Oakeshott on the difficulties of getting the help out in the sticks.
"In my part of the Cotswolds, there is such a mismatch of supply and demand for domestic work that the going rate for a cleaner is at least £20 an hour."
At what rate would she be willing to clean the homes of other people and travel to get there?
For me I'd start to get interested at around £100 per hour. I doubt she would be less.
I wouldn't pay Oakeshott to clean my house.
Given she spews toxic shit everywhere, it would end up much dirtier.
Oakeshott is in that category of slightly more interesting political people you occasionally get on the hard left and right, whose opinions are not entirely predictable. Like Tom Harwood and, recently on the left, Paul Mason. She has some pretty classic populist right views but occasionally surprises.
That makes her a bit more interesting than the likes of Owen Jones or Katie Hopkins.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
This issue is next on the OECD’s agenda after the BEPS project with the aim of making things easier and more standardised.
Very few people permanently work from paradise but there’s a lot of working from holiday / extended family home going on. Best approach is to ease the rules a bit.
If Lee Anderson had been a Labour MP this story would have led all the radio and TV news programmes, as well as all the front pages, and he would already have lost the Labour whip. The double standards are astounding - and entirely predictable.
Worth noting a few things about Lee Anderson's comments:-
1. The suggestion that Khan is an Islamist or somehow in league with those organising the demos in London is absurd. There is no evidence of this. Anderson's basis for doing this is simply that Khan is a Muslim which is simple bigotry.
2. Worth noting that if you were to substitute the word "Jew" for "Muslim" in what he has been saying you'd get pretty close to some of the things that have been said online, in public by some of the attendees at the marches and on posters at the marches - the same suggestions of Jewish conspiracies/ control / being Nazis / even on one occasion a poster of a Jewish baby drinking Palestinian blood. This is pretty offensive, untrue and hateful. If we condemn one, we should be condemning the other. It is not either/or. Some people do however have difficulty doing this. They feel it necessary to turn a blind eye to what "their" side says.
3. The recent ET case involving a former lecturer at Bristol University, David Miller, said that his anti-Zionist views were protected as a "belief" under the Equality Act. What he says is pretty unpleasant but free speech is freedom to say unpleasant and offensive things. That does not simply apply to anti-Zionists. You could have a belief that tribal nationalism (eg being in favour of a Palestinian state) is as appalling as having a Jewish state and that too would, using the same legal arguments, be protected.
4. The better criticism should be aimed at the Met. There is a lot of talk about "hate" crimes, public order, not wanting to put vulnerable and marginalised communities in fear and, yet, it is indisputable that there has been a very significant rise in attacks on Jews and that many have found the endless marches frightening. But there has been little regard for this. For Jews to feel unsafe in the capital city of their home country in 2024 is pretty shocking. It does not reflect well on us as a country.
5. The cab rank rule does not apply to solicitors but only to the Bar. But attacking defence lawyers for doing their job is wrong. Doing their job does not mean they share the views of their clients.
Also a bit surprised that some commentators essentially criticise lawyers for specialising in their field. If I were a plaintiff or a defendant in a discrimination case I would want a solicitor and advocate/barrister familiar with discrimination legislation. Yet that is seen as illegitimate, it seems.
I don't see right-wing commentators complaining that their family solicitor and accountant specialise in tax, despite the many cases of dodgy firms trying to do HMRC out of their money illicitly, and in general the undoubted deleterious effect on the public finances of people getting out of paying tax unnecessarily.
Ok, PB, quick question, linked to issues with British Gas:
Is there a legal term for issuing a false bill, knowing it is a false bill, with the intention of getting payment for goods not delivered as a result?
If it is done with criminal intent then it is uttering a false document, which is a category of fraud. But if it is just complete incompetence then there is no criminal intent and being British Gas may give them a fairly unimpeachable defence in that respect.
They've now done it six times across four different accounts.
Every single time I try to close an account, they put the wrong figure on the final bill.
And not trivially, either. The errors if I had not challenged them total many thousands (as in, over three). They still haven't admitted one of them while doubling down on it. (Edit - and they know full well that bill is false.)
I am no longer willing to accept incompetence as a defence. If they are this incompetent as far as I am concerned they are still guilty of fraud.
Thanks for the tip.
Send a letter recorded delivery to the General Counsel pointing out the facts, with copies of the disputed documents, a chronology etc, and that unless the matter is resolved with withdrawal of all the bills within 14 days etc you will have no option but to refer the matter to your lawyers / police for attempted fraud since it is no longer possible to believe that an organisation can be this incompetent and you must regretfully conclude that it is being done dishonestly.,. Etc.
If Lee Anderson had been a Labour MP this story would have led all the radio and TV news programmes, as well as all the front pages, and he would already have lost the Labour whip. The double standards are astounding - and entirely predictable.
Absolutely. I don’t know if it’s double standards or simply that it’s a dog bites man story. This is what the Tory party stands for now.
His interview certainly fails the edit:replace x with the word “Jew” test.
Worth noting a few things about Lee Anderson's comments:-
1. The suggestion that Khan is an Islamist or somehow in league with those organising the demos in London is absurd. There is no evidence of this. Anderson's basis for doing this is simply that Khan is a Muslim which is simple bigotry.
2. Worth noting that if you were to substitute the word "Jew" for "Muslim" in what he has been saying you'd get pretty close to some of the things that have been said online, in public by some of the attendees at the marches and on posters at the marches - the same suggestions of Jewish conspiracies/ control / being Nazis / even on one occasion a poster of a Jewish baby drinking Palestinian blood. This is pretty offensive, untrue and hateful. If we condemn one, we should be condemning the other. It is not either/or. Some people do however have difficulty doing this. They feel it necessary to turn a blind eye to what "their" side says.
3. The recent ET case involving a former lecturer at Bristol University, David Miller, said that his anti-Zionist views were protected as a "belief" under the Equality Act. What he says is pretty unpleasant but free speech is freedom to say unpleasant and offensive things. That does not simply apply to anti-Zionists. You could have a belief that tribal nationalism (eg being in favour of a Palestinian state) is as appalling as having a Jewish state and that too would, using the same legal arguments, be protected.
4. The better criticism should be aimed at the Met. There is a lot of talk about "hate" crimes, public order, not wanting to put vulnerable and marginalised communities in fear and, yet, it is indisputable that there has been a very significant rise in attacks on Jews and that many have found the endless marches frightening. But there has been little regard for this. For Jews to feel unsafe in the capital city of their home country in 2024 is pretty shocking. It does not reflect well on us as a country.
5. The cab rank rule does not apply to solicitors but only to the Bar. But attacking defence lawyers for doing their job is wrong. Doing their job does not mean they share the views of their clients.
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Worth noting a few things about Lee Anderson's comments:-
1. The suggestion that Khan is an Islamist or somehow in league with those organising the demos in London is absurd. There is no evidence of this. Anderson's basis for doing this is simply that Khan is a Muslim which is simple bigotry.
2. Worth noting that if you were to substitute the word "Jew" for "Muslim" in what he has been saying you'd get pretty close to some of the things that have been said online, in public by some of the attendees at the marches and on posters at the marches - the same suggestions of Jewish conspiracies/ control / being Nazis / even on one occasion a poster of a Jewish baby drinking Palestinian blood. This is pretty offensive, untrue and hateful. If we condemn one, we should be condemning the other. It is not either/or. Some people do however have difficulty doing this. They feel it necessary to turn a blind eye to what "their" side says.
3. The recent ET case involving a former lecturer at Bristol University, David Miller, said that his anti-Zionist views were protected as a "belief" under the Equality Act. What he says is pretty unpleasant but free speech is freedom to say unpleasant and offensive things. That does not simply apply to anti-Zionists. You could have a belief that tribal nationalism (eg being in favour of a Palestinian state) is as appalling as having a Jewish state and that too would, using the same legal arguments, be protected.
4. The better criticism should be aimed at the Met. There is a lot of talk about "hate" crimes, public order, not wanting to put vulnerable and marginalised communities in fear and, yet, it is indisputable that there has been a very significant rise in attacks on Jews and that many have found the endless marches frightening. But there has been little regard for this. For Jews to feel unsafe in the capital city of their home country in 2024 is pretty shocking. It does not reflect well on us as a country.
5. The cab rank rule does not apply to solicitors but only to the Bar. But attacking defence lawyers for doing their job is wrong. Doing their job does not mean they share the views of their clients.
Also a bit surprised that some commentators essentially criticise lawyers for specialising in their field. If I were a plaintiff or a defendant in a discrimination case I would want a solicitor and advocate/barrister familiar with discrimination legislation. Yet that is seen as illegitimate, it seems.
I don't see right-wing commentators complaining that their family solicitor and accountant specialise in tax, despite the many cases of dodgy firms trying to do HMRC out of their money illicitly, and in general the undoubted deleterious effect on the public finances of people getting out of paying tax unnecessarily.
To be fair people do criticise tax advisers for exactly that. Indeed it’s precisely what Michelle Mone laughably attempted to do to Dan Neidle a few weeks ago.
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Worth noting a few things about Lee Anderson's comments:-
1. The suggestion that Khan is an Islamist or somehow in league with those organising the demos in London is absurd. There is no evidence of this. Anderson's basis for doing this is simply that Khan is a Muslim which is simple bigotry.
2. Worth noting that if you were to substitute the word "Jew" for "Muslim" in what he has been saying you'd get pretty close to some of the things that have been said online, in public by some of the attendees at the marches and on posters at the marches - the same suggestions of Jewish conspiracies/ control / being Nazis / even on one occasion a poster of a Jewish baby drinking Palestinian blood. This is pretty offensive, untrue and hateful. If we condemn one, we should be condemning the other. It is not either/or. Some people do however have difficulty doing this. They feel it necessary to turn a blind eye to what "their" side says.
3. The recent ET case involving a former lecturer at Bristol University, David Miller, said that his anti-Zionist views were protected as a "belief" under the Equality Act. What he says is pretty unpleasant but free speech is freedom to say unpleasant and offensive things. That does not simply apply to anti-Zionists. You could have a belief that tribal nationalism (eg being in favour of a Palestinian state) is as appalling as having a Jewish state and that too would, using the same legal arguments, be protected.
4. The better criticism should be aimed at the Met. There is a lot of talk about "hate" crimes, public order, not wanting to put vulnerable and marginalised communities in fear and, yet, it is indisputable that there has been a very significant rise in attacks on Jews and that many have found the endless marches frightening. But there has been little regard for this. For Jews to feel unsafe in the capital city of their home country in 2024 is pretty shocking. It does not reflect well on us as a country.
5. The cab rank rule does not apply to solicitors but only to the Bar. But attacking defence lawyers for doing their job is wrong. Doing their job does not mean they share the views of their clients.
Also a bit surprised that some commentators essentially criticise lawyers for specialising in their field. If I were a plaintiff or a defendant in a discrimination case I would want a solicitor and advocate/barrister familiar with discrimination legislation. Yet that is seen as illegitimate, it seems.
I don't see right-wing commentators complaining that their family solicitor and accountant specialise in tax, despite the many cases of dodgy firms trying to do HMRC out of their money illicitly, and in general the undoubted deleterious effect on the public finances of people getting out of paying tax unnecessarily.
To be fair people do criticise tax advisers for exactly that. Indeed it’s precisely what Michelle Mone laughably attempted to do to Dan Neidle a few weeks ago.
And, to be fair, we all laughed at her nonsense when she tried this.
The Tories shrinking base will like Anderson’s comments and I expect will also appeal to Reform.
Of course if this had been a Labour MP saying a mayor had been taken over by the Jewish lobby there would have been outrage and the right wing media would have gone into overdrive .
If you call out anti-Semitism but don’t call out Anderson’s comments then clearly the rules apply differently .
Yes, it's almost as if a lot of Tory MPs and media commentators who expressed such deep concern about anti-Semitism last week were actually only looking to score political points. Could you possibly imagine it?
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
This issue is next on the OECD’s agenda after the BEPS project with the aim of making things easier and more standardised.
Very few people permanently work from paradise but there’s a lot of working from holiday / extended family home going on. Best approach is to ease the rules a bit.
I’ve got western friends out here in indochina who are basically paying zero tax, and have been doing so for years
The Thai government doesn’t seem to care. As long as they don’t rely on local health care - and they don’t, they all go private - then Bangkok appears supremely relaxed
Some of them are decidedly left wing. I have to bite my tongue when they pontificate on awful Tories and terrible Brexit and the horrors of right wing governments, even as they collect rent on the properties they own in the UK. One of them flew back to the UK recently for some free NHS healthcare - he’s in a serious way (I feel genuinely sorry for him) so private care out would have been TOO expensive - however he is using the NHS despite not having paid a penny towards it for 20 years
I think the Post Office scandal has exposed the solicitor's main aims. Make money and bugger justice. Thirty years ago, when I worked in the pharmaceutical industry, we used to joke that we should experiment on Americam lawyers rather than laboratory rats.
There are more lawyers and people think more of the rats. The animals have more scruples too.
Oakeshott on the difficulties of getting the help out in the sticks.
"In my part of the Cotswolds, there is such a mismatch of supply and demand for domestic work that the going rate for a cleaner is at least £20 an hour."
Nanotechnology hasn't advanced far enough to produce a violin of the required size.
Perhaps the cleaners have a stupid desire to afford a place to live? In the Cotswolds, house prices have soared to hilarious levels, due to hardcore NIMBY/“Green” no-development pushes.
Or perhaps, like the Highlands/Wales/Lake District/Yorkshire Dales/Cornwall, the shortage is driven by rich people buying multiple houses and leaving them empty for most of the year:
Smashing second homes for council tax is a policy all PBers should be able to get behind. From this report, sounds like the Cotswolds could double housing supply if second homes were banned.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Haven't we been told that the people who could do that are going to be replaced by AI ?
Banks have been telling staff that they are restricted to working in other countries for tax and data law reasons for years.
Monitoring connections is standard. Trying to use a VPN to disguise location means that your connection gets cut off.
So my employer knows where I’m logging in from. And blocks locations that are outside policy.
This is all done with out of the box, commercial software on their end.
A friend just moved her small company to a hosted virtual machine setup - so the company “computers” are just software in a farm. You can connect to them with your own laptop or tablet. But all the information is on the servers. So you can’t work off line. This is the future of business working, I think. No company computers to get lost or stolen. Upgrades are automatic. The “machines” on the server are automatically backed up - no more losing work when a drive dies.
And on her dashboard, she has the option to detect and block logins from various countries, and VPN logins.
Wouldn’t surprise me to see HMRC enforcing compliance on tax rules - and using the data laws as an additional stick.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Haven't we been told that the people who could do that are going to be replaced by AI ?
Banks have been telling staff that they are restricted to working in other countries for tax and data law reasons for years.
Monitoring connections is standard. Trying to use a VPN to disguise location means that your connection gets cut off.
So my employer knows where I’m logging in from. And blocks locations that are outside policy.
This is all done with out of the box, commercial software on their end.
A friend just moved her small company to a hosted virtual machine setup - so the company “computers” are just software in a farm. You can connect to them with your own laptop or tablet. But all the information is on the servers. So you can’t work off line. This is the future of business working, I think. No company computers to get lost or stolen. Upgrades are automatic. The “machines” on the server are automatically backed up - no more losing work when a drive dies.
And on her dashboard, she has the option to detect and block logins from various countries, and VPN logins.
Wouldn’t surprise me to see HMRC enforcing compliance on tax rules - and using the data laws as an additional stick.
Sorry this is confusing
“Banks are telling staff they ARE restricted to working in other countries”?
They are telling their staff - go work in Malaga or Mongolia?
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Haven't we been told that the people who could do that are going to be replaced by AI ?
Banks have been telling staff that they are restricted to working in other countries for tax and data law reasons for years.
Monitoring connections is standard. Trying to use a VPN to disguise location means that your connection gets cut off.
So my employer knows where I’m logging in from. And blocks locations that are outside policy.
This is all done with out of the box, commercial software on their end.
A friend just moved her small company to a hosted virtual machine setup - so the company “computers” are just software in a farm. You can connect to them with your own laptop or tablet. But all the information is on the servers. So you can’t work off line. This is the future of business working, I think. No company computers to get lost or stolen. Upgrades are automatic. The “machines” on the server are automatically backed up - no more losing work when a drive dies.
And on her dashboard, she has the option to detect and block logins from various countries, and VPN logins.
Wouldn’t surprise me to see HMRC enforcing compliance on tax rules - and using the data laws as an additional stick.
Sorry this is confusing
“Banks are telling staff they ARE restricted to working in other countries”?
They are telling their staff - go work in Malaga or Mongolia?
Sorry - restricted to list(s) of countries they can
- login in from - Do significant amounts of work from
There are two lists. The second is a lot shorter. So checking the state of the batch for 60 seconds while on a skiing holiday is considered one thing. Doing 8 hours is another.
They monitor this to prove compliance with laws on tax and data.
If any PB-ers are considering “working from paradise” then I heartily recommend Cambodia
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
I don't quite understand. Before formally moving to Ireland we spent a lot of the pandemic years living here, and I worked here and did not tell HMRC, or the Irish Revenue Commissioners. Because I didn't tell anyone it meant that I still paid tax in the UK. Isn't that the perfect scenario for HMRC - that British tax-registered people earn and work abroad but still pay tax in Britain?
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
He is way, way too boring. All the genuine Islamists I’ve met have that hyped-on-bad-speed vibe.
One thing to note - there is a past history of lawyers seeking out the most controversial cases to defend. A deliberate flex on the everyone-has-the-right-to-representation.
There was a whole bunch of very left wing lawyers in France who sought out some really surprising cases, given their politics.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Yes but as some of us have also wondered on here, if you are working abroad when your employer thinks you are here, whose tax laws apply and whose employment laws apply?
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
I don't quite understand. Before formally moving to Ireland we spent a lot of the pandemic years living here, and I worked here and did not tell HMRC, or the Irish Revenue Commissioners. Because I didn't tell anyone it meant that I still paid tax in the UK. Isn't that the perfect scenario for HMRC - that British tax-registered people earn and work abroad but still pay tax in Britain?
Fair point. It is somewhat confusing
Let me read it again and see if I can glean the true import
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Still be good to look at the data, though!
Justified or not, it’s disputed by UK Polling Report.
They’re in fact incredibly bullish about SNP chances (much more than I am) in the next GE. Not sure about the methodology for their analysis but they certainly used to have a good reputation.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
No-one appears to have suggested Lee Anderson be arrested! Just that maybe lying and inflaming tensions means he should lose the whip.
Saying Khan is controlled by Islamists “who are his mates” based on zero, nothing, other than his faith, is Islamophobia. Khan is dull. He’s not an Islamist.
Except as a lawyer he strenuously defended Islamists
And he has family links to extremist Muslims
“The links of mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan’s former brother-in-law to one of the UK’s most notorious extremist organisations are revealed today. Top London lawyer Makbool Javaid was married to the Labour Party candidate’s sister Farhat Khan until 2011.”
I magine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes
Would you just laugh that off? Accuse people of being racist for mentioning it? Or would you say Hmmm, these things are worth noting?
Lawyers defend bad people shocker ! Who knew ! And now we’re onto someone who used to be married to Khan’s sister upto 2011.
Answer my point
“Imagine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes”
How would you react to that? Honestly?
Would you leap to the defence of the Tory mayor and say it is just coincidence, the cab rank rule, no one can choose their family members, or would you actually say Hold on, let’s look at this more closely
I submit it would be the second and I am correct
For the purposes of clarity it may well be that Khan is entirely free of any sympathies to Islamist causes, I am willing to be persuaded on that - I am close to people that know him and they are fairly favourable. However, he does not get a free pass, no more than a Tory would with similar associations on “the right”
You would have to at least connect the weak connections (ex-brother-in-law? I have an ex-brother-in-law - I have got no clue what he is up to, he could be the head of the klu klux klan's european branch for all I know), to some actual extreme actions/rhetoric/voting record by the politician in question.
Given that Khan has had death threats from islamists, and a fatwa issued against him, where is your evidence that he is himself any kind of islamist extremist?
There must be loads of politicians who have family connections at the level of ex-brother-in-law to extremists, and criminals but we don't tend to hear about many of them.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Thanks for the link - he sounds like a real arsehole with utterly abhorrent views, based on his own tweets. What have you got on Khan? So far you have produced nothing.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
Yes but as some of us have also wondered on here, if you are working abroad when your employer thinks you are here, whose tax laws apply and whose employment laws apply?
That will be fun for the lawyers.
HMRC will be on them like a hawk if they start helping you reduce your tax in the U.K., that’s for sure.
Way back when I worked for an oil company, people moving between the 90 different national level companies that made up the conglomerate was a big issue. For them and the tax authorities in all 90 countries.
Not moving between the companies and trying to completely offshore your tax situation was subject to lots of rulings and there was a bunch of admin related to that. Suffice it to say - complicated. And not ignored.
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
I don't quite understand. Before formally moving to Ireland we spent a lot of the pandemic years living here, and I worked here and did not tell HMRC, or the Irish Revenue Commissioners. Because I didn't tell anyone it meant that I still paid tax in the UK. Isn't that the perfect scenario for HMRC - that British tax-registered people earn and work abroad but still pay tax in Britain?
Fair point. It is somewhat confusing
Let me read it again and see if I can glean the true import
The story from a little while ago about the incentives Portugal created for remote workers to move to Portugal and pay a special low rate of tax for two years is more consequential than people pretending they don't exist for tax purposes, who will have a bit of a shock when they try to collect on a state pension, etc, later on.
If individuals can play the tax arbitrage game that many companies have played over the years then that will be a massive problem. I'm sure my UK-based employer has noticed the lower rate of employers PRSI in Ireland (8.8% & 11.05%) compared to employers National Insurance in Britain (13.8%).
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
I don't quite understand. Before formally moving to Ireland we spent a lot of the pandemic years living here, and I worked here and did not tell HMRC, or the Irish Revenue Commissioners. Because I didn't tell anyone it meant that I still paid tax in the UK. Isn't that the perfect scenario for HMRC - that British tax-registered people earn and work abroad but still pay tax in Britain?
Fair point. It is somewhat confusing
Let me read it again and see if I can glean the true import
Quarter of a century ago I'd lug my brick-heavy Powerbook 100 down to Barnes & Noble in Palm Beach at 7am to swop badinage with London clients. "What would Uncle Sam think, if only he know?" I mused. Heard a story about an American author driving to the South of France in the 1970s, pulled over by a gendarme. The back seat of her car resembled the aftermath of a hurricane in a library. "Qu'est-que c'est?" he asked menacingly, waving his revolver at the midden. "C'est mon travail," she replied, indignantly. "Ah ... travail ... Américaine ... avez-vous un permit de travail?"
Oakeshott on the difficulties of getting the help out in the sticks.
"In my part of the Cotswolds, there is such a mismatch of supply and demand for domestic work that the going rate for a cleaner is at least £20 an hour."
"The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) released figures showing that as of mid-February 2024, around 6 million Ukrainian war refugees were registered in Europe. The largest number were registered in Germany (1.13 million). This was followed by Poland (956,000), the Czech Republic (381,000), the UK (253,000), Spain (192,000), Italy (168,000) and the Netherlands (149,000).
In comparison to Germany, many countries offer less support to the Ukrainian refugees they are hosting. Poland, for instance, only provides financial assistance for the first three months. Afterward, the refugees must mostly support themselves. The Czech Republic offers the equivalent of €130 per month after the first five months, and the UK pays even less.
In both Poland and the Czech Republic, around two-thirds of Ukrainian refugees are currently working, and 50% are working in the UK –– compared to just 20% in Germany."
Others disagree:
"Sociologist Dietrich Thränhardt compiled these figures in November 2023 for a study commissioned by the SPD-affiliated Friedrich Ebert Foundation. However, Thränhardt does not believe that the refugees' low employment rate in Germany is due to the social benefits they receive.
He points to other European countries that are still supporting the refugees with financial assistance yet have high employment numbers. In Denmark, for example, some 78% of Ukrainian war refugees are employed; in Sweden and Norway, more than 50% have a job."
Some blame red tape, or difficulties learning German, or lack of childcare.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Thanks for the link - he sounds like a real arsehole with utterly abhorrent views, based on his own tweets. What have you got on Khan? So far you have produced nothing.
Two seconds of research produces this
“The Labour candidate for mayor of London was under pressure last night after it emerged that he complained to MPs about the demonisation of a hardline Islamic cleric.
Sadiq Khan objected to the treatment of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who had called for the destruction of Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.
Mr Khan, as chairman of legal affairs at the Muslim Council of Britain, gave evidence to the home affairs select committee’s inquiry into community relations in 2004 when he was a Labour councillor in the London borough of Wandsworth.
David Winnick, MP for Walsall North, asked him whether Britain should permit Dr al-Qaradawi to visit. The cleric, who was to meet Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, had been quoted saying: “Oh God, deal with your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh God, deal with the usurpers and oppressors and tyrannical Jews.”
Mr Khan responded: “There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that Mr al-Qaradawi is not the extremist he is painted as being by selective quotations from his remarks.”
This is nothing to do with “cab rank” (not that this applies to solicitors anyway). Khan CHOSE to act for the Muslim Council of Britain (a body the government now refuses to work with, by the way, because it’s its Islamist tendencies) and Khan CHOSE to speak out for Qarawadi
Qaradawi is this guy
He wants to implement Islamic law among the Muslim minority in Europe.
He has said: “women can be guilty of provoking a sexual attack if their dress or behaviour arouses a man”.
At the council’s 2003 conference, he published a fatwa supporting suicide bombing against coalition forces in Iraq as well as against Israelis.
A year later, he published another fatwa on IslamOnline in response to the mutilation of the bodies of security contractors in Iraq, in which he permitted such acts. Two weeks after the fatwa’s publication, the body of a Spanish officer, who was killed during a raid on a terrorist cell associated with the Madrid bombing, was disinterred and burned.
Al-Qaradawi does endorse violence against civilians used by terrorists in Iraq and by Hamas in Israel. At a 2005 conference of Islamic scholars in London, he said: “I think it that saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq is not enough”
Oakeshott on the difficulties of getting the help out in the sticks.
"In my part of the Cotswolds, there is such a mismatch of supply and demand for domestic work that the going rate for a cleaner is at least £20 an hour."
She should be extolling the virtues of an undoubted Brexit benefit. Wage rises for our plucky working classes thanks to the ending of free movement.
Of course, Brexit isn’t really about benefiting the working class, is it? It’s about screwing them more effectively.
She’s obviously not a fan of free markets.
When I lived in Wiltshire some of the incomers were very vocal about preventing the expansion of the Dyson factory. One actually said, out loud, that it would put up wages so it would cost more to get a gardener. And that the hated “locals” would be only ones to benefit.
A professional Tory hater, by the way. Hilariously, he used to bang on about why the UK was exporting manufacturing jobs.
If I ever accidentally get the money, I will go back an open a Thermal Depolymerisation plant next to his house. With duff filters.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
No-one appears to have suggested Lee Anderson be arrested! Just that maybe lying and inflaming tensions means he should lose the whip.
Saying Khan is controlled by Islamists “who are his mates” based on zero, nothing, other than his faith, is Islamophobia. Khan is dull. He’s not an Islamist.
Except as a lawyer he strenuously defended Islamists
And he has family links to extremist Muslims
“The links of mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan’s former brother-in-law to one of the UK’s most notorious extremist organisations are revealed today. Top London lawyer Makbool Javaid was married to the Labour Party candidate’s sister Farhat Khan until 2011.”
I magine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes
Would you just laugh that off? Accuse people of being racist for mentioning it? Or would you say Hmmm, these things are worth noting?
Lawyers defend bad people shocker ! Who knew ! And now we’re onto someone who used to be married to Khan’s sister upto 2011.
Answer my point
“Imagine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes”
How would you react to that? Honestly?
Would you leap to the defence of the Tory mayor and say it is just coincidence, the cab rank rule, no one can choose their family members, or would you actually say Hold on, let’s look at this more closely
I submit it would be the second and I am correct
For the purposes of clarity it may well be that Khan is entirely free of any sympathies to Islamist causes, I am willing to be persuaded on that - I am close to people that know him and they are fairly favourable. However, he does not get a free pass, no more than a Tory would with similar associations on “the right”
I think it's an iron rule that one doesn't judge people by their relatives (a brother-in-law FFS?). I've known people (including at least one on this site) who I like and respect who have far-right relatives. What are they supposed to do about it?
Basically it's one of those Lyndon Johnson dirty tricks - "I don't think X is a paedophile but I want to hear him have to deny it". Judge politicians by what they actually say and do in their political jobs - everything else is irrelevant.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
No-one appears to have suggested Lee Anderson be arrested! Just that maybe lying and inflaming tensions means he should lose the whip.
Saying Khan is controlled by Islamists “who are his mates” based on zero, nothing, other than his faith, is Islamophobia. Khan is dull. He’s not an Islamist.
Except as a lawyer he strenuously defended Islamists
And he has family links to extremist Muslims
“The links of mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan’s former brother-in-law to one of the UK’s most notorious extremist organisations are revealed today. Top London lawyer Makbool Javaid was married to the Labour Party candidate’s sister Farhat Khan until 2011.”
I magine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes
Would you just laugh that off? Accuse people of being racist for mentioning it? Or would you say Hmmm, these things are worth noting?
Lawyers defend bad people shocker ! Who knew ! And now we’re onto someone who used to be married to Khan’s sister upto 2011.
Answer my point
“Imagine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes”
How would you react to that? Honestly?
Would you leap to the defence of the Tory mayor and say it is just coincidence, the cab rank rule, no one can choose their family members, or would you actually say Hold on, let’s look at this more closely
I submit it would be the second and I am correct
For the purposes of clarity it may well be that Khan is entirely free of any sympathies to Islamist causes, I am willing to be persuaded on that - I am close to people that know him and they are fairly favourable. However, he does not get a free pass, no more than a Tory would with similar associations on “the right”
I think it's an iron rule that one doesn't judge people by their relatives (a brother-in-law FFS?). I've known people (including at least one on this site) who I like and respect who have far-right relatives. What are they supposed to do about it?
Basically it's one of those Lyndon Johnson dirty tricks - "I don't think X is a paedophile but I want to hear him have to deny it". Judge politicians by what they actually say and do in their political jobs - everything else is irrelevant.
I’ve just given you evidence of what Khan has DONE. He chose to be the legal dude for the Muslim Council of Britain. HMG has blacklisted the MCB because of its links to jihadism and Islamism
Khan CHOSE to speak up for this dude Qaradawi - he wasn’t simply defending him as some lawyerly duty. Khan went to Qaradawi’s aid against British “demonisation”. Qaradawi was extremely dubious and a self-confessed Islamist who wanted Sharia law, approved attacks on UK forces, and so on
There is, actually, tons of this stuff. Does PB really want me to go down this road? I can if you want, I advise against it
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Thanks for the link - he sounds like a real arsehole with utterly abhorrent views, based on his own tweets. What have you got on Khan? So far you have produced nothing.
Two seconds of research produces this
“The Labour candidate for mayor of London was under pressure last night after it emerged that he complained to MPs about the demonisation of a hardline Islamic cleric.
Sadiq Khan objected to the treatment of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who had called for the destruction of Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.
Mr Khan, as chairman of legal affairs at the Muslim Council of Britain, gave evidence to the home affairs select committee’s inquiry into community relations in 2004 when he was a Labour councillor in the London borough of Wandsworth.
David Winnick, MP for Walsall North, asked him whether Britain should permit Dr al-Qaradawi to visit. The cleric, who was to meet Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, had been quoted saying: “Oh God, deal with your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh God, deal with the usurpers and oppressors and tyrannical Jews.”
Mr Khan responded: “There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that Mr al-Qaradawi is not the extremist he is painted as being by selective quotations from his remarks.”
This is nothing to do with “cab rank” (not that this applies to solicitors anyway). Khan CHOSE to act for the Muslim Council of Britain (a body the government now refuses to work with, by the way, because it’s its Islamist tendencies) and Khan CHOSE to speak out for Qarawadi
Qaradawi is this guy
He wants to implement Islamic law among the Muslim minority in Europe.
He has said: “women can be guilty of provoking a sexual attack if their dress or behaviour arouses a man”.
At the council’s 2003 conference, he published a fatwa supporting suicide bombing against coalition forces in Iraq as well as against Israelis.
A year later, he published another fatwa on IslamOnline in response to the mutilation of the bodies of security contractors in Iraq, in which he permitted such acts. Two weeks after the fatwa’s publication, the body of a Spanish officer, who was killed during a raid on a terrorist cell associated with the Madrid bombing, was disinterred and burned.
Al-Qaradawi does endorse violence against civilians used by terrorists in Iraq and by Hamas in Israel. At a 2005 conference of Islamic scholars in London, he said: “I think it that saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq is not enough”
You've got one remark he made 20 years ago as a lawyer representing a client?
You are someone calling for a 'reformation of islam' yet when we've got an elected politician who happens to be muslim, who clearly believes in the compatibility of islam and secular democracy, who has repeatedly condemned islamist extremism and terrorism, and repeatedly condemned anti-semitism, and voted as an MP in favour of same-sex marriage, you want to raise 'legitimate questions' about whether he is secretly an islamist? He seems to be exactly what you say you want. You are either a total moron, or are actually a bigot.
If any PB-ers are considering “working from paradise” then I heartily recommend Cambodia
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Thanks for the link - he sounds like a real arsehole with utterly abhorrent views, based on his own tweets. What have you got on Khan? So far you have produced nothing.
Two seconds of research produces this
“The Labour candidate for mayor of London was under pressure last night after it emerged that he complained to MPs about the demonisation of a hardline Islamic cleric.
Sadiq Khan objected to the treatment of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who had called for the destruction of Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.
Mr Khan, as chairman of legal affairs at the Muslim Council of Britain, gave evidence to the home affairs select committee’s inquiry into community relations in 2004 when he was a Labour councillor in the London borough of Wandsworth.
David Winnick, MP for Walsall North, asked him whether Britain should permit Dr al-Qaradawi to visit. The cleric, who was to meet Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, had been quoted saying: “Oh God, deal with your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh God, deal with the usurpers and oppressors and tyrannical Jews.”
Mr Khan responded: “There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that Mr al-Qaradawi is not the extremist he is painted as being by selective quotations from his remarks.”
This is nothing to do with “cab rank” (not that this applies to solicitors anyway). Khan CHOSE to act for the Muslim Council of Britain (a body the government now refuses to work with, by the way, because it’s its Islamist tendencies) and Khan CHOSE to speak out for Qarawadi
Qaradawi is this guy
He wants to implement Islamic law among the Muslim minority in Europe.
He has said: “women can be guilty of provoking a sexual attack if their dress or behaviour arouses a man”.
At the council’s 2003 conference, he published a fatwa supporting suicide bombing against coalition forces in Iraq as well as against Israelis.
A year later, he published another fatwa on IslamOnline in response to the mutilation of the bodies of security contractors in Iraq, in which he permitted such acts. Two weeks after the fatwa’s publication, the body of a Spanish officer, who was killed during a raid on a terrorist cell associated with the Madrid bombing, was disinterred and burned.
Al-Qaradawi does endorse violence against civilians used by terrorists in Iraq and by Hamas in Israel. At a 2005 conference of Islamic scholars in London, he said: “I think it that saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq is not enough”
You've got one remark he made 20 years ago as a lawyer representing a client?
You are someone calling for a 'reformation of islam' yet when we've got an elected politician who happens to be muslim, who clearly believes in the compatibility of islam and secular democracy, who has repeatedly condemned islamist extremism and terrorism, and repeatedly condemned anti-semitism, and voted as an MP in favour of same-sex marriage, you want to raise 'legitimate questions' about whether he is secretly an islamist? He seems to be exactly what you say you want. You are either a total moron, or are actually a bigot.
In 2004 Sadiq Khan shared a stage with five Islamists, as part of the Friends of Al Aqsa
"Sadiq Khan shared a platform with five Islamic extremists at a political meeting where women were told to use a separate entrance, the Evening Standard can reveal.
Labour’s candidate for Mayor of London took part with an activist who has threatened “fire throughout the world”, a supporter of terror group Hamas, a preacher who backs an Islamic state and a Muslim leader accused of advocating attacks on the Royal Navy if it stopped arms being smuggled into Gaza"
"Mr Khan was billed on the list of speakers as Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Tooting, despite his insistence that he attended “as a human rights lawyer”."
One of the Islamic extremists was this guy, Ibrahim Hewitt:
"Another speaker was Ibrahim Hewitt, who wrote a notorious pamphlet that branded homosexuality a “great sin” and suggested adulterers should be “stoned to death”.
Mr Hewitt spoke as chair of Interpal, a charity that says it provides humanitarian and emergency aid to people in the Middle East. However, in 2003 Interpal was designated as a “global terrorist” organisation by the US Treasury which claimed it was “utilised to hide the flow of money to Hamas”."
"in 2007, both Sadiq Khan and Jeremy Corbyn were present at a tenth anniversary celebration of the Palestinian Return Centre (PRC), which is outlawed by the Israeli government.
Israel says the PRC is affiliated to Hamas and has been involved in 'initiating and organising radical and violent activity against Israel in Europe'. The year before the event Khan attended at the Novotel Hotel in Euston, the PRC hosted a conference in Sweden with a Hamas minister, Atef Adwan."
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
"On July 12, 2003, less than two years before he became an MP, Sadiq Khan attended a “First Captives Conference” in central London to discuss terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay.
The event was organised by the Islamic Observation Centre, run by a man called Yasser al-Siri, which has been described as “a public relations outfit for Islamic fundamentalist groups”.
Al-Siri, another of the meeting’s speakers, came to the UK in 1994 after he was sentenced to death in his absence in Egypt for plotting to kill a former prime minister in a car bomb attack that left a 12-year-old girl dead."
If any PB-ers are considering “working from paradise” then I heartily recommend Cambodia
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
"The growth is being driven by the passing of the property-rich baby boomer generation, which has increased the financial stakes for descendants; increases in second marriages leading to stepchildren being disinherited; and a rise in dementia leading to more claims that wills were not properly drawn up. [...]
The execution of wills by video link during the Covid pandemic could also be leading to greater challenges, lawyers said. They also cited the cost of living crisis as driving children to risk challenges simply because they need the money."
I hadn't realised how eye-watering some of the legal costs can be. But equally the importance of writing the blasted thing properly in the first place. And having a lawyer do it who can attest if need be that one is capax/compos mentis.
I am involved in a case, which involves three interlocking estates, and is finally coming to an end. The three estates are worth £10 m between them, and there are five firms of solicitors who are involved. Total costs to date are about £2m. And, it's all because bone-headed beneficiaries refuse to settle, and bone-headed personal represenatives won't do their jobs.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Still be good to look at the data, though!
Justified or not, it’s disputed by UK Polling Report.
They’re in fact incredibly bullish about SNP chances (much more than I am) in the next GE. Not sure about the methodology for their analysis but they certainly used to have a good reputation.
Indeed, which is precisely why I wanted to see the BBS analysis. Of course "independents" who are really Tory tulchan calves complicate the analysis still more, at least in the previous council election or two (as one of us remarked the other day), so ditto.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
It seems to me that there is a concerted effort by people on the right to delegitimise any Muslim who becomes involved in politics. Now that they don't have the EU to blame for everything, they're going after the enemy within. It's really quite scary.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
I did warn you not to ask for this stuff. But you did (and there is plenty more I could adduce, if you foolishly insist)
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
The flip side to that notion can be applied to the Labour Party who conflate Benjamin Netanyahu's policy in Gaza with Luciana Berger.
I believe any terms of reference for "disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea such as Islam" (or indeed Judaism or Christianity- and the various flavours thereof) should be carefully considered. Anyway, why would you want to "disrespect" anyone's faith? You may have already tied yourself up in knots there Morris.
People should be allowed to have their own opinion , but they should not be allowed to push it on other people or threaten them in the streets , stop people going about their business or commit real crimes about it. In this country it seems you can abuse anything except Islam and Islamists who can do and say what they like with impunity. Police standby scared to say boo and they are allowed to blockade any street, business, school etc they like. Unless that is just a media apparition it does seem a bit off, best not to be a Jew or Christian in Britain any longer. People can interpret that how they like.
Morning Malc,
Sounds like you're at odds with the SNP over this one?
If any PB-ers are considering “working from paradise” then I heartily recommend Cambodia
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
Go South East, young man!
They're not expats. They're immigrants.
Hopefully Cambodia will adopt a strict anti immigrant policy of the sort advocated by, er, Leon.
"The growth is being driven by the passing of the property-rich baby boomer generation, which has increased the financial stakes for descendants; increases in second marriages leading to stepchildren being disinherited; and a rise in dementia leading to more claims that wills were not properly drawn up. [...]
The execution of wills by video link during the Covid pandemic could also be leading to greater challenges, lawyers said. They also cited the cost of living crisis as driving children to risk challenges simply because they need the money."
I hadn't realised how eye-watering some of the legal costs can be. But equally the importance of writing the blasted thing properly in the first place. And having a lawyer do it who can attest if need be that one is capax/compos mentis.
I am involved in a case, which involves three interlocking estates, and is finally coming to an end. The three estates are worth £10 m between them, and there are five firms of solicitors who are involved. Total costs to date are about £2m. And, it's all because bone-headed beneficiaries refuse to settle, and bone-headed personal represenatives won't do their jobs.
Indeed! A few years back I was one of a number of beneficiaries of an elderly relative. It was clear that the (professional) executors had messed up in their accounts and that they had either left one item out or underestimated it - the accounts were that shaky. I really don't think they were malicious, just sloppy - there were other examples of their incompetence, beginning with the refusal to let me see an actual copy of the will before disbursement, despite the fact that I had been tasked with organising the funeral service and interment to meet the deceased's unusual wishes (easily solved at the cost of an order from the Probate Registry - but otherwise I'd have put the relative in the wrong place ...). However, I mentally compared the amount in question (low thousands) with the likely costs of the lawyers arguing it - all of which would end up against the estate. No question: as I said to the other beneficiaries, it wasn't worth the dispute.
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
I did warn you not to ask for this stuff. But you did (and there is plenty more I could adduce, if you foolishly insist)
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Yes, if you have a single example from Khan of islamist rhetoric please share it! You've obviously spent some time trying to find something and it seems you've come up with nothing. Like I said, you should be over the moon about muslims engaging with democracy, supporting human rights for gay people, condemning anti-semitism and so on. Weird that you aren't. Unless, of course, you are full of shit.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
I did warn you not to ask for this stuff. But you did (and there is plenty more I could adduce, if you foolishly insist)
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Two things.
First is that a lot of it does seem to be from quite a while ago. How many of us want to be judged from the things we said or the company we kept two decades ago? I hear that there are people who give themselves a whole new name to put distance between their present and past selves.
More importantly, there's an awfully big jump from "questions to answer about his past" to "Islamists had 'got control' of Mr Khan and he had "given our capital city away to his mates'."
Maybe it's just that Anderson is too dim not to say the quiet part out loud.
If any PB-ers are considering “working from paradise” then I heartily recommend Cambodia
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
Go South East, young man!
They're not expats. They're immigrants.
Hopefully Cambodia will adopt a strict anti immigrant policy of the sort advocated by, er, Leon.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
I did warn you not to ask for this stuff. But you did (and there is plenty more I could adduce, if you foolishly insist)
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Two things.
First is that a lot of it does seem to be from quite a while ago. How many of us want to be judged from the things we said or the company we kept two decades ago? I hear that there are people who give themselves a whole new name to put distance between their present and past selves.
More importantly, there's an awfully big jump from "questions to answer about his past" to "Islamists had 'got control' of Mr Khan and he had "given our capital city away to his mates'."
Maybe it's just that Anderson is too dim not to say the quiet part out loud.
Too honest perhaps. I have a certain regard for bastards who are honest bastards. Still bad people, but they don't fuck with your head whilst they are doing it.
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
It seems to me that there is a concerted effort by people on the right to delegitimise any Muslim who becomes involved in politics. Now that they don't have the EU to blame for everything, they're going after the enemy within. It's really quite scary.
No, there is a long, ongoing attempt to shut down any criticism of any Muslim politician (or public figure) by wheeling out the boo-word "Islamophobia", in the hope that the critics will shut up, because they are scared of being seen as racist
Exactly as Chris Hitchens predicted
Now I have provided tons of evidence that Khan has a long history of associations with Islamists and jihadists - not just defending them as a lawyer by choice, but sharing platforms with them, speaking at events with them, writing to the government in defence of them, all of this voluntary - not his job. There is lots more evidence I could provide but my point is surely made
I am quite prepared to believe Khan regrets all this, and has honestly moved on, but - as @williamglenn notes - if this was a Tory with a long history of associations with neo-Nazi activists and terrorists there is no way the Left would simply let it go because "guilt by association" is "wrong"
By my rough calculation its now paying way below minimum wage.
My wife earns at least £50 a year doing them. What are you moaning about?
I would happily do surveys for free if they were just of political matters without having to wade through pages of guff asking what I think of different dishwasher brands*. I gave up YouGov years ago for that reason.
(*Yes I appreciate that’s the whole point of polling companies’ business model).
Yougov usually puts the VI question at the end of a long series of Q's on consumer topics specifically to avoid its polls being distorted by way too many people who are political and look out for political polls
"The growth is being driven by the passing of the property-rich baby boomer generation, which has increased the financial stakes for descendants; increases in second marriages leading to stepchildren being disinherited; and a rise in dementia leading to more claims that wills were not properly drawn up. [...]
The execution of wills by video link during the Covid pandemic could also be leading to greater challenges, lawyers said. They also cited the cost of living crisis as driving children to risk challenges simply because they need the money."
I hadn't realised how eye-watering some of the legal costs can be. But equally the importance of writing the blasted thing properly in the first place. And having a lawyer do it who can attest if need be that one is capax/compos mentis.
I am involved in a case, which involves three interlocking estates, and is finally coming to an end. The three estates are worth £10 m between them, and there are five firms of solicitors who are involved. Total costs to date are about £2m. And, it's all because bone-headed beneficiaries refuse to settle, and bone-headed personal represenatives won't do their jobs.
Indeed! A few years back I was one of a number of beneficiaries of an elderly relative. It was clear that the (professional) executors had messed up in their accounts and that they had either left one item out or underestimated it - the accounts were that shaky. I really don't think they were malicious, just sloppy - there were other examples of their incompetence, beginning with the refusal to let me see an actual copy of the will before disbursement, despite the fact that I had been tasked with organising the funeral service and interment to meet the deceased's unusual wishes (easily solved at the cost of an order from the Probate Registry - but otherwise I'd have put the relative in the wrong place ...). However, I mentally compared the amount in question (low thousands) with the likely costs of the lawyers arguing it - all of which would end up against the estate. No question: as I said to the other beneficiaries, it wasn't worth the dispute.
In the time it takes to lose a bequest to lawyers fees you could read Bleak House and catch up on how Jarndyce v Jarndyce is getting on.
(Somewhere in his writings Jerome K Jerome comments that if someone tried to rob him of his watch in the street he would resist and fight back, but if someone walked up and said he was going to issue a writ for the recovery of the watch he would immediately hand it over.)
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
If they themselves condemn neo-nazis, haven't said anything neo-nazi themselves, and have distanced themselves from people they once shared stages with, then yes the same points would be equally valid, of course.
"The growth is being driven by the passing of the property-rich baby boomer generation, which has increased the financial stakes for descendants; increases in second marriages leading to stepchildren being disinherited; and a rise in dementia leading to more claims that wills were not properly drawn up. [...]
The execution of wills by video link during the Covid pandemic could also be leading to greater challenges, lawyers said. They also cited the cost of living crisis as driving children to risk challenges simply because they need the money."
I hadn't realised how eye-watering some of the legal costs can be. But equally the importance of writing the blasted thing properly in the first place. And having a lawyer do it who can attest if need be that one is capax/compos mentis.
I am involved in a case, which involves three interlocking estates, and is finally coming to an end. The three estates are worth £10 m between them, and there are five firms of solicitors who are involved. Total costs to date are about £2m. And, it's all because bone-headed beneficiaries refuse to settle, and bone-headed personal represenatives won't do their jobs.
Indeed! A few years back I was one of a number of beneficiaries of an elderly relative. It was clear that the (professional) executors had messed up in their accounts and that they had either left one item out or underestimated it - the accounts were that shaky. I really don't think they were malicious, just sloppy - there were other examples of their incompetence, beginning with the refusal to let me see an actual copy of the will before disbursement, despite the fact that I had been tasked with organising the funeral service and interment to meet the deceased's unusual wishes (easily solved at the cost of an order from the Probate Registry - but otherwise I'd have put the relative in the wrong place ...). However, I mentally compared the amount in question (low thousands) with the likely costs of the lawyers arguing it - all of which would end up against the estate. No question: as I said to the other beneficiaries, it wasn't worth the dispute.
In the time it takes to lose a bequest to lawyers fees you could read Bleak House and catch up on how Jarndyce v Jarndyce is getting on.
(Somewhere in his writings Jerome K Jerome comments that if someone tried to rob him of his watch in the street he would resist and fight back, but if someone walked up and said he was going to issue a writ for the recovery of the watch he would immediately hand it over.)
That was indeed the other issue - time. They had taken years (it was pre-covid) and there were critical tax deadlines coming up. Which made the calculation even easier.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
"Before and after he became an MP, [Sadiq Khan] knowingly shared speaking platforms with some highly questionable figures, including attending at least four meetings organised by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by a man dubbed the 'Bin Laden of the internet'.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
I did warn you not to ask for this stuff. But you did (and there is plenty more I could adduce, if you foolishly insist)
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Two things.
First is that a lot of it does seem to be from quite a while ago. How many of us want to be judged from the things we said or the company we kept two decades ago? I hear that there are people who give themselves a whole new name to put distance between their present and past selves.
More importantly, there's an awfully big jump from "questions to answer about his past" to "Islamists had 'got control' of Mr Khan and he had "given our capital city away to his mates'."
Maybe it's just that Anderson is too dim not to say the quiet part out loud.
On your first point, and leaving aside the Leon factor, in 2008 Sadiq Khan was already a senior Labour politician - he was an Undersecretary of State in 2008 in the Brown Government. and nearly 40 years old.
So, I don't think "a long time ago" works as a reason / excuse here.
Having said that, no matter what you think of Mr Khan his opponents for Mayor of London are complete fruit-loops, and were I London I would be voting Khan.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
Or original nazis. Like Pope Benedict.
Weirdly just looked up the difference between a neo-nazi and a good old fashioned full on nazi. Apparently the difference is a nazi has to be rooted in specifically Germanic supremacy rather than just racial supremacy.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
No-one appears to have suggested Lee Anderson be arrested! Just that maybe lying and inflaming tensions means he should lose the whip.
Saying Khan is controlled by Islamists “who are his mates” based on zero, nothing, other than his faith, is Islamophobia. Khan is dull. He’s not an Islamist.
Except as a lawyer he strenuously defended Islamists
And he has family links to extremist Muslims
“The links of mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan’s former brother-in-law to one of the UK’s most notorious extremist organisations are revealed today. Top London lawyer Makbool Javaid was married to the Labour Party candidate’s sister Farhat Khan until 2011.”
I magine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes
Would you just laugh that off? Accuse people of being racist for mentioning it? Or would you say Hmmm, these things are worth noting?
Lawyers defend bad people shocker ! Who knew ! And now we’re onto someone who used to be married to Khan’s sister upto 2011.
Answer my point
“Imagine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes”
How would you react to that? Honestly?
Would you leap to the defence of the Tory mayor and say it is just coincidence, the cab rank rule, no one can choose their family members, or would you actually say Hold on, let’s look at this more closely
I submit it would be the second and I am correct
For the purposes of clarity it may well be that Khan is entirely free of any sympathies to Islamist causes, I am willing to be persuaded on that - I am close to people that know him and they are fairly favourable. However, he does not get a free pass, no more than a Tory would with similar associations on “the right”
I think it's an iron rule that one doesn't judge people by their relatives (a brother-in-law FFS?). I've known people (including at least one on this site) who I like and respect who have far-right relatives. What are they supposed to do about it?
Basically it's one of those Lyndon Johnson dirty tricks - "I don't think X is a paedophile but I want to hear him have to deny it". Judge politicians by what they actually say and do in their political jobs - everything else is irrelevant.
Obviously the Hitchens brothers and the Corbyn brothers are examples of genes not determining politics.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
Or original nazis. Like Pope Benedict.
Hmmm compulsory drafting into a Youth Organisation at the age of iirc 14 makes him a Nazi?
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
Or original nazis. Like Pope Benedict.
Hmmm compulsory drafting into a Youth Organisation at the age of iirc 14 makes him a Nazi?
Nope.
Sorry, i wasn't being clear. I was saying that he had past associations with nazis, not that he was one himself.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
Or original nazis. Like Pope Benedict.
Point of order - he was conscripted into the Hitler Youth and then the army. He was not a member of the Nazi party - in fact his family was noted as being anti-regime.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
No-one appears to have suggested Lee Anderson be arrested! Just that maybe lying and inflaming tensions means he should lose the whip.
Saying Khan is controlled by Islamists “who are his mates” based on zero, nothing, other than his faith, is Islamophobia. Khan is dull. He’s not an Islamist.
Except as a lawyer he strenuously defended Islamists
And he has family links to extremist Muslims
“The links of mayoral hopeful Sadiq Khan’s former brother-in-law to one of the UK’s most notorious extremist organisations are revealed today. Top London lawyer Makbool Javaid was married to the Labour Party candidate’s sister Farhat Khan until 2011.”
I magine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes
Would you just laugh that off? Accuse people of being racist for mentioning it? Or would you say Hmmm, these things are worth noting?
Lawyers defend bad people shocker ! Who knew ! And now we’re onto someone who used to be married to Khan’s sister upto 2011.
Answer my point
“Imagine if a Tory London mayor was an ex lawyer known for defending the human rights of Nazis in court. Imagine if it was then revealed that his brother in law is a Nazi involved in far right causes”
How would you react to that? Honestly?
Would you leap to the defence of the Tory mayor and say it is just coincidence, the cab rank rule, no one can choose their family members, or would you actually say Hold on, let’s look at this more closely
I submit it would be the second and I am correct
For the purposes of clarity it may well be that Khan is entirely free of any sympathies to Islamist causes, I am willing to be persuaded on that - I am close to people that know him and they are fairly favourable. However, he does not get a free pass, no more than a Tory would with similar associations on “the right”
I think it's an iron rule that one doesn't judge people by their relatives (a brother-in-law FFS?). I've known people (including at least one on this site) who I like and respect who have far-right relatives. What are they supposed to do about it?
Basically it's one of those Lyndon Johnson dirty tricks - "I don't think X is a paedophile but I want to hear him have to deny it". Judge politicians by what they actually say and do in their political jobs - everything else is irrelevant.
Obviously the Hitchens brothers and the Corbyn brothers are examples of genes not determining politics.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
If they themselves condemn neo-nazis, haven't said anything neo-nazi themselves, and have distanced themselves from people they once shared stages with, then yes the same points would be equally valid, of course.
Why do you ask? Do you have someone in mind?
Yes, you often hear this rhetoric of forgiveness from the Left
"Look, OK, this Tory mayoral candidate Herman Berlin has defended neo-Nazis in court. Including murderers. And yes OK his onetime brother in law is an actual Nazi. And yes OK in 2003 he shared a platform with multiple neo Nazis. And yes OK he did that again in 2004. Twice. And yes alright in 2005 he shared a platform five times with known neo-Nazis. And sure, alright, he did that again - attend rallies and speak alongside neo Nazis - in 2006, and 2007. And yes OK Mr Berlin also wrote to the government to say neoNazi Nick Griffin was actully a fine person who has been traduced and they should stop persecuting him. And yes OK Mister Berlin voluntarily became the legal representative for neoNazi group Britain First. But all this was ages ago and now he says he's sorry so it's totally fine"
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Still be good to look at the data, though!
Justified or not, it’s disputed by UK Polling Report.
They’re in fact incredibly bullish about SNP chances (much more than I am) in the next GE. Not sure about the methodology for their analysis but they certainly used to have a good reputation.
Dumfries and Galloway was Labour until 2015 so Labour would also fancy their chances.
Of course even if the SNP won every remaining Scottish Tory seat, which they won't, that would be more than outweighed by the projected SNP seats that will be lost to Scottish Labour on current Scotland only polls
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
Or original nazis. Like Pope Benedict.
Hmmm compulsory drafting into a Youth Organisation at the age of iirc 14 makes him a Nazi?
Nope.
Sorry, i wasn't being clear. I was saying that he had past associations with nazis, not that he was one himself.
Thanks for the clarification.
OT on this subject -ish, listening to the very good Telegraph interview with Archbishop Welby last weekend, he cited the theologian Jurgen Moltmann, who is now 97, and was also drafted into an anti-aircraft unit.
In Moltmann's case he was on the receiving end of the Hamburg bombings.
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
So... remember how the IM1 lunar lander had some sensors fail in space?
Allegedly, the reason is that before launch, they forgot to take the "Remove Before Launch" cover off the sensor...
If true, rather embarrassing. The lander landed safely, but toppled over for some reason.
Because of the Moon’s lower gravity, tipping over due to a landing bounce is easier. I’ll try and dig out the YouTube that demonstrated this…
Lots of potential causes, including cavities caused by the exhaust plume.
Doubtful it’s an excavtion problem - LEMs, Surveyors and some Russian landers show that the erosion from more substantial landing engines isn’t that great.
Being bigoted against someone because they're Muslim is wretched. Disliking, questioning, or disrespecting an idea, such as Islam, is something that should be legally protected in a free society.
Quite, but Anderson's comments - attacking Khan simply because he is a Muslim - are very much in the former category.
Khan as a lawyer defended some really dodgy Muslim causes. He has admitted it
“Among those he has defended were Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam, when he tried unsuccessfully to visit the UK.
He also campaigned to prevent the extradition to the US of Babar Ahmed who later pleaded guilty to terrorist offences.”
Why did he choose those cases? And not others? These are legitimate questions
Do you think Khan is an islamist?
I honestly do not know, so any answer of mine will be a guess. FWIW my guess is No, he isn’t, but he has clear associations with people who really ARE Islamist, and it is legitimate to interrogate them
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
Thanks for the link - he sounds like a real arsehole with utterly abhorrent views, based on his own tweets. What have you got on Khan? So far you have produced nothing.
Two seconds of research produces this
“The Labour candidate for mayor of London was under pressure last night after it emerged that he complained to MPs about the demonisation of a hardline Islamic cleric.
Sadiq Khan objected to the treatment of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who had called for the destruction of Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.
Mr Khan, as chairman of legal affairs at the Muslim Council of Britain, gave evidence to the home affairs select committee’s inquiry into community relations in 2004 when he was a Labour councillor in the London borough of Wandsworth.
David Winnick, MP for Walsall North, asked him whether Britain should permit Dr al-Qaradawi to visit. The cleric, who was to meet Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, had been quoted saying: “Oh God, deal with your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh God, deal with the usurpers and oppressors and tyrannical Jews.”
Mr Khan responded: “There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that Mr al-Qaradawi is not the extremist he is painted as being by selective quotations from his remarks.”
This is nothing to do with “cab rank” (not that this applies to solicitors anyway). Khan CHOSE to act for the Muslim Council of Britain (a body the government now refuses to work with, by the way, because it’s its Islamist tendencies) and Khan CHOSE to speak out for Qarawadi
Qaradawi is this guy
He wants to implement Islamic law among the Muslim minority in Europe.
He has said: “women can be guilty of provoking a sexual attack if their dress or behaviour arouses a man”.
At the council’s 2003 conference, he published a fatwa supporting suicide bombing against coalition forces in Iraq as well as against Israelis.
A year later, he published another fatwa on IslamOnline in response to the mutilation of the bodies of security contractors in Iraq, in which he permitted such acts. Two weeks after the fatwa’s publication, the body of a Spanish officer, who was killed during a raid on a terrorist cell associated with the Madrid bombing, was disinterred and burned.
Al-Qaradawi does endorse violence against civilians used by terrorists in Iraq and by Hamas in Israel. At a 2005 conference of Islamic scholars in London, he said: “I think it that saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq is not enough”
You've got one remark he made 20 years ago as a lawyer representing a client?
You are someone calling for a 'reformation of islam' yet when we've got an elected politician who happens to be muslim, who clearly believes in the compatibility of islam and secular democracy, who has repeatedly condemned islamist extremism and terrorism, and repeatedly condemned anti-semitism, and voted as an MP in favour of same-sex marriage, you want to raise 'legitimate questions' about whether he is secretly an islamist? He seems to be exactly what you say you want. You are either a total moron, or are actually a bigot.
By my rough calculation its now paying way below minimum wage.
My wife earns at least £50 a year doing them. What are you moaning about?
I would happily do surveys for free if they were just of political matters without having to wade through pages of guff asking what I think of different dishwasher brands*. I gave up YouGov years ago for that reason.
(*Yes I appreciate that’s the whole point of polling companies’ business model).
Yougov usually puts the VI question at the end of a long series of Q's on consumer topics specifically to avoid its polls being distorted by way too many people who are political and look out for political polls
Sometimes they do. Mostly they don’t even ask the VI question, because they make their money primarily as a consumer research company.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
If they themselves condemn neo-nazis, haven't said anything neo-nazi themselves, and have distanced themselves from people they once shared stages with, then yes the same points would be equally valid, of course.
Why do you ask? Do you have someone in mind?
Yes, you often hear this rhetoric of forgiveness from the Left
"Look, OK, this Tory mayoral candidate Herman Berlin has defended neo-Nazis in court. Including murderers. And yes OK his onetime brother in law is an actual Nazi. And yes OK in 2003 he shared a platform with multiple neo Nazis. And yes OK he did that again in 2004. Twice. And yes alright in 2005 he shared a platform five times with known neo-Nazis. And sure, alright, he did that again - attend rallies and speak alongside neo Nazis - in 2006, and 2007. And yes OK Mr Berlin also wrote to the government to say neoNazi Nick Griffin was actully a fine person who has been traduced and they should stop persecuting him. And yes OK Mister Berlin voluntarily became the legal representative for neoNazi group Britain First. But all this was ages ago and now he says he's sorry so it's totally fine"
That's a typical speech you commonly hear
OK.
Name three of these alleged Herman Berlins.
Not the lefty defences- but the incidents where the allegations were made.
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
In practice it seems to have stopped it. I think Trump only ever comes out for Trump, and the IVF is incidental. See his very varied positions on abortion which change tactically, and I wonder how many abortions he has funded personally due to his affairs?
However aiui the Court decision is dependent on Dobbs vs Jackson (the one that overturned Roe vs Wade).
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
Er, missing the point. The new law makes IVF clinics much more difficult to manage. The eggs have to be kept forever, and the director could be had up for the local equivalent of murder or manslaughter if the power went off on the deep freeze. Who's going to provide insurance?
Scottish polling will be interesting post last week and it was also interesting just how well the conservatives did in Jedburgh taking a seat off the SNP
However, catching up on this and the last thread, the increasingly divisive nature of our politics is very troubling and is being influenced by the middle east conflict
Both antisemitism and islamaphobia are wrong but the activities in and outside Westminster this week have shamed everyone and I really do fear that the next election may well be dominated by this division with untold consequences
The genie seems to be out of the bottle and there seems no way to put him back
Very worrying and troubling days
Didn't really take it off the SNP - you're implicitly comparing an IIRC third on the slate seat with a first on the slate, so seats alone isn't enough. We needf to drill down deeper, but Ballot Box Scotland hasn't yet reported - I've just looked.
I do not think it is in dispute that the SNP are going to do very poorly across the border regions at the next GE
Still be good to look at the data, though!
Justified or not, it’s disputed by UK Polling Report.
They’re in fact incredibly bullish about SNP chances (much more than I am) in the next GE. Not sure about the methodology for their analysis but they certainly used to have a good reputation.
Dumfries and Galloway was Labour until 2015 so Labour would also fancy their chances.
Of course even if the SNP won every remaining Scottish Tory seat, which they won't, that would be more than outweighed by the projected SNP seats that will be lost to Scottish Labour on current Scotland only polls
That may well be the case but I'm interested in why an operation that's in the business of analytical prediction is outside the norm.
Have you got anything apart from guilt by association? Any islamist rhetoric from Khan himself?
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Would you make the same points about someone with past associations with neo-nazis?
If they themselves condemn neo-nazis, haven't said anything neo-nazi themselves, and have distanced themselves from people they once shared stages with, then yes the same points would be equally valid, of course.
Why do you ask? Do you have someone in mind?
Yes, you often hear this rhetoric of forgiveness from the Left
"Look, OK, this Tory mayoral candidate Herman Berlin has defended neo-Nazis in court. Including murderers. And yes OK his onetime brother in law is an actual Nazi. And yes OK in 2003 he shared a platform with multiple neo Nazis. And yes OK he did that again in 2004. Twice. And yes alright in 2005 he shared a platform five times with known neo-Nazis. And sure, alright, he did that again - attend rallies and speak alongside neo Nazis - in 2006, and 2007. And yes OK Mr Berlin also wrote to the government to say neoNazi Nick Griffin was actully a fine person who has been traduced and they should stop persecuting him. And yes OK Mister Berlin voluntarily became the legal representative for neoNazi group Britain First. But all this was ages ago and now he says he's sorry so it's totally fine"
That's a typical speech you commonly hear
OK.
Name three of these alleged Herman Berlins.
Not the lefty defences- but the incidents where the allegations were made.
I've already given one. Paul Marshall the owner of GB News
He has been accused by the Left (in the form of Hope not Hate) of using an anoymous Twitter account to retweet some stridently anti-immigrant rhetoric (but nothing illegal, as far as I can see)
They couldn't even find original tweets, just retweets. That's it. And on this basis (infinitely flimsier than all the years of stuff I've presented re Khan) they say he is not fit to own British media, he should be hounded out of public life, etc etc
"Sir Paul Marshall, GB News co-owner and would-be Telegraph owner, has been ‘liking’ and spreading some pretty vile things on @x This casts a different light on his desire to be a mini-Murdoch. My column."
Comments
That makes her a bit more interesting than the likes of Owen Jones or Katie Hopkins.
https://www.ft.com/content/13fded41-7f7c-4c11-9c63-995bef9f06b6
I think this is going to be a major new problem for advanced high tax countries, especially ones with horrible rainswept winters, shitty dentistry, sluggish or zero growth, growing “cultural” problems and a plethora of ugly red brick semi detached houses making everyone depressed
Why work there when you can literally phone it in from a beach in south east Asia? I believe someone wrote about this, presciently, in the Spectator
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-work-from-home-when-you-can-work-from-paradise/
We could see the UK’s tax base collapse
Very few people permanently work from paradise but there’s a lot of working from holiday / extended family home going on. Best approach is to ease the rules a bit.
I don't see right-wing commentators complaining that their family solicitor and accountant specialise in tax, despite the many cases of dodgy firms trying to do HMRC out of their money illicitly, and in general the undoubted deleterious effect on the public finances of people getting out of paying tax unnecessarily.
His interview certainly fails the edit:replace x with the word “Jew” test.
“Because you've never heard of the cab rank rule?
For somebody who bangs about his intelligence and knowledge, you are remarkably lacking in so many areas.”
So you’re saying @TheScreamingEagles is wrong? The cab rank rule does NOT apply here? Khan chose these cases?
The Thai government doesn’t seem to care. As long as they don’t rely on local health care - and they don’t, they all go private - then Bangkok appears supremely relaxed
Some of them are decidedly left wing. I have to bite my tongue when they pontificate on awful Tories and terrible Brexit and the horrors of right wing governments, even as they collect rent on the properties they own in the UK. One of them flew back to the UK recently for some free NHS healthcare - he’s in a serious way (I feel genuinely sorry for him) so private care out would have been TOO expensive - however he is using the NHS despite not having paid a penny towards it for 20 years
This model does not seem sustainable, to me
There are more lawyers and people think more of the rats. The animals have more scruples too.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c88nnn3v3qwo
Smashing second homes for council tax is a policy all PBers should be able to get behind. From this report, sounds like the Cotswolds could double housing supply if second homes were banned.
Monitoring connections is standard. Trying to use a VPN to disguise location means that your connection gets cut off.
So my employer knows where I’m logging in from. And blocks locations that are outside policy.
This is all done with out of the box, commercial software on their end.
A friend just moved her small company to a hosted virtual machine setup - so the company “computers” are just software in a farm. You can connect to them with your own laptop or tablet. But all the information is on the servers. So you can’t work off line. This is the future of business working, I think. No company computers to get lost or stolen. Upgrades are automatic. The “machines” on the server are automatically backed up - no more losing work when a drive dies.
And on her dashboard, she has the option to detect and block logins from various countries, and VPN logins.
Wouldn’t surprise me to see HMRC enforcing compliance on tax rules - and using the data laws as an additional stick.
“Banks are telling staff they ARE restricted to working in other countries”?
They are telling their staff - go work in Malaga or Mongolia?
“Armitage seems to be setting up a run on an AI that belongs to Tessier-Ashpool. The mainframe's in Berne, but it's linked with another one in Rio…..
`It own itself?'
`Swiss citizen, but T-A own the basic software and the mainframe.'
`That's a good one,' the construct said. `Like, I own your brain and what you know, but your thoughts have Swiss citizenship. Sure. Lotsa luck, AI.'”
- login in from
- Do significant amounts of work from
There are two lists. The second is a lot shorter. So checking the state of the batch for 60 seconds while on a skiing holiday is considered one thing. Doing 8 hours is another.
They monitor this to prove compliance with laws on tax and data.
It has everything. Superb food, agreeable people, very little crime, a benign climate, relative stability, and everything is insanely cheap. On an average UK income - £30k a year - you will live like a 1%-er.. Prices are about 25% what they are in the UK, so that £30k will = £120k
Infrastructure is now much better, PP is just 50 minutes from Bangkok or Saigon. Gleaming shopping malls have appeared. The government is very relaxed about expats, you could come and go for years and I doubt they’d bother you, just renew your tourist visa every month with a weekend in Bangers
And there is a growing and quite bohemian expat community, probably more interesting than the boozers of Bangkok. Quite a few arty types, writers, academics, etc
Go South East, young man!
One thing to note - there is a past history of lawyers seeking out the most controversial cases to defend. A deliberate flex on the everyone-has-the-right-to-representation.
There was a whole bunch of very left wing lawyers in France who sought out some really surprising cases, given their politics.
Let me read it again and see if I can glean the true import
They’re in fact incredibly bullish about SNP chances (much more than I am) in the next GE. Not sure about the methodology for their analysis but they certainly used to have a good reputation.
The idea that this is some unique persecution by the right is absurd; if the positions were reversed - a London Tory mayor with family and professional links to Fascists, then of course the Left would be all over it
Indeed they are doing it right now: see the attacks on GB News owner Paul Marshall. The Left is digging into all his associations trying to find Far Right dirt. I do not see PB condemning that
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/media/65007/paul-marshalls-hateful-likes-make-him-unfit-to-be-a-media-mogul
Given that Khan has had death threats from islamists, and a fatwa issued against him, where is your evidence that he is himself any kind of islamist extremist?
There must be loads of politicians who have family connections at the level of ex-brother-in-law to extremists, and criminals but we don't tend to hear about many of them.
HMRC will be on them like a hawk if they start helping you reduce your tax in the U.K., that’s for sure.
Way back when I worked for an oil company, people moving between the 90 different national level companies that made up the conglomerate was a big issue. For them and the tax authorities in all 90 countries.
Not moving between the companies and trying to completely offshore your tax situation was subject to lots of rulings and there was a bunch of admin related to that. Suffice it to say - complicated. And not ignored.
If individuals can play the tax arbitrage game that many companies have played over the years then that will be a massive problem. I'm sure my UK-based employer has noticed the lower rate of employers PRSI in Ireland (8.8% & 11.05%) compared to employers National Insurance in Britain (13.8%).
Of course, Brexit isn’t really about benefiting the working class, is it? It’s about screwing them more effectively.
She’s obviously not a fan of free markets.
https://www.dw.com/en/ukrainian-refugees-in-germany-why-few-work-for-a-living/a-68338226
Some blame too generous benefits:
"The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) released figures showing that as of mid-February 2024, around 6 million Ukrainian war refugees were registered in Europe. The largest number were registered in Germany (1.13 million). This was followed by Poland (956,000), the Czech Republic (381,000), the UK (253,000), Spain (192,000), Italy (168,000) and the Netherlands (149,000).
In comparison to Germany, many countries offer less support to the Ukrainian refugees they are hosting. Poland, for instance, only provides financial assistance for the first three months. Afterward, the refugees must mostly support themselves. The Czech Republic offers the equivalent of €130 per month after the first five months, and the UK pays even less.
In both Poland and the Czech Republic, around two-thirds of Ukrainian refugees are currently working, and 50% are working in the UK –– compared to just 20% in Germany."
Others disagree:
"Sociologist Dietrich Thränhardt compiled these figures in November 2023 for a study commissioned by the SPD-affiliated Friedrich Ebert Foundation. However, Thränhardt does not believe that the refugees' low employment rate in Germany is due to the social benefits they receive.
He points to other European countries that are still supporting the refugees with financial assistance yet have high employment numbers. In Denmark, for example, some 78% of Ukrainian war refugees are employed; in Sweden and Norway, more than 50% have a job."
Some blame red tape, or difficulties learning German, or lack of childcare.
“The Labour candidate for mayor of London was under pressure last night after it emerged that he complained to MPs about the demonisation of a hardline Islamic cleric.
Sadiq Khan objected to the treatment of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who had called for the destruction of Jews and the death penalty for homosexuals.
Mr Khan, as chairman of legal affairs at the Muslim Council of Britain, gave evidence to the home affairs select committee’s inquiry into community relations in 2004 when he was a Labour councillor in the London borough of Wandsworth.
David Winnick, MP for Walsall North, asked him whether Britain should permit Dr al-Qaradawi to visit. The cleric, who was to meet Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, had been quoted saying: “Oh God, deal with your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh God, deal with the usurpers and oppressors and tyrannical Jews.”
Mr Khan responded: “There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that Mr al-Qaradawi is not the extremist he is painted as being by selective quotations from his remarks.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sadiq-khan-supported-islamist-cleric-jwxdvnjdb
This is nothing to do with “cab rank” (not that this applies to solicitors anyway). Khan CHOSE to act for the Muslim Council of Britain (a body the government now refuses to work with, by the way, because it’s its Islamist tendencies) and Khan CHOSE to speak out for Qarawadi
Qaradawi is this guy
He wants to implement Islamic law among the Muslim minority in Europe.
He has said: “women can be guilty of provoking a sexual attack if their dress or behaviour arouses a man”.
At the council’s 2003 conference, he published a fatwa supporting suicide bombing against coalition forces in Iraq as well as against Israelis.
A year later, he published another fatwa on IslamOnline in response to the mutilation of the bodies of security contractors in Iraq, in which he permitted such acts. Two weeks after the fatwa’s publication, the body of a Spanish officer, who was killed during a raid on a terrorist cell associated with the Madrid bombing, was disinterred and burned.
Al-Qaradawi does endorse violence against civilians used by terrorists in Iraq and by Hamas in Israel. At a 2005 conference of Islamic scholars in London, he said: “I think it that saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq is not enough”
On and on
https://medium.com/@hannah.ball/here-is-what-we-know-about-the-european-council-for-fatwa-and-research-3821f6da18b7
A professional Tory hater, by the way. Hilariously, he used to bang on about why the UK was exporting manufacturing jobs.
If I ever accidentally get the money, I will go back an open a Thermal Depolymerisation plant next to his house. With duff filters.
Basically it's one of those Lyndon Johnson dirty tricks - "I don't think X is a paedophile but I want to hear him have to deny it". Judge politicians by what they actually say and do in their political jobs - everything else is irrelevant.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/22/muslim-council-says-uk-ministers-refusal-to-cooperate-has-had-tragic-consequences
Khan CHOSE to speak up for this dude Qaradawi - he wasn’t simply defending him as some lawyerly duty. Khan went to Qaradawi’s aid against British “demonisation”. Qaradawi was extremely dubious and a self-confessed Islamist who wanted Sharia law, approved attacks on UK forces, and so on
There is, actually, tons of this stuff. Does PB really want me to go down this road? I can if you want, I advise against it
You are someone calling for a 'reformation of islam' yet when we've got an elected politician who happens to be muslim, who clearly believes in the compatibility of islam and secular democracy, who has repeatedly condemned islamist extremism and terrorism, and repeatedly condemned anti-semitism, and voted as an MP in favour of same-sex marriage, you want to raise 'legitimate questions' about whether he is secretly an islamist? He seems to be exactly what you say you want. You are either a total moron, or are actually a bigot.
"Sadiq Khan shared a platform with five Islamic extremists at a political meeting where women were told to use a separate entrance, the Evening Standard can reveal.
Labour’s candidate for Mayor of London took part with an activist who has threatened “fire throughout the world”, a supporter of terror group Hamas, a preacher who backs an Islamic state and a Muslim leader accused of advocating attacks on the Royal Navy if it stopped arms being smuggled into Gaza"
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/sadiq-khan-shared-platform-with-five-islamic-extremists-a3231436.html
"Mr Khan was billed on the list of speakers as Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Tooting, despite his insistence that he attended “as a human rights lawyer”."
One of the Islamic extremists was this guy, Ibrahim Hewitt:
"Another speaker was Ibrahim Hewitt, who wrote a notorious pamphlet that branded homosexuality a “great sin” and suggested adulterers should be “stoned to death”.
Mr Hewitt spoke as chair of Interpal, a charity that says it provides humanitarian and emergency aid to people in the Middle East. However, in 2003 Interpal was designated as a “global terrorist” organisation by the US Treasury which claimed it was “utilised to hide the flow of money to Hamas”."
Israel says the PRC is affiliated to Hamas and has been involved in 'initiating and organising radical and violent activity against Israel in Europe'. The year before the event Khan attended at the Novotel Hotel in Euston, the PRC hosted a conference in Sweden with a Hamas minister, Atef Adwan."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3544846/With-friends-like-Sadiq-Khan-fit-run-London-Labour-MP-s-dealings-Islamic-extremists-raise-doubts-suitability-London-s-mayor.html
Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam linked to Al Qaeda, preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers and became the first American to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike.
Stop Political Terror later merged with Cage, a London campaign group that described Jihadi John (who left the capital to join Isis in Syria) as 'a beautiful young man'. It supports what it calls 'victims' of the war on terror, urging people 'arrested, raided or approached by the security services' to get in touch.
Khan has now distanced himself from Stop Political Terror and Cage. But in 2008 he took part in a controversial conference called the Global Peace and Unity (GPU) Festival, organised by a satellite TV station called the Islam Channel. It has since emerged that he did so against the express wishes of Labour's then Communities Secretary Hazel Blears.
A former aide to Blears said: 'We were deeply unhappy about anyone speaking at the GPU. Most of it is mainstream — but at the fringes are stalls and individuals we deemed beyond the pale. We said to [Sadiq Khan], 'Don't give it legitimacy by turning up', but he did.'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3544846/With-friends-like-Sadiq-Khan-fit-run-London-Labour-MP-s-dealings-Islamic-extremists-raise-doubts-suitability-London-s-mayor.html
The event was organised by the Islamic Observation Centre, run by a man called Yasser al-Siri, which has been described as “a public relations outfit for Islamic fundamentalist groups”.
Al-Siri, another of the meeting’s speakers, came to the UK in 1994 after he was sentenced to death in his absence in Egypt for plotting to kill a former prime minister in a car bomb attack that left a 12-year-old girl dead."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/khan-struggles-to-shake-off-link-to-convicted-terrorist-st5s2lr78
Allegedly, the reason is that before launch, they forgot to take the "Remove Before Launch" cover off the sensor...
If true, rather embarrassing. The lander landed safely, but toppled over for some reason.
"Ah, Mr. Pierrepoint, I've long wanted to meet you, but not, I'm sure you'll understand, under present circumstances."
I mean what do you want? He appears to be a muslim politician who is secular, democratic, believes in human rights, has distanced himself from people he once shared stages with. You should be celebrating him. But he's never going to pass the Leon purity test. What are muslims to make of this?
Let PBers read it for themselves, and decide if it is all a load of nothing and I am an "Islamophobe" for even mentioning it
Sounds like you're at odds with the SNP over this one?
Thanks for the header, @TSE .
Moving off topic (!), the latest effect of the crackdown on reproductive rights in the Southern USA - pretty much no IVF in Alabama, because the Alabama Supreme Court has decided that IVF embryos have full legal personhood.
Medical facilities are suspending all IVF treatments because of liability risks for medical staff.
A little under 250k women receive IVF treatments per annum in the USA. I make that probably 500k people immediately affected.
A further impact on the Presidential Election?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68366337
First is that a lot of it does seem to be from quite a while ago. How many of us want to be judged from the things we said or the company we kept two decades ago? I hear that there are people who give themselves a whole new name to put distance between their present and past selves.
More importantly, there's an awfully big jump from "questions to answer about his past" to "Islamists had 'got control' of Mr Khan and he had "given our capital city away to his mates'."
Maybe it's just that Anderson is too dim not to say the quiet part out loud.
Exactly as Chris Hitchens predicted
Now I have provided tons of evidence that Khan has a long history of associations with Islamists and jihadists - not just defending them as a lawyer by choice, but sharing platforms with them, speaking at events with them, writing to the government in defence of them, all of this voluntary - not his job. There is lots more evidence I could provide but my point is surely made
I am quite prepared to believe Khan regrets all this, and has honestly moved on, but - as @williamglenn notes - if this was a Tory with a long history of associations with neo-Nazi activists and terrorists there is no way the Left would simply let it go because "guilt by association" is "wrong"
(Somewhere in his writings Jerome K Jerome comments that if someone tried to rob him of his watch in the street he would resist and fight back, but if someone walked up and said he was going to issue a writ for the recovery of the watch he would immediately hand it over.)
Why do you ask? Do you have someone in mind?
So, I don't think "a long time ago" works as a reason / excuse here.
Having said that, no matter what you think of Mr Khan his opponents for Mayor of London are complete fruit-loops, and were I London I would be voting Khan.
Nope.
"Look, OK, this Tory mayoral candidate Herman Berlin has defended neo-Nazis in court. Including murderers. And yes OK his onetime brother in law is an actual Nazi. And yes OK in 2003 he shared a platform with multiple neo Nazis. And yes OK he did that again in 2004. Twice. And yes alright in 2005 he shared a platform five times with known neo-Nazis. And sure, alright, he did that again - attend rallies and speak alongside neo Nazis - in 2006, and 2007. And yes OK Mr Berlin also wrote to the government to say neoNazi Nick Griffin was actully a fine person who has been traduced and they should stop persecuting him. And yes OK Mister Berlin voluntarily became the legal representative for neoNazi group Britain First. But all this was ages ago and now he says he's sorry so it's totally fine"
That's a typical speech you commonly hear
Of course even if the SNP won every remaining Scottish Tory seat, which they won't, that would be more than outweighed by the projected SNP seats that will be lost to Scottish Labour on current Scotland only polls
OT on this subject -ish, listening to the very good Telegraph interview with Archbishop Welby last weekend, he cited the theologian Jurgen Moltmann, who is now 97, and was also drafted into an anti-aircraft unit.
In Moltmann's case he was on the receiving end of the Hamburg bombings.
Strange parallels.
Trump has also come out for IVF
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68388232
Name three of these alleged Herman Berlins.
Not the lefty defences- but the incidents where the allegations were made.
As part of the process, embryos are checked and if damaged, destroyed. For example.
In any event, crack a test tube and that’s manslaughter.
Lawyer in court - “So you knowingly exposed your employees to charges of murder?”
No insurance company will touch that with a barge pole.
Lawyer in court - “So you knowingly exposed your employees to charges of murder? Outside the insurance coverage of the hospital?”
However aiui the Court decision is dependent on Dobbs vs Jackson (the one that overturned Roe vs Wade).
The top IVF clinics in Alabama have suspended treatments. eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68373901
He has been accused by the Left (in the form of Hope not Hate) of using an anoymous Twitter account to retweet some stridently anti-immigrant rhetoric (but nothing illegal, as far as I can see)
They couldn't even find original tweets, just retweets. That's it. And on this basis (infinitely flimsier than all the years of stuff I've presented re Khan) they say he is not fit to own British media, he should be hounded out of public life, etc etc
"Sir Paul Marshall, GB News co-owner and would-be Telegraph owner, has been ‘liking’ and spreading some pretty vile things on
@x
This casts a different light on his desire to be a mini-Murdoch. My column."
https://x.com/arusbridger/status/1761304176573735106?s=20