I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
You see, whenever you post something ad-hominemy like this then I know you're on edge: the migrants deaths have got coverage, but the numbers outside reliably right-wing publications like The Mail and the Telegraph.
And I know you've just gone googling and searching for them both. The leitmotif here is you want to brush the problem off and then go back to talking about other stuff.
If you have moderate right-wingers like me worried about this stuff, and starting to be drawn to firmer measures, then you know you've got a problem.
You've got a problem.
I'm not really on the edge, the reality this was a problem before Starmer became PM and people will give him the benefit of the doubt for a bit.
You're on much stronger ground on criticising him for his other policies like VAT on school fees.
Parents scramble to find state school places to avoid VAT on fees
With tax on private school fees set to increase costs by 20 per cent from January next year, parents are struggling to find alternatives
If you've followed my posts, and I hope I don't flatter myself too much when I suggest you might have an inkling, you will have noted I've both criticised his attacks on aspirational Britain and on controlling the borders.
It's part of my thesis of how his coalition could collapse from both sides very quickly - like that horrible Titantic sub disaster- resulting in him being a one-term PM.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
You see, whenever you post something ad-hominemy like this then I know you're on edge: the migrants deaths have got coverage, but the numbers outside reliably right-wing publications like The Mail and the Telegraph.
And I know you've just gone googling and searching for them both. The leitmotif here is you want to brush the problem off and then go back to talking about other stuff.
If you have moderate right-wingers like me worried about this stuff, and starting to be drawn to firmer measures, then you know you've got a problem.
You've got a problem.
I'm not really on the edge, the reality this was a problem before Starmer became PM and people will give him the benefit of the doubt for a bit.
You're on much stronger ground on criticising him for his other policies like VAT on school fees.
Parents scramble to find state school places to avoid VAT on fees
With tax on private school fees set to increase costs by 20 per cent from January next year, parents are struggling to find alternatives
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
My suggestion that you brush up somehow engenders a theory that I'm responsible for illegal immigrants?
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
My suggestion that you brush up somehow engenders a theory that I'm responsible for illegal immigrants?
I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
I doubt its the latter as far as the well-being of the people are concerned, but rather about saving face.
If people are evacuated from the front lines "for their own safety", then they can't be left behind to report the towns have fallen when they do.
There's possibly also the fear that when Ukrainians failed to "welcome the Russians as liberators" as forecast at the start of the war, what happens if Russians in Russian territory actually welcome the Ukrainians?
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
My suggestion that you brush up somehow engenders a theory that I'm responsible for illegal immigrants?
OK, back to me thinking you're thick.
When you say thinking. There seems almost no evidence of such a thing.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
No, they'll be paying the current market rate. If the council doesn't buy it, it will never get PP so the landowner is not disadvantaged.
They will be paying well over the current market rate. Just not 20 - 100 times the current value.
Fair point. How much over will they be paying? I can't see it from a quick skim of the article.
If it's anything like current CPO's, a miserly amount. Often not enough to compensate an owner for buying a new place and moving (in the case of homeowners).
Ok well I'd like to see a small premium to compensate for the disruption, say 10-20%.
If the land is treated as already having the PP though the premium would 1000%-2000% which is idiotic.
Why is it 'idiotic' ?
What happens if the land increases in value by those amounts (because that's the market rate...), and the council then sells off parcels of it to developers? The council grabs the money that the landowner should have got.
Why should the landowner get it - the land is currently green belt land.
The value is enhanced by the granting of planning permission which is given by the council. Why shouldn’t the council pocket most of the gain?
The government, especially councils, are skint and people are suggesting a massive windfall goes to rich speculators rather than councils.
Yes, I don't think public opinion is going to fall on the side of landowners. The likelihood is that they'll get some decent windfalls on their land. I can't see many people manning the barricades on their behalf.
That's the thing about good government: they should try and do the right thing, even if doing the wrong thing might be more popular. This is a sig of a very bad government.
Addressing our housing crisis (with action not just words) is both popular and right imo.
But it's not addressing our housing crisis, is it? It's one small part, and one whose effects might be achievable in other ways.
As I said below, if the government put a caveat in that this was only targeted at speculators (by saying the sale had to be within the last decade or two), I'd be happier. Oh, and that would not include inheritance in families.
Would you be against that?
It certainly is addressing it. Getting land that's being sat on by speculators (many gaming the system) into development for affordable homes will make big inroads into our housing shortage. It's not a marginal issue.
As to the detail, sure let's see. There's a balance to be struck. This is the UK we're talking about here. However I'd hope and expect that a Labour government wouldn't bend too far towards private landowners at the expense of the common good.
Again, you are assuming it is all 'speculators'.
On zero evidence.
I'd love to see your reaction when the 'common good' goes against your own interests...
I'm not assuming that. I'm assuming (on copious evidence) that speculation and gaming the system is a big part of why land gets 'banked' rather than developed in a country that has an acute shortage of affordable housing.
Your specific question, it would depend but eg I'd vote tomorrow for a wealth tax, which would harm me but (imo) be a net national good.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
Honestly, Labour are hopeless. They've had over a month now to STOP THE BOATS, and yet they're still coming.
In reality, Labour is doing what it said it would do - quietly working away on solutions that will obviously take time to come to fruition. Personally I'm delighted it's making less news now - who didn't get sick of the constant STOP THE BOATS rhetoric in the tabloids, and the painfully inept salvation of 'Rwanda' as the solution?
I suspect many people are hoping for a period of calm, non-shouty government in which ministers take a more serious-minded approach to resolving the myriad of problems we have and, hopefully, deliver better results than the previous useless bunch.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
No, they'll be paying the current market rate. If the council doesn't buy it, it will never get PP so the landowner is not disadvantaged.
They will be paying well over the current market rate. Just not 20 - 100 times the current value.
Fair point. How much over will they be paying? I can't see it from a quick skim of the article.
If it's anything like current CPO's, a miserly amount. Often not enough to compensate an owner for buying a new place and moving (in the case of homeowners).
Ok well I'd like to see a small premium to compensate for the disruption, say 10-20%.
If the land is treated as already having the PP though the premium would 1000%-2000% which is idiotic.
Why is it 'idiotic' ?
What happens if the land increases in value by those amounts (because that's the market rate...), and the council then sells off parcels of it to developers? The council grabs the money that the landowner should have got.
Why should the landowner get it - the land is currently green belt land.
The value is enhanced by the granting of planning permission which is given by the council. Why shouldn’t the council pocket most of the gain?
The government, especially councils, are skint and people are suggesting a massive windfall goes to rich speculators rather than councils.
Yes, I don't think public opinion is going to fall on the side of landowners. The likelihood is that they'll get some decent windfalls on their land. I can't see many people manning the barricades on their behalf.
That's the thing about good government: they should try and do the right thing, even if doing the wrong thing might be more popular. This is a sig of a very bad government.
Addressing our housing crisis (with action not just words) is both popular and right imo.
But it's not addressing our housing crisis, is it? It's one small part, and one whose effects might be achievable in other ways.
As I said below, if the government put a caveat in that this was only targeted at speculators (by saying the sale had to be within the last decade or two), I'd be happier. Oh, and that would not include inheritance in families.
Would you be against that?
It certainly is addressing it. Getting land that's being sat on by speculators (many gaming the system) into development for affordable homes will make big inroads into our housing shortage. It's not a marginal issue.
As to the detail, sure let's see. There's a balance to be struck. This is the UK we're talking about here. However I'd hope and expect that a Labour government wouldn't bend too far towards private landowners at the expense of the common good.
Again, you are assuming it is all 'speculators'.
On zero evidence.
I'd love to see your reaction when the 'common good' goes against your own interests...
I'm not assuming that. I'm assuming (on copious evidence) that speculation and gaming the system is a big part of why land gets 'banked' rather than developed in a country that has an acute shortage of affordable housing.
Your specific question, it would depend but eg I'd vote tomorrow for a wealth tax, which would harm me but (imo) be a net national good.
Land gets "banked" in this country because only land with planning permission can be built upon.
Eliminate the planning system, you'd eliminate land banking.
In Japan with zonal development and land tax you don't get land banking, quite the opposite.
I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
This is a mess - you can obtain from this polling whatever you want. YouGov's first figure has 34% support for the protests, 6% support for the unrest.
Then you have "sympathy" for peaceful protest, compared with unrest. Depending of the ordering of the questions, I would have answered yes to that too because I always support people's right to peacefully protest an issue that concerns them.
This is a classic example of National Service sketch from Yes Minister.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
No, they'll be paying the current market rate. If the council doesn't buy it, it will never get PP so the landowner is not disadvantaged.
They will be paying well over the current market rate. Just not 20 - 100 times the current value.
Fair point. How much over will they be paying? I can't see it from a quick skim of the article.
If it's anything like current CPO's, a miserly amount. Often not enough to compensate an owner for buying a new place and moving (in the case of homeowners).
Ok well I'd like to see a small premium to compensate for the disruption, say 10-20%.
If the land is treated as already having the PP though the premium would 1000%-2000% which is idiotic.
Why is it 'idiotic' ?
What happens if the land increases in value by those amounts (because that's the market rate...), and the council then sells off parcels of it to developers? The council grabs the money that the landowner should have got.
Why should the landowner get it - the land is currently green belt land.
The value is enhanced by the granting of planning permission which is given by the council. Why shouldn’t the council pocket most of the gain?
The government, especially councils, are skint and people are suggesting a massive windfall goes to rich speculators rather than councils.
Yes, I don't think public opinion is going to fall on the side of landowners. The likelihood is that they'll get some decent windfalls on their land. I can't see many people manning the barricades on their behalf.
That's the thing about good government: they should try and do the right thing, even if doing the wrong thing might be more popular. This is a sig of a very bad government.
Addressing our housing crisis (with action not just words) is both popular and right imo.
But it's not addressing our housing crisis, is it? It's one small part, and one whose effects might be achievable in other ways.
As I said below, if the government put a caveat in that this was only targeted at speculators (by saying the sale had to be within the last decade or two), I'd be happier. Oh, and that would not include inheritance in families.
Would you be against that?
It certainly is addressing it. Getting land that's being sat on by speculators (many gaming the system) into development for affordable homes will make big inroads into our housing shortage. It's not a marginal issue.
As to the detail, sure let's see. There's a balance to be struck. This is the UK we're talking about here. However I'd hope and expect that a Labour government wouldn't bend too far towards private landowners at the expense of the common good.
Again, you are assuming it is all 'speculators'.
On zero evidence.
I'd love to see your reaction when the 'common good' goes against your own interests...
I'm not assuming that. I'm assuming (on copious evidence) that speculation and gaming the system is a big part of why land gets 'banked' rather than developed in a country that has an acute shortage of affordable housing.
Your specific question, it would depend but eg I'd vote tomorrow for a wealth tax, which would harm me but (imo) be a net national good.
You are 'assuming' it is a big reason.
I would argue (without going all Bart...) that the planning process is a much larger reason.
You want councils/the government to set the local plan, have responsibility for giving planning permissions, and be able to grab land at reduced value. I wonder why you cannot see the conflict of interest in that, especially given the planning scandals that have occurred over the years.
Remarkable outrage on here on behalf of the oppressed property speculator who might be unjustly thwarted from realising mahoosive windfalls at the expense of - well, everyone else.
I do actually know one of these guys. Firstly he's immensely rich. Secondly he's totally capable of looking after himself and has an army of lawyers, accountants etc to help him get his way. Thirdly, while I don't hold any grudge against him, I am unaware of him having done anything at all to benefit mankind beyond raking in the millions.
What do you do for the affected people who are *not* property speculators?
They sold out to the property speculator. They did OK. My acquaintance isn't the Mafia.
????
I'm talking about people who own land who did not sell out to speculators.
I know a fair few people who are in that position, and who are not rich. Many farmers are not, you know, even when they own their land.
They are not necessarily rich, but I'm not sure what your point is. That if they haven't sold out individual farmers should be able to claim a windfall of many times what the land is worth but professional speculators not?
Yes. Because they're actually farming the land. I hate to tell you this, but farming is good for the country; both in terms of food supply and land management - which nowadays is rightly highly regulated.
Let's imagine a massive resource is found on someone's land - not under, but on. Should they get zero compensation if the state decides to grab that resource?
And that's what we're talking about here: zero compensation.
I wonder how you would feel if your house was CPO'd by the council, and you only got the value of the house (with planning blight...) and nothing for the inconvenience and heartache that moving would cause you.
I would make a distinction between compensation and speculative advantage. Not sure I have anything more to add.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
Would it be cynical to suggest the smugglers are receiving all the support they need from the citizens of Calais, and the authorities have no interest in stopping them, but for the sake of Anglo-French relations are obliged to pretend?
I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
You refer to "the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests". Were there any? The far right groups organising them were clearly intent from the outset on fomenting vicious riots.
Remarkable outrage on here on behalf of the oppressed property speculator who might be unjustly thwarted from realising mahoosive windfalls at the expense of - well, everyone else.
I do actually know one of these guys. Firstly he's immensely rich. Secondly he's totally capable of looking after himself and has an army of lawyers, accountants etc to help him get his way. Thirdly, while I don't hold any grudge against him, I am unaware of him having done anything at all to benefit mankind beyond raking in the millions.
What do you do for the affected people who are *not* property speculators?
They sold out to the property speculator. They did OK. My acquaintance isn't the Mafia.
????
I'm talking about people who own land who did not sell out to speculators.
I know a fair few people who are in that position, and who are not rich. Many farmers are not, you know, even when they own their land.
They are not necessarily rich, but I'm not sure what your point is. That if they haven't sold out individual farmers should be able to claim a windfall of many times what the land is worth but professional speculators not?
Yes. Because they're actually farming the land. I hate to tell you this, but farming is good for the country; both in terms of food supply and land management - which nowadays is rightly highly regulated.
Let's imagine a massive resource is found on someone's land - not under, but on. Should they get zero compensation if the state decides to grab that resource?
And that's what we're talking about here: zero compensation.
I wonder how you would feel if your house was CPO'd by the council, and you only got the value of the house (with planning blight...) and nothing for the inconvenience and heartache that moving would cause you.
I would make a distinction between compensation and speculative advantage. Not sure I have anything more to add.
“The enemy will certainly receive a worthy response, and all the goals facing us will, without a doubt, be achieved,” Putin said.
“It is clear now why the Kiyv regime rejected our proposals to return to a peace plan, as well as the proposals of interested and neutral mediators,” he added.
“The West is fighting us with the hands of Ukrainians.”
He went on: “Apparently, the enemy is striving to improve its negotiating positions in the future.
“But what kind of negotiations?
How do we even talk with people who indiscriminately strike at civilians, at civilian infrastructure and try to create threats to nuclear energy? What can we even talk about with them?”
I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
I think @Omnium is possibly the stupidest one on this site. And, sadly, there are several in the final.
They simply cannot compute this.
At all.
It's all of a piece with the tendency to "truthiness" over truth - and both the right and the left are guilty of this
People persist in believing utter nonsense even against overwhelming evidence, so it becomes quasi religious. Mad rightwingers believe in QAnon or the Protocols or whatever, leftwingers believe you can - indeed must - import endless migrants as that is a moral good and it won't end badly no no no. If they can, they will actively censor speech that challenges their worldview, ie they make it a heresy
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
No, they'll be paying the current market rate. If the council doesn't buy it, it will never get PP so the landowner is not disadvantaged.
They will be paying well over the current market rate. Just not 20 - 100 times the current value.
Fair point. How much over will they be paying? I can't see it from a quick skim of the article.
If it's anything like current CPO's, a miserly amount. Often not enough to compensate an owner for buying a new place and moving (in the case of homeowners).
Ok well I'd like to see a small premium to compensate for the disruption, say 10-20%.
If the land is treated as already having the PP though the premium would 1000%-2000% which is idiotic.
The planning system is at fault for that.
Eliminate that, and let the price of land be worth the same with or without permission and those 00s can be knocked off the price of new houses.
Then we might actually have "affordable" housing. By which I mean good quality homes that are affordable, not shitty flats or tiny shoebox houses.
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
Perhaps Russia is evacuating its own citizens so it can flatten the place from the air.
“The enemy will certainly receive a worthy response, and all the goals facing us will, without a doubt, be achieved,” Putin said.
“It is clear now why the Kiyv regime rejected our proposals to return to a peace plan, as well as the proposals of interested and neutral mediators,” he added.
“The West is fighting us with the hands of Ukrainians.”
He went on: “Apparently, the enemy is striving to improve its negotiating positions in the future.
“But what kind of negotiations?
How do we even talk with people who indiscriminately strike at civilians, at civilian infrastructure and try to create threats to nuclear energy? What can we even talk about with them?”
I mean, do pb liberals get this? I mean, REALLY? There are some bright, well-educated and reflective people amongst them, right?
Do they understand what's coming if they don't engage with this issue, and sort it?
No, I don't think they do get it, despite the gathering stormclouds
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
I think @Omnium is possibly the stupidest one on this site. And, sadly, there are several in the final.
They simply cannot compute this.
At all.
It's all of a piece with the tendency to "truthiness" over truth - and both the right and the left are guilty of this
People persist in believing utter nonsense even against overwhelming evidence, so it becomes quasi religious. Mad rightwingers believe in QAnon or the Protocols or whatever, leftwingers believe you can - indeed must - import endless migrants as that is a moral good and it won't end badly no no no. If they can, they will actively censor speech that challenges their worldview, ie they make it a heresy
Remarkable outrage on here on behalf of the oppressed property speculator who might be unjustly thwarted from realising mahoosive windfalls at the expense of - well, everyone else.
I do actually know one of these guys. Firstly he's immensely rich. Secondly he's totally capable of looking after himself and has an army of lawyers, accountants etc to help him get his way. Thirdly, while I don't hold any grudge against him, I am unaware of him having done anything at all to benefit mankind beyond raking in the millions.
What do you do for the affected people who are *not* property speculators?
They sold out to the property speculator. They did OK. My acquaintance isn't the Mafia.
????
I'm talking about people who own land who did not sell out to speculators.
I know a fair few people who are in that position, and who are not rich. Many farmers are not, you know, even when they own their land.
They are not necessarily rich, but I'm not sure what your point is. That if they haven't sold out individual farmers should be able to claim a windfall of many times what the land is worth but professional speculators not?
Yes. Because they're actually farming the land. I hate to tell you this, but farming is good for the country; both in terms of food supply and land management - which nowadays is rightly highly regulated.
Let's imagine a massive resource is found on someone's land - not under, but on. Should they get zero compensation if the state decides to grab that resource?
And that's what we're talking about here: zero compensation.
I wonder how you would feel if your house was CPO'd by the council, and you only got the value of the house (with planning blight...) and nothing for the inconvenience and heartache that moving would cause you.
I would make a distinction between compensation and speculative advantage. Not sure I have anything more to add.
Can you say what you mean by 'distinction' ?
The difference between say £10 000 per acre for agricultural land and £1 million per acre for development land.
Another sign that he is rattled. He can't afford to be off the main site for political chat and ludicrous memes
Isn't it just because he's got a well-publicised chat with Twitter's owner later today?
Kind of weird to do that when he's not Tweeting.
Musk is obviously betting big on Trump, and his personal worldviews align more in that direction especially with the conspiracies and what not, but it would be funny if he dropped at least one major negative surprise on Trump - we know he is not above criticising Trump in the past.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
No, they'll be paying the current market rate. If the council doesn't buy it, it will never get PP so the landowner is not disadvantaged.
They will be paying well over the current market rate. Just not 20 - 100 times the current value.
Fair point. How much over will they be paying? I can't see it from a quick skim of the article.
If it's anything like current CPO's, a miserly amount. Often not enough to compensate an owner for buying a new place and moving (in the case of homeowners).
Ok well I'd like to see a small premium to compensate for the disruption, say 10-20%.
If the land is treated as already having the PP though the premium would 1000%-2000% which is idiotic.
Why is it 'idiotic' ?
What happens if the land increases in value by those amounts (because that's the market rate...), and the council then sells off parcels of it to developers? The council grabs the money that the landowner should have got.
Why should the landowner get it - the land is currently green belt land.
The value is enhanced by the granting of planning permission which is given by the council. Why shouldn’t the council pocket most of the gain?
The government, especially councils, are skint and people are suggesting a massive windfall goes to rich speculators rather than councils.
Yes, I don't think public opinion is going to fall on the side of landowners. The likelihood is that they'll get some decent windfalls on their land. I can't see many people manning the barricades on their behalf.
That's the thing about good government: they should try and do the right thing, even if doing the wrong thing might be more popular. This is a sig of a very bad government.
I'm at a loss as to what your idea of good government is?
Because it seems to be allowing landowners to charge top dollar for housing reducing the viability of the scheme at a time when we need to build a lot of houses and ideally a lot of houses at a time when building costs have risen to take prices outside the level most people can afford.
Good government is not stealing someones land in a way that benefits the Government but adversely affects the landowner. I know you are a socialist with all the guff about 'all property is theft' but most of us don't believe that and think that if the state is going to inconvenicence us then they should not be allowed to leave us out of pocket whilst doing it.
I mean for Christ's sake, even the French get this.
I suspect we will find a lot of land bought under this cpo will be land that actually already has a house but the council considers they have two big a garden so they cpo it and grant planning permission for a 6 story of rabbit hutch flats
Remarkable outrage on here on behalf of the oppressed property speculator who might be unjustly thwarted from realising mahoosive windfalls at the expense of - well, everyone else.
I do actually know one of these guys. Firstly he's immensely rich. Secondly he's totally capable of looking after himself and has an army of lawyers, accountants etc to help him get his way. Thirdly, while I don't hold any grudge against him, I am unaware of him having done anything at all to benefit mankind beyond raking in the millions.
What do you do for the affected people who are *not* property speculators?
They sold out to the property speculator. They did OK. My acquaintance isn't the Mafia.
????
I'm talking about people who own land who did not sell out to speculators.
I know a fair few people who are in that position, and who are not rich. Many farmers are not, you know, even when they own their land.
They are not necessarily rich, but I'm not sure what your point is. That if they haven't sold out individual farmers should be able to claim a windfall of many times what the land is worth but professional speculators not?
Yes. Because they're actually farming the land. I hate to tell you this, but farming is good for the country; both in terms of food supply and land management - which nowadays is rightly highly regulated.
Let's imagine a massive resource is found on someone's land - not under, but on. Should they get zero compensation if the state decides to grab that resource?
And that's what we're talking about here: zero compensation.
I wonder how you would feel if your house was CPO'd by the council, and you only got the value of the house (with planning blight...) and nothing for the inconvenience and heartache that moving would cause you.
I would make a distinction between compensation and speculative advantage. Not sure I have anything more to add.
Can you say what you mean by 'distinction' ?
The difference between say £10 000 per acre for agricultural land and £1 million per acre for development land.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
Mate, it's your hard-earned taxes that will be spent housing 50,000 new asylum seekers (or more) every year, at vast expense to the exchequer and putting great strain on communities, services, hotels, social housing, infra
If you're happy for your taxes to be spaffed on this lunacy, good for you
Another sign that he is rattled. He can't afford to be off the main site for political chat and ludicrous memes
Isn't it just because he's got a well-publicised chat with Twitter's owner later today?
Kind of weird to do that when he's not Tweeting.
Musk is obviously betting big on Trump, and his personal worldviews align more in that direction especially with the conspiracies and what not, but it would be funny if he dropped at least one major negative surprise on Trump - we know he is not above criticising Trump in the past.
Billionaire ramps politician who gives tax cuts to billionaires. Hold the front page.
[Jeremy Irons with a German accent voice] "As I was going to St. Ives, I met a man with 7 wives, every wife had 7 sacks, every sack had 7 cats, every cat had 7 kittens, kittens, cats sacks and wives. How many were going to St. Ives?"
"Billionaire Richard Lugner - known for his extravagant lifestyle, many wives and glamourous dates with a-listers - has died at the age of 91 after suffering several health issues.
The construction tycoon and socialite, who made headlines for paying the world's VIPs to attend Vienna's annual Opera Ball, passed away in his Viennese villa on Monday, Austrian media reported.
Just a few weeks ago , Lugner married his sixth wife, 42-year-old actress Simone 'Biene' Reilaender."
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
Perhaps Russia is evacuating its own citizens so it can flatten the place from the air.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
Perhaps Russia is evacuating its own citizens so it can flatten the place from the air.
That may be the Ukranian plan. Bait the trap, then have the air defence ready for the counterattack
[Jeremy Irons with a German accent voice] "As I was going to St. Ives, I met a man with 7 wives, every wife had 7 sacks, every sack had 7 cats, every cat had 7 kittens, kittens, cats sacks and wives. How many were going to St. Ives?"
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
Perhaps Russia is evacuating its own citizens so it can flatten the place from the air.
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Not that controversial. An awful lot of railway employees have to deal with the aftermath of a ‘one under’ every year, and it’s not nice to put it politely. Many drivers end up long term sick and in need of counselling as a result.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
It is £4.3 billion a year and rising fast. We spend £6m a DAY on hotels. Insane
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
It is £4.3 billion a year and rising fast. We spend £6m a DAY on hotels. Insane
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
Yes it is insane.
How much do European countries that can process applications within weeks not years pay on hotels, so that we can make an accurate comparison between the two systems?
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
It is £4.3 billion a year and rising fast. We spend £6m a DAY on hotels. Insane
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
Countries that give asylum seekers the right to work are already finding that people are using it to hack the visa system.
@BartholomewRoberts denies that he supports open borders, but in practice he supports policies that push inexorably in that direction.
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
At first glance, it's all too complicated for this bear of little brain. Surely both sides are wrong. It is farfetched that Gaza caused the riots here, but it's a further stretch to go from there to say he is blaming Israel for Gaza causing the riots.
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
A Labour MP has been accused of blaming Israel for the far-Right riots after claiming the war in Gaza has stoked hatred towards British Muslims.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Not that controversial. An awful lot of railway employees have to deal with the aftermath of a ‘one under’ every year, and it’s not nice to put it politely. Many drivers end up long term sick and in need of counselling as a result.
An old friend of mine had the subsidiary role of going onto the site of such incidents and checking the site was ready for trains to run again (if vehicles are involved, infrastructure can be damaged). He saw body pieces hundreds of metres down the track from the incident, and talked of cleaners finding body pieces on/under trains when they got to depot.
And anecdotally, drivers have committed suicide after such incidents.
It's one of the reasons I'm narrowly in favour of assisted suicide; but that in itself is troublesome.
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
I would assume the conflict will enter into a lengthy frozen phase at some point, as it did after 2014. It's not that Russia is undefeatable or has endless resources, it isn't and doesn't, but it feels like the Putin regime would need to be tumbling to provide opportunity for something major to happen.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
Because he didn't mess around and actually cut the numbers and deported more people after it became an issue:
Long honeymoon? Maybe. But they should enjoy it as long as they can - if it drives Trump even barmier, it may sustain itself a lot longer than anticipated.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
Because he didn't mess around and actually cut the numbers and deported more people after it became an issue:
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
As the American political philosopher Donald Trump once said: "If you don't have borders, you don't have a country."
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Not that controversial. An awful lot of railway employees have to deal with the aftermath of a ‘one under’ every year, and it’s not nice to put it politely. Many drivers end up long term sick and in need of counselling as a result.
An old friend of mine had the subsidiary role of going onto the site of such incidents and checking the site was ready for trains to run again (if vehicles are involved, infrastructure can be damaged). He saw body pieces hundreds of metres down the track from the incident, and talked of cleaners finding body pieces on/under trains when they got to depot.
And anecdotally, drivers have committed suicide after such incidents.
It's one of the reasons I'm narrowly in favour of assisted suicide; but that in itself is troublesome.
A good friend of mine is a copper, and he says that the worst accidents they regularly see are the railway suicides.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
As the American political philosopher Donald Trump once said: "If you don't have borders, you don't have a country."
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
Applying for asylum is not illegal, much as you may wish it so.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Or let people work and pay for themselves.
We can't tow people back to France without France's consent - France is a sovereign country.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Not that controversial. An awful lot of railway employees have to deal with the aftermath of a ‘one under’ every year, and it’s not nice to put it politely. Many drivers end up long term sick and in need of counselling as a result.
An old friend of mine had the subsidiary role of going onto the site of such incidents and checking the site was ready for trains to run again (if vehicles are involved, infrastructure can be damaged). He saw body pieces hundreds of metres down the track from the incident, and talked of cleaners finding body pieces on/under trains when they got to depot.
And anecdotally, drivers have committed suicide after such incidents.
It's one of the reasons I'm narrowly in favour of assisted suicide; but that in itself is troublesome.
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
I'm curious about T&P . He sounds good, but makes mistakes: such as stating that Ukraine might make a number of distributed 50 milliwatt power stations. Only nine orders of magnitude out...
There are many potential reasons for this incursion; the chances are that it will not just be one, but a combination that made the potential risk versus reward balance worthwhile. Those two options are potentials, but there are many others, such as the potential to disrupt Russian logistics; or grab the Kursk NPP (unlikely...) or to have land to exchange for Ukrainian land, or many others we do not know of. As another example; this incursion adds many more targets for long-range weapons into Russia.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
Because he didn't mess around and actually cut the numbers and deported more people after it became an issue:
2003: "Blair 'guarantees' asylum-seeker figures will halve"
And how did he do that?
With an array of restrictive policies designed to deter people from coming here in the first place. Removing access to benefits and rights to appeal against denied claims etc.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
After 14 years of rightly critiquing the Tory party and its horrendous failures on migration and asylum, the remarkable thing is that the Left hasn't actually thought about the subject at all. The comment above yours is an example. The logic of a 13 year old, unable to extrapolate events
This is what I suspected before the election, yet I hoped I was wrong, I hoped they really had developed some clever answers
They haven't. This is why I believe this subject - migration/asylum - will shred this government to pieces in short order. They are clueless, and all their instincts tell them to make the problem WORSE
So this seems to be the explanation/excuse for the reduction in gold medals:
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
As the American political philosopher Donald Trump once said: "If you don't have borders, you don't have a country."
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
Because he didn't mess around and actually cut the numbers and deported more people after it became an issue:
2003: "Blair 'guarantees' asylum-seeker figures will halve"
And how did he do that?
With an array of restrictive policies designed to deter people from coming here in the first place. Removing access to benefits and rights to appeal against denied claims etc.
However, Blair was not facing boats, which are hard to stop
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
I'm curious about T&P . He sounds good, but makes mistakes: such as stating that Ukraine might make a number of distributed 50 milliwatt power stations. Only nine orders of magnitude out...
There are many potential reasons for this incursion; the chances are that it will not just be one, but a combination that made the potential risk versus reward balance worthwhile. Those two options are potentials, but there are many others, such as the potential to disrupt Russian logistics; or grab the Kursk NPP (unlikely...) or to have land to exchange for Ukrainian land, or many others we do not know of. As another example; this incursion adds many more targets for long-range weapons into Russia.
It also offers potentially an alternative route to liberate Ukrainian land via bypassing Russia's minefields.
Also it turns the battlefield to one that plays on Ukraine's strengths - when it comes to mobile warfare rather than frozen warfare, Ukraine has the technological edge.
Comments
Remember, about 58% of Britons sympathise strongly or to an extent with the PEACEFUL anti immigration protests post-Southport. About 12% think the actual RIOTS are justified. That is to say: 8 million Britons agree with the rioters
This is a tinderbox waiting for a spark
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50257-the-public-reaction-to-the-2024-riots
TSE: "TORY scum!"
The information coming out of Kursk is fragmentary and contradictory; unusually in a war that has seen fights over individual buildings, fields and spoil heaps argued over in detail. There is little official coming out of Ukraine, but much more out of Russia.
Over the last few days, Russia has apparently organised the evacuation of many settlements away from the presumed front lines. Which would make sense, except for the fact that Putin's regime has shown little interest in the wellbeing of its own people. Which makes me think that these evacuations are somewhat forced.
Does this mean that the front lines are further into Kursk that we assumed? Or that some Ukrainian forces are infiltrating that far in small numbers on missions? Or that Putin's regime has suddenly started caring for its people?
I doubt it's the latter.
Why don't you try and impress me?
They simply cannot compute this.
At all.
If people are evacuated from the front lines "for their own safety", then they can't be left behind to report the towns have fallen when they do.
There's possibly also the fear that when Ukrainians failed to "welcome the Russians as liberators" as forecast at the start of the war, what happens if Russians in Russian territory actually welcome the Ukrainians?
Your specific question, it would depend but eg I'd vote tomorrow for a wealth tax, which would harm me but (imo) be a net national good.
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
Eliminate the planning system, you'd eliminate land banking.
In Japan with zonal development and land tax you don't get land banking, quite the opposite.
Then you have "sympathy" for peaceful protest, compared with unrest. Depending of the ordering of the questions, I would have answered yes to that too because I always support people's right to peacefully protest an issue that concerns them.
This is a classic example of National Service sketch from Yes Minister.
I would argue (without going all Bart...) that the planning process is a much larger reason.
You want councils/the government to set the local plan, have responsibility for giving planning permissions, and be able to grab land at reduced value. I wonder why you cannot see the conflict of interest in that, especially given the planning scandals that have occurred over the years.
Even the one who voted Labour!
“The enemy will certainly receive a worthy response, and all the goals facing us will, without a doubt, be achieved,” Putin said.
“It is clear now why the Kiyv regime rejected our proposals to return to a peace plan, as well as the proposals of interested and neutral mediators,” he added.
“The West is fighting us with the hands of Ukrainians.”
He went on: “Apparently, the enemy is striving to improve its negotiating positions in the future.
“But what kind of negotiations?
How do we even talk with people who indiscriminately strike at civilians, at civilian infrastructure and try to create threats to nuclear energy? What can we even talk about with them?”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/08/12/ukraine-invasion-russia-response-putin-west/
People persist in believing utter nonsense even against overwhelming evidence, so it becomes quasi religious. Mad rightwingers believe in QAnon or the Protocols or whatever, leftwingers believe you can - indeed must - import endless migrants as that is a moral good and it won't end badly no no no. If they can, they will actively censor speech that challenges their worldview, ie they make it a heresy
Methinks trouble ahead
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2024/08/12/graham-thorpe-took-own-life-after-battle-with-depression-fa/
Eliminate that, and let the price of land be worth the same with or without permission and those 00s can be knocked off the price of new houses.
Then we might actually have "affordable" housing. By which I mean good quality homes that are affordable, not shitty flats or tiny shoebox houses.
It's early days, but the mood music is that they want more of the latter, in part, because they are not willing to deal with the former.
If that mood music continues, it will not be good for them electorally.
Kind of weird to do that when he's not Tweeting.
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
It's not as if railway suicides have not killed others:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ufton_Nervet_rail_crash
(/controversial opinion)
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
Is that your argument?
If you're happy for your taxes to be spaffed on this lunacy, good for you
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lmr29ygjo
I believe that's a fair bit more than most open-source intel bods have been saying.
This *may* be connected with a recent post of mine.
"As I was going to St. Ives, I met a man with 7 wives, every wife had 7 sacks, every sack had 7 cats, every cat had 7 kittens, kittens, cats sacks and wives. How many were going to St. Ives?"
"Billionaire Richard Lugner - known for his extravagant lifestyle, many wives and glamourous dates with a-listers - has died at the age of 91 after suffering several health issues.
The construction tycoon and socialite, who made headlines for paying the world's VIPs to attend Vienna's annual Opera Ball, passed away in his Viennese villa on Monday, Austrian media reported.
Just a few weeks ago , Lugner married his sixth wife, 42-year-old actress Simone 'Biene' Reilaender."
Mail
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
There were some stats last week, his first twenty six tests were against Australia, West Indies, and South Africa.
I worked in a rail depot for a couple of years. Some people brush it off others it hangs over them for life.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South, appeared to link Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the recent disorder on Britain’s streets, arguing that the “inhumanity” shown towards Palestinians had led to rising Islamophobia in the UK.
Campaigners accused the MP of blaming Israel for the riots and called for his suspension.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/12/labour-mp-accused-blame-israel-riots-islamophobia/
236 last year, that’s more than four a week. https://www.statista.com/statistics/305113/railway-suicide-fatalities-in-great-britain-uk/
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
How much do European countries that can process applications within weeks not years pay on hotels, so that we can make an accurate comparison between the two systems?
Wisconsin - 🔵 Harris +12
Michigan - 🔵 Harris +5
Pennsylvania - 🔵 Harris +4
Bullfinch (No Rank) - 1500 LV - 8/11
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1823061951179583880
@BartholomewRoberts denies that he supports open borders, but in practice he supports policies that push inexorably in that direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kndAdLxnasM
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
And anecdotally, drivers have committed suicide after such incidents.
It's one of the reasons I'm narrowly in favour of assisted suicide; but that in itself is troublesome.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-guarantees-asylumseeker-figures-will-halve-118816.html
2003: "Blair 'guarantees' asylum-seeker figures will halve"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009071378371313664
We can't tow people back to France without France's consent - France is a sovereign country.
It's utterly horrid.
There are many potential reasons for this incursion; the chances are that it will not just be one, but a combination that made the potential risk versus reward balance worthwhile. Those two options are potentials, but there are many others, such as the potential to disrupt Russian logistics; or grab the Kursk NPP (unlikely...) or to have land to exchange for Ukrainian land, or many others we do not know of. As another example; this incursion adds many more targets for long-range weapons into Russia.
This is what I suspected before the election, yet I hoped I was wrong, I hoped they really had developed some clever answers
They haven't. This is why I believe this subject - migration/asylum - will shred this government to pieces in short order. They are clueless, and all their instincts tell them to make the problem WORSE
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c15gzzx1q5zo
Also it turns the battlefield to one that plays on Ukraine's strengths - when it comes to mobile warfare rather than frozen warfare, Ukraine has the technological edge.
Harris (D) 49%
Trump (R) 40%
Kennedy (I) 3%
West (I) 1%
Stein (G) 1%
8/8-8/11 by The Bullfinch Group
500 RV
Woof! Can I have a treat?
Source:
independentcenter.org
Exclusive Poll: Election 2024 Survey of the Playground States - Independent Center