority of between 24 and 420. Even this broad prediction is outside what I think the result (NOM) will be.
Someone else who thinks the likelihood of the Torypocalypse, as much as they deserve it, has been overdone. There aren't many of us left!
But yes, the boundaries on Electoral Calculus are vast. It'd be mildly interesting to know whom the shell shocked 99 survivors are meant to be, though I'd bet one of them would be ours. Two factors discourage me from bothering to turn out to vote: the conviction that Labour are unlikely to do much better than the current dross, and the total immovability of the incumbent.
Given that you expect NoM can you tell me how that is going to be achieved based on the current polling (15-20% gap in party polling and a 40+% gap in net approval rating)?
These ratings have now been consistent for over a year - I just can't see anything that is going to shift them especially the amount needed to end up with a hung Parliament...
It's a guess. That's how the future is. I think something like this will happen: Dirty and long campaign; Labour are subject to external attack on left and other issues; many DKs and Reform voters return to the Tories; Labour find ways of shooting themselves in the foot over tax, anti semitism, Islamism, Burgon appears on tellyism; very low turnout by the centre and the left; Starmer fails to galvanise the young vote to turn out; less tactical voting than expected. Also, between now and the election another black swan of some sort. This will be bad for Labour because they start so well they have no upside. Tories unite to fight campaign.
Result: Labour about 310 seats - a gain of 108 seats, which is remarkable but still a NOM.
One sliver of evidence: Kingswood swing only 16%. Labour have said nothing, but actually PB and Labour expected a much better result.
That’s very funny 🥲
In the real world, LLG is 60% and ready for some blue toppling with tactical voting. If Labour do hit some problems, does the LLG drop very much, or just shared in a different way?
You would have to prove the individuals concerned committed war crimes against civilians or the unarmed, shooting armed Hamas terrorists who haven't surrendered and who massacred 100s of Israelis earlier this year does not count!
Israel has massacred THOUSANDS of Palestinians!
That happens in wars, especially in wars fought in urban areas where the defender makes a policy of using civilians and civilian infrastructure as defensive shields (which is itself a war crime).
There is no obligation on combatants to avoid civilian casualties, only to minimise them as far as is possible within the context of fighting legitimate targets. FWIW, I don't think Israel has always done that, nor has it made adequate provision for civilian support in the areas it has occupied but those are issues that sit far higher up the command chain.
How can you prosecute people fighting voluntarily for the Israeli army, the IDF is not listed as a terrorist organisation in the UK?
Of course you can't, its clear nonsense. An attention whore and money making scam by someone.
British law is entirely clear that British citizens (both dual national and exclusively British nationals) are perfectly entitled to fight for other countries legal armies.
And if those British nationals are dual-nationals, they might be in their own (other) nation's army in which case what on earth do you think you're going to do about it?
Who actually decides what is legal in this case? The United Nations?
What if the other countries legal army were actually the villains of the piece, stolen someone’s land, and the other protagonist were the good guys fighting for land and freedom?
I’ll give you an example, going back quite a few thousand years, if the UN existed, do you think it would have sided with Egyptian Pharaohs against the stateless Jews?
Never mind the UN, it's covered by UK law. The Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 covers fighting wars. Or if it isn't, I'd like to see a reasoned argument why not.
It is perfectly possible to prosecute someone fighting in any army for war crimes.
They have to have been responsible for committing such a crime, as defined in the various conventions and treaties on the subject.
From the tenor of the Twatter messages, I will bet that they will be trying for a novel interpretation, trying to make service in the Israeli army itself, a crime.
Kaivan Shroff @KaivanShroff · Feb 19 Some delusional scenario where the party instead anoints a Biden replacement at the Democratic National Convention in August, just over 3 months away from election day, and then that candidate goes on to defeat Trump is beyond even Aaron Sorkin’s imagination.
Kaivan Shroff @KaivanShroff · Feb 19 Joe Biden is the best candidate to beat Donald Trump in just 9 months. Even if he wasn’t, there is no time left and there are no alternatives.
The judges and juries in Trump's criminal trials may have more influence on the election result than whoever the Democratic nominee is, Biden or not
Unless he is barred from running somehow through legal processes he is the nominee.
GOP will make him nominee even if he is in prison.
Yes but Independents will be far more likely to hold their nose and vote for Biden again if Trump is sent to jail, even if 30-40% of US voters still vote for Trump even if he is in jail on election day ie his MAGA core vote
Plenty of Republicans say they won't vote for Trump if he is convicted of something that puts him in jail.
Comments
source: https://www.npr.org/2024/02/19/1232527647/the-washington-state-legislature-is-taking-up-a-so-called-strippers-bill-of-righ#:~:text=The Washington State Legislature is considering a bill that advocates,in Seattle, Monica Nickelsburg reports.
I worry about the safety of those poor girls in those awful shoes, but, other than that, don't know enough to have a position on the bill.
(Speaking of shoes, I am hoping someone better informed than I about such matters (TSE, perhaps) will review the shoes the Loser, DJT, is selling.)
How many Hamas terrorists do you want Israel to spare?
One small issue. He wasn't an historian. Pop or otherwise.
His first book in English, The Destruction of Dresden, Was subtitled 'Ein Roman' when the German translation first came out, because he'd falsified so much information in it.
Who, coincidentally, died about three months ago.
Your party won’t set a date for it, arguing the waste of money involved so close to the General Election.
And it’s the right decision, so no real opposition to it.
Lab: 7448 (46.2%)
Con: 6223 (38.6%)
Ind: 1108 (6.9%)
Green: 629 (3.9%)
Ref: 540 (3.3%)
LD: 172 (1.1%)
Given this starts as a marginal and one that Electoral Calculus has a 30% margin Labour win, that 7.6% local election lead is quite low.
Labour is typically gaining a further 2-8% swing over and above local results in by-elections, much depending on third party, including Independent, vote squeeze. The prospects for that are quite modest here (for the sake of argument I'm ignoring the effect of Benton as an independent here).
So, if this occurs, I wonder if we could see a lower swing than we've been used to, maybe around 12%, as I'd expect some RefUK showing.
I'm sure such a result might be interpreted as improvement for the Tories, but I think that would be a mistake.
Labour will win, but likely with their least convincing mainstream result since Uxbridge.
Rampton and Julius came up with a great strategy to destroy Irving.
PQ17 was five years after that. I think it was his first court case though. He had to pay £40,000 damages including £25,000 in exemplary damages.
https://conservativehome.com/2024/02/20/cameron-has-gone-native-at-the-foreign-office/
https://twitter.com/HackBlackburn/status/1760046163741557197
https://twitter.com/StephenCVGraham/status/1760042782742216885/photo/1
But for the record, that is because one of my early jobs was to rebut them...
Incidentally, we had commentary on Richard Carrier a few days ago from @148grss - Carrier's use of Irving as a reliable source to support an untenable thesis was what alerted me to the fact that Carrier is a loon...
What if the other countries legal army were actually the villains of the piece, stolen someone’s land, and the other protagonist were the good guys fighting for land and freedom?
I’ll give you an example, going back quite a few thousand years, if the UN existed, do you think it would have sided with Egyptian Pharaohs against the stateless Jews?
Yup. Jonathan Frakes playing William T Riker going into Season 2 of Star Trek: The Next Generation. That beard.
What an epitaph.
Meanwhile, this is glorious;
https://x.com/keiranpedley/status/1759970566776197307?s=20
Result: Labour about 310 seats - a gain of 108 seats, which is remarkable but still a NOM.
One sliver of evidence: Kingswood swing only 16%. Labour have said nothing, but actually PB and Labour expected a much better result.
NEW THREAD
In the real world, LLG is 60% and ready for some blue toppling with tactical voting. If Labour do hit some problems, does the LLG drop very much, or just shared in a different way?
There is no obligation on combatants to avoid civilian casualties, only to minimise them as far as is possible within the context of fighting legitimate targets. FWIW, I don't think Israel has always done that, nor has it made adequate provision for civilian support in the areas it has occupied but those are issues that sit far higher up the command chain.
They have to have been responsible for committing such a crime, as defined in the various conventions and treaties on the subject.
From the tenor of the Twatter messages, I will bet that they will be trying for a novel interpretation, trying to make service in the Israeli army itself, a crime.