This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
Changi is the Robert Jenrick of airports. Try as I might, I just can't see the appeal.
Yes, passport control gave me a small boiled sweet, but I had to walk a huge distance in a very short time between connecting flights immediately after disembarking, which wasn't enjoyable.
I also dislike Dubai which some rave about.
Give me a medium-sized US airport with an on-site microbrewery every time.
Doha is best: they have a swimming pool, so you can do 40 laps while you wait for your connection.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
NB. It seems the whole “Starmer is getting a box at Arsenal for free” is something of a misunderstanding - he’s being seated in the Director’s box, alongside all the other guests. The Director’s box is a) huge and b) invitation only, which presumably allows his security to vet the guest list. Similarly Sunak was seated in the Director’s box when he attended Southampton matches I believe.
Much of the Starmer freebies story is a massive own goal of spectacular proportions, but this one seems reasonable?
Starmer also continues to pay for his Arsenal season ticket.
Does he then sell the seats through the Arsenal secondary market, recouping - IIRC - 80% of face?
He doesn't have a season ticket any more. It's another one of his vague lawyerly mistruths that he has allowed to continue, to let people use as reasoning to support his actions.
Any evidence of this ?
Most football fans hold on to season tickets like limpets particularly at the likes of Arsenal, United, Liverpool and even Everton, and which is why some season ticket holders at Liverpool are rumoured to have reached the ripe old age of 107
They can get face value back from the club without difficulty.
When he's left office and on the ex PM speech gravy train, I'd be pretty certain his son would prefer to sit in his normal spec. with people he has probably known for 5 years+ than with some twats in a box.
That's not true of Arsenal. I joined the season ticket waiting list in 2008 and got one in 2013. If you joined the list now, you're not going to be getting one any time soon. Point is, it all depends on the perception of the fans. At the moment, they've "got their Arsenal back". A bad season and we'll be back to loads of empty seats and it impossible to sell on the exchange.
I'm still on the waiting list to graduate from Red to Silver membership.
From I can tell, the benefits of Silver membership were largely made redundant by the dreaded ballot.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
Staggering they didn't get it all out on the table the first time they were eating @%^& over this. Now genuinely feels possible there's just going to be a further stream of venial corruption revealed every other day.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
It did bring down Boris - the self obsession entirely absorbed the government, and they did nothing otherwise. Or perhaps worse they just did the easiest thing otherwise.
Boris could have been a good, perhaps even a great PM, and yet he spent all of his time pondering his own navel.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
Don’t forget my fellow political junkies the VP debate is on next Tuesday night . I ordinarily wouldn’t stay up for a VP debate but this one could be a lot more interesting and there’s bound to be fireworks .
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
It’s very hard to bring down a leader of the Labour Party. But it is relatively trivial to bring down a Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
There is certainly a timeline where Sir Sausage gets ousted by the Labour Left, with the moderates too disallusioned by how crap he is to put up the fight to save him. I’d say it’s actually quite likely, big majorities make for rowdy backbenches.
As hard as it might be for me to believe today, the day might come in this parliament where I am rather wistful for those heady days when Starmer was in charge, rather than the pro Hamas wing of the Labour Party.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
I really hope we don't return to the situation that we had under Boris where politics simply became about defending Boris.
It's ridiculous that he took free clothes and all the rest of it. (Although I do think the football stuff is ok.)
We need to look at the laws so that attempted bribery of an MP gets you locked up.
The problem with the Alli / Labour mess is that he is now, essentially, Labour.
It's not like the good olde days, when a developer gave a brown envelope to a minister so a certain development went ahead - or another one did not. Or someone pays for a vote. That's relatively easy to show cause and effect.
In Alli's case, AIUI he's splurged hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - at loads of Labour MPs and the party as a whole. One of his people was involved with selecting candidates; he helped Sue Gray's son get elected. His fingers are everywhere, and working out what, if anything, he got, or hoped to get, for his influence will be exceptionally tricky.
Even if he was doing it for thoroughly altruistic reasons, it looks terrible and such behavious should be stamped on. Because even if Alli is with the angels, the next one might not.
Who TF is Jonathan Pie? Is he important in some way?
He’s a comedian who does a lot of funny political commentary and satire.
Many people are upset with him, that following the change of government he’s still ripping the piss out of the incumbents.
Never heard of the guy.
He can be very funny, a lot of Youtube and a R4 series
He's not that funny unless you're a left-winger.
He's very mildly Woke critical.
I saw him absolutely rinse rainbow-flag coffee cups once. Brilliantly.
Some of the best jokes at the fringe this year were lefties taking the piss out of their fellow lefties. Ultimately people are all hypocrites to a certain degree, which is a rich vein for comedy (and indeed for people attacking Labour at the moment).
It works better than the humourless fury of a Daily Mail reader.
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
It's like a really badly scripted episode of the American The Office..
Whatever you do Michael, don't call the Jewish hostages sausages
This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
Changi is the Robert Jenrick of airports. Try as I might, I just can't see the appeal.
Yes, passport control gave me a small boiled sweet, but I had to walk a huge distance in a very short time between connecting flights immediately after disembarking, which wasn't enjoyable.
I also dislike Dubai which some rave about.
Give me a medium-sized US airport with an on-site microbrewery every time.
Doha is best: they have a swimming pool, so you can do 40 laps while you wait for your connection.
This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
City is horribly claustrophobic imo.
Agreed. Really cramped and terrible catering. It used to be great, I dunno what they've done
Luton is vastly improved, esp with the train shuttle
LHR is a great world airport, people are far too cruel about it
I agree some of the UK's regional airports are a disgrace. Glasgow is horrible. Exeter is dismal
That's a shame, I haven't flown from there for a while because corporate HQ was in Japan so no flights. It used to be brilliant, airside in under 15 mins, decent selection of bars and not too crowded with pointless shops.
Heathrow is only good if you're flying from T2 or T5. If you're in 3 or 4 it's dire. They need to invest and refurb or rebuild T4 completely and expand T2 enough so they can dump T3 entirely.
T4 is OK, T3 I agree needs major work
For some reason nearly all my flights go through T2 or T5 (I guess because they are the best and biggest)
LCY has just got permission to expand, which it desperately needs
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
You don't mean "even in opposition" you mean "only in opposition". A cabinet strike is immediately effective, a shadow cabinet strike who even notices?
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
I really hope we don't return to the situation that we had under Boris where politics simply became about defending Boris.
It's ridiculous that he took free clothes and all the rest of it. (Although I do think the football stuff is ok.)
We need to look at the laws so that attempted bribery of an MP gets you locked up.
The problem with the Alli / Labour mess is that he is now, essentially, Labour.
It's not like the good olde days, when a developer gave a brown envelope to a minister so a certain development went ahead - or another one did not. Or someone pays for a vote. That's relatively easy to show cause and effect.
In Alli's case, AIUI he's splurged hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - at loads of Labour MPs and the party as a whole. One of his people was involved with selecting candidates; he helped Sue Gray's son get elected. His fingers are everywhere, and working out what, if anything, he got, or hoped to get, for his influence will be exceptionally tricky.
Even if he was doing it for thoroughly altruistic reasons, it looks terrible and such behavious should be stamped on. Because even if Alli is with the angels, the next one might not.
I read a bit into the geezers background and found it tricky to figure out his angle.
NB. It seems the whole “Starmer is getting a box at Arsenal for free” is something of a misunderstanding - he’s being seated in the Director’s box, alongside all the other guests. The Director’s box is a) huge and b) invitation only, which presumably allows his security to vet the guest list. Similarly Sunak was seated in the Director’s box when he attended Southampton matches I believe.
Much of the Starmer freebies story is a massive own goal of spectacular proportions, but this one seems reasonable?
Starmer also continues to pay for his Arsenal season ticket.
Does he then sell the seats through the Arsenal secondary market, recouping - IIRC - 80% of face?
He doesn't have a season ticket any more. It's another one of his vague lawyerly mistruths that he has allowed to continue, to let people use as reasoning to support his actions.
Any evidence of this ?
Most football fans hold on to season tickets like limpets particularly at the likes of Arsenal, United, Liverpool and even Everton, and which is why some season ticket holders at Liverpool are rumoured to have reached the ripe old age of 107
They can get face value back from the club without difficulty.
When he's left office and on the ex PM speech gravy train, I'd be pretty certain his son would prefer to sit in his normal spec. with people he has probably known for 5 years+ than with some twats in a box.
I'll row back on my comment. It was on the BBC this morning as they were running a live update on his interview, they used the word 'previously' but that live update is not up any more.
He normally only says 'I have been a season ticket holder for years'.
If he is still, who is using the season ticket? Are they using it for free?
Poor bloke only received £35,792 worth of football tickets during the last parliament.
Errr: he will simply sell the tickets back to the Club, which takes about 20 seconds to do.
Does he need to declare that income?
It's not income: you bought a ticket for £100, and sold it back to the club for £80.
NB. It seems the whole “Starmer is getting a box at Arsenal for free” is something of a misunderstanding - he’s being seated in the Director’s box, alongside all the other guests. The Director’s box is a) huge and b) invitation only, which presumably allows his security to vet the guest list. Similarly Sunak was seated in the Director’s box when he attended Southampton matches I believe.
Much of the Starmer freebies story is a massive own goal of spectacular proportions, but this one seems reasonable?
Starmer also continues to pay for his Arsenal season ticket.
Does he then sell the seats through the Arsenal secondary market, recouping - IIRC - 80% of face?
He doesn't have a season ticket any more. It's another one of his vague lawyerly mistruths that he has allowed to continue, to let people use as reasoning to support his actions.
Any evidence of this ?
Most football fans hold on to season tickets like limpets particularly at the likes of Arsenal, United, Liverpool and even Everton, and which is why some season ticket holders at Liverpool are rumoured to have reached the ripe old age of 107
They can get face value back from the club without difficulty.
When he's left office and on the ex PM speech gravy train, I'd be pretty certain his son would prefer to sit in his normal spec. with people he has probably known for 5 years+ than with some twats in a box.
I'll row back on my comment. It was on the BBC this morning as they were running a live update on his interview, they used the word 'previously' but that live update is not up any more.
He normally only says 'I have been a season ticket holder for years'.
If he is still, who is using the season ticket? Are they using it for free?
Poor bloke only received £35,792 worth of football tickets during the last parliament.
Errr: he will simply sell the tickets back to the Club, which takes about 20 seconds to do.
Does he need to declare that income?
It's not income: you bought a ticket for £100, and sold it back to the club for £80.
And a few grands' worth of ticket at the same time
SEE, I'm on the cutting (and hallucinating) edge of things:
"Sam Altman says he has had "life-changing" psychedelic experiences that transformed him from an anxious, unhappy person into a very calm person who can work on hard and important things"
If you haven't taken ayahuasca and interviewed a jaguar demon in an Aztec Temple MADE OF SAPPHIRES as you both approach the shimmering ocean of the Godhead then you're NOTHING
That’s the concern for Harris . Trump will be telling everyone it would be all lovely and peaceful if he was still President.
How the actual f*** does that work - Trump has a direct line to the leadership of Hezbollah and could have stopped October 7th?
Hezbollah was not involved in October 7th, and nor was Iran. Hamas blindsided both its nominal allies. Possibly if they had known, they might have talked Hamas out of their absurd (and evil) plan.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
You don't mean "even in opposition" you mean "only in opposition". A cabinet strike is immediately effective, a shadow cabinet strike who even notices?
Corbyn got overwhelmingly reelected by members when he had to restand for the leadership as forced to by Labour MPs; how would Slalom fare under the same test?
This classic blooper/blunder was committed by Harry von Zell, a prominent singer, actor and especially professional announcer (from 1920s through 1960s)
from his wikibio: As a young announcer, von Zell made a memorable verbal slip in 1931 when he referred to then U.S. President Herbert Hoover as "Hoobert Heever" during a live tribute on Hoover's birthday. Hoover was not present at this tribute. Von Zell's blooper came at the end of a lengthy summation of Hoover's career, during which von Zell had pronounced the President's name correctly several times
SSI - No need to wonder at such spoonerisms, especially when they involve rhymes & the like, methinks.
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
When in Germany, I try a little of the language, but I make sure never to say "Mein fraülein" because I'm petrified of saying something else...
Who TF is Jonathan Pie? Is he important in some way?
He’s a comedian who does a lot of funny political commentary and satire.
Many people are upset with him, that following the change of government he’s still ripping the piss out of the incumbents.
Never heard of the guy.
He can be very funny, a lot of Youtube and a R4 series
He's not that funny unless you're a left-winger.
He's very mildly Woke critical.
I saw him absolutely rinse rainbow-flag coffee cups once. Brilliantly.
Some of the best jokes at the fringe this year were lefties taking the piss out of their fellow lefties. Ultimately people are all hypocrites to a certain degree, which is a rich vein for comedy (and indeed for people attacking Labour at the moment).
It works better than the humourless fury of a Daily Mail reader.
There's no equivalent on the left of the Regan(?) principle that no conservative should speak Illl of another conservative.
Not sure how much that is admirable and how much it is foolish. On either side.
British conservatives would have done better had more people spoken Ill of Boris and Liz and sooner.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
Changi is the Robert Jenrick of airports. Try as I might, I just can't see the appeal.
Yes, passport control gave me a small boiled sweet, but I had to walk a huge distance in a very short time between connecting flights immediately after disembarking, which wasn't enjoyable.
I also dislike Dubai which some rave about.
Give me a medium-sized US airport with an on-site microbrewery every time.
Doha is best: they have a swimming pool, so you can do 40 laps while you wait for your connection.
Does this apply to all passengers? I've been there, once, in the middle of the night. It looked like a 5 star hotel as I recall.
This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
Changi is the Robert Jenrick of airports. Try as I might, I just can't see the appeal.
Yes, passport control gave me a small boiled sweet, but I had to walk a huge distance in a very short time between connecting flights immediately after disembarking, which wasn't enjoyable.
I also dislike Dubai which some rave about.
Give me a medium-sized US airport with an on-site microbrewery every time.
Doha is best: they have a swimming pool, so you can do 40 laps while you wait for your connection.
Does this apply to all passengers? I've been there, once, in the middle of the night. It looked like a 5 star hotel as I recall.
You have to pay to use the swimming pool, but it's open to anyone.
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
When in Germany, I try a little of the language, but I make sure never to say "Mein fraülein" because I'm petrified of saying something else...
When I deliver parcels, I often say 'I have a packet for you"
I never say it to anyone who might be Pakistani, just in case they mishear and think I've abbreviatied their nationality
The Harris - Walz garden posters have at least and at last started going up around Asheville.
"Yard signs" in our quaint colonial lingo. Same here around Seattle & environs.
PS - You & your little dog too, keep an ear & eye out for weather news. Hurricane Helene is a serious storm, getting ready to slam into the Florida Panhandle then may (emphasis on conditional) be headed your general direction. Danger on Gulf Coast is wind & storm surge; further inland rain & flooding.
This seems a strange report. I don't think 5 days is enough to find out whether a claimed "theft from my bank account" is fraud or not.
It will open up new opportunities for fraud based around aflse claims of having had money removed. Removing all responsibility from someone who clicked on a phishing email and gave out their numbers could blow up the FSCS.
Potentially this is in the "tragedy of the commons" category.
UK banks must refund fraud victims up to £85,000 within five days under new rules.
Most High Street banks and payment companies voluntarily compensate customers who are tricked into sending money to scammers.
But in a world first, these refunds will become mandatory from 7 October, the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) has announced.
The watchdog has reduced the maximum compensation from a previous proposal of £415,000. It said the new cap of £85,000 would cover more than 99% of claims.
It also announced that once a bank or payment company had refunded a customer, it could claim half back from the financial institution the fraudster used to receive the stolen money. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy94vz4zd7zo
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
When in Germany, I try a little of the language, but I make sure never to say "Mein fraülein" because I'm petrified of saying something else...
When I deliver parcels, I often say 'I have a packet for you"
I never say it to anyone who might be Pakistani, just in case they think I've abbreviatied their nationality
Me, age 10, on the bus taking to my mate about our in-progress homegrown BBC BASIC reimplementation of PacMan:
"So, imagine if the pacman - the poor little paci man - hits a wall..."
Middle aged asian dude across the aisle looks over, daggers.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
He is. Guido is well known to be a Tory hack. He pretends to be Nige-curious just now to please his commentors, but he'll be putting the boot in there where and when possible too.
The point is not whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
Yet again another donation that has not registered / not registered correctly. For a man with a supposed forensic lawyer background, he ain't half crap ensuring the correct paperwork has been done...
I posted my dinner plans, but swapped sausages for hostages, and got fifteen likes (so far)
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
It is BIZARRE
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
There is a fairly straightforward theory, but I am not being accused of two comments that are beneath me in one day.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
Actually in this case I was referring to Sky who are just not letting up in their pursuit for gotchas
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
He is. Guido is well known to be a Tory hack. He pretends to be Nige-curious just now to please his commentors, but he'll be putting the boot in there where and when possible too.
The point is whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
If the son was living there for more than a month, council tax would be due, right? Even if there is no council tax on second homes in that borough.
On topic - that is a good spot by TSE but I'd want to see more pollsconfirming it and especially polls by non-British pollsters. The British companies have a pretty terrible record in US elections.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
He is. Guido is well known to be a Tory hack. He pretends to be Nige-curious just now to please his commentors, but he'll be putting the boot in there where and when possible too.
The point is whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
If the son was living there for more than a month, council tax would be due, right? Even if there is no council tax on second homes in that borough.
Lord Alli would be paying council tax in case he stayed there no? There could even be live in staff.
If the StarmTroopers said "this is stupid and looks bad even if within the rules" instead of "this is within the rules and nowhere near as bad as the tories so stfu" they might have their opinions taken with a modicum of seriousness
Set aside the legalities of politicians accepting lavish hospitality and gifts.
It’s just so *utterly stupid.*
There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. When someone does you a big favour, you incur an obligation to that person. Morally speaking. Tit for tat is at the heart of all social obligations.
As Vito Corleone put it, maybe that debt will never be called in. But if it is, it must be paid.
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
He is. Guido is well known to be a Tory hack. He pretends to be Nige-curious just now to please his commentors, but he'll be putting the boot in there where and when possible too.
The point is whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
If the son was living there for more than a month, council tax would be due, right? Even if there is no council tax on second homes in that borough.
Lord Alli would be paying council tax in case he stayed there no? There could even be live in staff.
"You’ll usually have to pay Council Tax on another property you own or rent, such as a holiday home. These properties are furnished and do not have anyone living in them as their main home. They are also known as ‘second homes’.
Your council can decide to give you a discount - it’s up to them how much you get. Contact your council to ask about a discount."
This seems a strange report. I don't think 5 days is enough to find out whether a claimed "theft from my bank account" is fraud or not.
It will open up new opportunities for fraud based around aflse claims of having had money removed. Removing all responsibility from someone who clicked on a phishing email and gave out their numbers could blow up the FSCS.
Potentially this is in the "tragedy of the commons" category.
UK banks must refund fraud victims up to £85,000 within five days under new rules.
Most High Street banks and payment companies voluntarily compensate customers who are tricked into sending money to scammers.
But in a world first, these refunds will become mandatory from 7 October, the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) has announced.
The watchdog has reduced the maximum compensation from a previous proposal of £415,000. It said the new cap of £85,000 would cover more than 99% of claims.
It also announced that once a bank or payment company had refunded a customer, it could claim half back from the financial institution the fraudster used to receive the stolen money. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy94vz4zd7zo
Interesting.
The ITV national news presented it as the watchdog going easy on the banks because the cap,was reduced.
If people are stupid enough to be tricked into sending money to scammers especially to the point of deceiving bank staff why should they get a penny back ?
There was some twit on radio 4 a year or two ago who pretended to mispronounce Jeremy Hunt's surname with a C. The twittery being that this just doesn't happen: we don't store words as strings according to initial letter or concluding syllable and so we don't dip into a folder of *unt words and accidentally come up with the wrong one.
Starmer is emotionally colourblind. Duck and luck are for most of us black and white words while fuck is lit up in neon. And there's as big a difference between sausage and hostage. These are not to most of us just character strings with a 43% overlap. A frightened captive human being and a high fat gristle tube are in different folders, as separate and differently coloured as the duck and fuck folders. Picking one by mistake for the other is not a human mistake.
To be human is to dream. Dreams let us process and make emotional sense of life. Starmer shockingly claims not to dream. Sausage and hostage to him are just character strings.
He is plainly good enough at mimicking human to get by at least in the stilted worlds of law and the labour party. Labour tends to promote such people - Brown, Miliband. The key to understanding Starmer is to see that he is what "does not speak human" really looks like.
Whilst the trolling of those who can't abide any criticism of the new government is on point, the cod psychology needs work imo.
This is going viral on TwiX. Is it true? I have never used Manc airport
"The experience of arriving at Manchester Airport from Singapore is the nearest we can get to experiencing actual time travel from the future to the past, or to approximate viscerally the feeling of what it was like to return to East Germany from the West"
Two points. He is comparing it to Changi which is probably the best airport in the world, and in one of the richest cities in the world. And I went through Edinburgh airport recently and I thought it was OK for a regional European airport, about the same as you'd get in Spain or Germany, a bit less flash than France
But is Manc really that bad?
All of our airports except LCY are shit compared to Changi or middle eastern ones. As with most infrastructure in the UK there's been far too little investment and far too much shareholder dividends. Heathrow generates so much cash that it should be world class and have £4-5bn in the bank ready for the third runway but instead anyone who doesn't fly from T2 or T5 gets a depressing experience through a long security queue and a bunch of shite airside. Greedy shareholders are the bane of regulated UK industry from water to airports to energy generation.
Changi is the Robert Jenrick of airports. Try as I might, I just can't see the appeal.
Yes, passport control gave me a small boiled sweet, but I had to walk a huge distance in a very short time between connecting flights immediately after disembarking, which wasn't enjoyable.
I also dislike Dubai which some rave about.
Give me a medium-sized US airport with an on-site microbrewery every time.
Yes, the oft-overlooked problem with these massive Gulf and Asian airports is they often come with enormous walks - 30 minutes to get to the gate etc. Which is not fun
For me the perfect airport is small, near its city, but ultra-modern, and with maybe three good bars and a good restaurant
If you must have a big world airport give it great connections to the city and lots of good bars and restos, cool lounges, and minimal walking. LHR is really pretty good for that. Better than CDG, JFK or LAX for instance
First time I went to Phnom Penh airport, it had just opened. It had one carousel and no walk was more than about fifty yards.
Joyous. I suspect that has changed!
Best airport - Trujillo, Peru.
When I flew in, two flights a day in, two out.
Modern Airbus from Lima. With every seat a wide, business class style seat.
You walked off the plane and your luggage appeared on the single carousel thing. In about 5 min. You see through the flaps to see that your luggage was actually being hoiked out of the containers straight onto the carousel.
You could be in and out of the airport in 10 min or less.
This seems a strange report. I don't think 5 days is enough to find out whether a claimed "theft from my bank account" is fraud or not.
It will open up new opportunities for fraud based around aflse claims of having had money removed. Removing all responsibility from someone who clicked on a phishing email and gave out their numbers could blow up the FSCS.
Potentially this is in the "tragedy of the commons" category.
UK banks must refund fraud victims up to £85,000 within five days under new rules.
Most High Street banks and payment companies voluntarily compensate customers who are tricked into sending money to scammers.
But in a world first, these refunds will become mandatory from 7 October, the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) has announced.
The watchdog has reduced the maximum compensation from a previous proposal of £415,000. It said the new cap of £85,000 would cover more than 99% of claims.
It also announced that once a bank or payment company had refunded a customer, it could claim half back from the financial institution the fraudster used to receive the stolen money. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy94vz4zd7zo
My mate fell victim to a scam so obvious that I called it just a few words in to his tale (daughter, lost phone, send money to "friend's" bank account). His bank blocked the payment, but he did not believe the bank's warning and was only saved by being so inept at online banking that he managed accidentally to lock himself out of his account.
I lost the wirewhich reluctantly charges my phone earlier today in a running-for-the-tram-while-carrying-a-bag-with-a-hole-in-it earlier today. Bugger. (Made the tram, though, beating it over 400m in a foot race. Go fat middle aged me. Anyway.) So I was in the market for a new wire. Happened, atound 7pm, to be driving up Great Ducie Street in Strangeways. 12 months ago, this was Counterfeit Alley - anonymous shop after anonymous shop with Asian men hovering watchfully outside. Used to be busy with people emerging with armfuls of knock-off clothing and covered in litter. It's been marginally cleaned up and is now the territory of not-obviously-horrible takeaways, but also, happily, a shop selling mobile phone accessories. I turned into a sidestreet to park, which was lined by nothing - nothing - but vape shops. Over 50 of them, if you take in the units in the mini retail park at the end. Nothing but vape shops as far as the eye could see. Half of them closed - understandably, given the hour - but half open - staffed by Asian men underneath bright neon signs and utterly devoid of customers. What the bloody hell is going on there then? Nothing legitimate, surely. I mean, the dodgy counterfeit shops were clearly selling illegal goods, but I could at least understamd how their businesses worked. Anyway, the phone shop - also staffed by Asian men - were able to cheerfully solve all my phone problems and I went on my way.
Set aside the legalities of politicians accepting lavish hospitality and gifts.
It’s just so *utterly stupid.*
There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. When someone does you a big favour, you incur an obligation to that person. Morally speaking. Tit for tat is at the heart of all social obligations.
As Vito Corleone put it, maybe that debt will never be called in. But if it is, it must be paid.
On one hand, fully agree.
On the other, that's not the line that the British system has had. Until about ten days ago, the line was "take what you like, as long as you declare it." The trouble for the last government was how often they struggled to clear even that hurdle.
And on the third hand (don't worry, I don't teach biology any more), then the boring stuff that donations currently funds has to be paid for some other way, and we're collectively allergic to putting our hands in our pockets.
I don't know what the answer is, except that it will work to the opposition's disadvantage. Which is why they're largely avoiding the story.
Maybe we should have a register of interests for newspapers?
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
I really hope we don't return to the situation that we had under Boris where politics simply became about defending Boris.
It's ridiculous that he took free clothes and all the rest of it. (Although I do think the football stuff is ok.)
We need to look at the laws so that attempted bribery of an MP gets you locked up.
The problem with the Alli / Labour mess is that he is now, essentially, Labour.
It's not like the good olde days, when a developer gave a brown envelope to a minister so a certain development went ahead - or another one did not. Or someone pays for a vote. That's relatively easy to show cause and effect.
In Alli's case, AIUI he's splurged hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - at loads of Labour MPs and the party as a whole. One of his people was involved with selecting candidates; he helped Sue Gray's son get elected. His fingers are everywhere, and working out what, if anything, he got, or hoped to get, for his influence will be exceptionally tricky.
Even if he was doing it for thoroughly altruistic reasons, it looks terrible and such behavious should be stamped on. Because even if Alli is with the angels, the next one might not.
I read a bit into the geezers background and found it tricky to figure out his angle.
Perhaps he doesn't have an angle. Perhaps he's with the angels.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
I don't know if he's a goner, but he is permanently tainted now, there is so much of it, and it is so complex and prolonged. It's not one incident, it's a type of behaviour: entitlement mixed with sanctimony. Not good at all
Also, he is perpetually on the back foot, the prime minister having to explain every day - in an awkward way - why is not actually a lying thief
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
One of his problems is he immediately gets defensive and prickly, and refuses to take questions, and that makes him look even guiltier, and he is completely devoid of charm, smarm or humour
Blair would have said Shucks, sorry, ah well, and smiled, and you'd warm to him anyway; Boris would have blustered then told a joke and distracted everyone (tho he ran out of jokes in the end)
This is at the BEGINNING of Starmer's premiership and he looks like an exhausted batsman who has been at the crease all day and is now wearily fending off the bowling
What's more, Beth Rigby didn't even ask him the obvious, punitive question: "Prime Minister, you say you claimed this flat for your son's GCSEs, but the dates don't match, those exams finished nearly a month before you handed the flat back. What did you really use the flat for?"
What is the mechanism by which this brings down the Prime Minister when freebies did not bring down Blair or Boris, and when it is almost impossible to depose a Labour leader even in Opposition?
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
Re your last paragraph why would they when the media are doing it for them
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
It may be that Guido is fronting for CCHQ. Who else would have every Starmer broadcast saved and ready to compare with Alli's room dimensions?
He is. Guido is well known to be a Tory hack. He pretends to be Nige-curious just now to please his commentors, but he'll be putting the boot in there where and when possible too.
The point is not whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
The bit re: family photo, reminds me of the media flap when Richard Nixon was photographed walking along the beach at San Clemente . . . in suit, tie AND . . . wait for it . . . wingtips.
Folks my age still recall THAT far more than far more important details re: Nixon Presidency and Watergate.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
And in doing so, you get Farage, or Corbyn, or whoever it is that burns with a bright but ill light?
For the time being Starmer is fine.
I don’t know - I'm not willing this to happen. I don’t like Starmer but nor do I like a country with no semblance of a competent Government.
I suspect SKS will be replaced by another Labourite - we can hardly have another GE.
Any leader is going to be chased by the press until chasing by the press stops being the issue.
I vaguely recall a time when the press had a role beyond continual attempted destabilisation of the realm.
This sort of comment is depressing. If politicians do not want the media to go after them, then they shouldn't do stupid stuff that - at best - looks dodgy.
Were you calling it 'destabilisation of the realm' when parts of the media were after Boris? Or Truss? Or Sunak?
What donations will he be defending in the next interview? Tune in next week for another thrilling installment.
I really hope we don't return to the situation that we had under Boris where politics simply became about defending Boris.
It's ridiculous that he took free clothes and all the rest of it. (Although I do think the football stuff is ok.)
We need to look at the laws so that attempted bribery of an MP gets you locked up.
The problem with the Alli / Labour mess is that he is now, essentially, Labour.
It's not like the good olde days, when a developer gave a brown envelope to a minister so a certain development went ahead - or another one did not. Or someone pays for a vote. That's relatively easy to show cause and effect.
In Alli's case, AIUI he's splurged hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - at loads of Labour MPs and the party as a whole. One of his people was involved with selecting candidates; he helped Sue Gray's son get elected. His fingers are everywhere, and working out what, if anything, he got, or hoped to get, for his influence will be exceptionally tricky.
Even if he was doing it for thoroughly altruistic reasons, it looks terrible and such behavious should be stamped on. Because even if Alli is with the angels, the next one might not.
I read a bit into the geezers background and found it tricky to figure out his angle.
A friend at work, who is in the Labour Party, argued that his angle is that he's just a really sweet guy. This - even in my public sector blobby organisation - was met with a lot of laughter.
As ever it's the cover up which is screwing with Starmer
Trotting out that blatant lie about the Covent Garden penthouse - "for my son's GCSE study" - even tho they kept the flat almost a month after the exams ended - has got everyone looking at the penthouse. Now it turns out Starmer has been using it for multiple purposes for years, and during lockdown, when he was hysterically lecturing the Tories about breaking lockdown
This is now deeply perilous for Skyr Toolmakersson
Lazy to just give a massive lump sum on the day after donations are declarable before the election - at least Lord Ali but the effort in spreading his goodies around bit by bit.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
And in doing so, you get Farage, or Corbyn, or whoever it is that burns with a bright but ill light?
For the time being Starmer is fine.
I don’t know - I'm not willing this to happen. I don’t like Starmer but nor do I like a country with no semblance of a competent Government.
I suspect SKS will be replaced by another Labourite - we can hardly have another GE.
Any leader is going to be chased by the press until chasing by the press stops being the issue.
I vaguely recall a time when the press had a role beyond continual attempted destabilisation of the realm.
This sort of comment is depressing. If politicians do not want the media to go after them, then they shouldn't do stupid stuff that - at best - looks dodgy.
Were you calling it 'destabilisation of the realm' when parts of the media were after Boris? Or Truss? Or Sunak?
I don't think I called it that at the time, but I have no problem calling it that in retrospect.
Mostly such press is entirely justified, and the press have often been a great pillar of our society in calling out behaviour that is unacceptable. Finding and highlighting fault as a modus operandi is a bit different.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
You think he’s going to resign? What price do you make that?
I don’t know. I make it an even chance. It seems to be becoming apparent that Lord Ali's flat is Starmers second (first?) home. That indicates that the reality of Starmer's life is not the one he has attempted to portray. I don't see it as at all possible that the full facts will not be disclosed at this point. And I don’t see how that doesn't lead to either a completely lame zombie PM, or a resignation.
It's pretty obvious. He is being held sausage by the Labour party and had one chance of getting a coded message out to the outside world. The elegance of the deliberate slip is breathtaking.
Also do photos exist of him with lord Alli, before generative AI? Do the math, people.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
And in doing so, you get Farage, or Corbyn, or whoever it is that burns with a bright but ill light?
For the time being Starmer is fine.
I don’t know - I'm not willing this to happen. I don’t like Starmer but nor do I like a country with no semblance of a competent Government.
I suspect SKS will be replaced by another Labourite - we can hardly have another GE.
Any leader is going to be chased by the press until chasing by the press stops being the issue.
I vaguely recall a time when the press had a role beyond continual attempted destabilisation of the realm.
Quite.
And one of the healthy things that Starmer did in opposition was to not particularly genuflect to the shrines of Murdoch and Rothermere. Not completely, he's not the Messiah, but he didn't grovel anything like as much as, say, Blair did.
(That, of course, is one reason the press don't like him.)
He has started poorly. Whether that's inevitable in a PM, I don't know. But if by buggering on, he gives a polite, stilted, two fingers to the frothers and curtain-twitchers looking to depose people they don't like every five minutes, he will have done the nation a service. Much like his de-Corbyning of the Labour Party.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
I don't know if he's a goner, but he is permanently tainted now, there is so much of it, and it is so complex and prolonged. It's not one incident, it's a type of behaviour: entitlement mixed with sanctimony. Not good at all
Also, he is perpetually on the back foot, the prime minister having to explain every day - in an awkward way - why is not actually a lying thief
He will just have to console himself with a 174 seat majority.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 2h One of the biggest challenges in trying to interpret the US race is the sheer amount of poor quality polling, which gets added into the various models.
Yet again another donation that has not registered / not registered correctly. For a man with a supposed forensic lawyer background, he ain't half crap ensuring the correct paperwork has been done...
Perhaps he's been struggling to cope with his workload.
I think he's a gonner. I really do. Stick a fork in him, he's done.
I don't know if he's a goner, but he is permanently tainted now, there is so much of it, and it is so complex and prolonged. It's not one incident, it's a type of behaviour: entitlement mixed with sanctimony. Not good at all
Also, he is perpetually on the back foot, the prime minister having to explain every day - in an awkward way - why is not actually a lying thief
It doesn't look good but I think they will just ride it out. It is a bit of a second order problem for Labour because surely the main problem is that they have no economic plan, other than to just try and 'keep going'; but then they keep introducing all these new rules, regulations and spending money on things, along with a bit of 'class war' thrown in to keep the supporters happy. They seem to be sleepwalking in to a scenario of economic decline exacerbated by the destruction of the tax base.
'Interesting. Labour's new climate envoy Rachel Kyte is co-chair of climate advisory board of Quadrature Climate Foundation, linked to Quadrature hedge fund based in the Cayman Islands which invests in fossil fuel firms. Quadrature gave Labour £4m on 28 May, at the start of the election campaign, a fact which only emerged a week ago'
Martin Williams:
SCOOP: The Labour peer at the centre of the donations row, Lord Alli, failed to declare interests in a tax haven firm. @openDemocracy
What were the odds on Starmer not making it to the end of the year again?
Comments
And why are the Conservative leadership contenders not wading in even though mortally wounding the Prime Minister would ensure their victory?
He's there on sufferance, his mandate is entirely legal with none of the popular unpinnings the word is intended to convey.
I saw him absolutely rinse rainbow-flag coffee cups once. Brilliantly.
Boris could have been a good, perhaps even a great PM, and yet he spent all of his time pondering his own navel.
https://x.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1838982352954941699?t=migD1S2aSQmfx0ZGMbAA5g&s=19
It's not even a clever joke; the unfunny nonsense I posted to jobbyjob earlier about bells and pies had more thought put into it
But Sir Keir is so awful that his sausages are the sharpest thing about him; they're the only thing that's cut through
Mind you the party conference could be very interesting this weekend
There is certainly a timeline where Sir Sausage gets ousted by the Labour Left, with the moderates too disallusioned by how crap he is to put up the fight to save him. I’d say it’s actually quite likely, big majorities make for rowdy backbenches.
As hard as it might be for me to believe today, the day might come in this parliament where I am rather wistful for those heady days when Starmer was in charge, rather than the pro Hamas wing of the Labour Party.
It's not like the good olde days, when a developer gave a brown envelope to a minister so a certain development went ahead - or another one did not. Or someone pays for a vote. That's relatively easy to show cause and effect.
In Alli's case, AIUI he's splurged hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - at loads of Labour MPs and the party as a whole. One of his people was involved with selecting candidates; he helped Sue Gray's son get elected. His fingers are everywhere, and working out what, if anything, he got, or hoped to get, for his influence will be exceptionally tricky.
Even if he was doing it for thoroughly altruistic reasons, it looks terrible and such behavious should be stamped on. Because even if Alli is with the angels, the next one might not.
It works better than the humourless fury of a Daily Mail reader.
In academic and legal careers and just taking part in life generally I have sat through thousands of hours people speechifying and I have never heard an error like this. It's the sort of mistake you make in a language you don't know, like kalamari for kalimera in Greek. Starmer speaks English so it is only explicable as a failure to speak human: people, gristle tubes, what's the difference?
Whatever you do Michael, don't call the Jewish hostages sausages
https://www.hial.co.uk/airport-information/terminal-building-refurbishment-barra-airport/1
For some reason nearly all my flights go through T2 or T5 (I guess because they are the best and biggest)
LCY has just got permission to expand, which it desperately needs
"Sam Altman says he has had "life-changing" psychedelic experiences that transformed him from an anxious, unhappy person into a very calm person who can work on hard and important things"
https://x.com/tsarnick/status/1838820218732449993
"Ladies and gentleman, the President of the United States - Hoobert Heever."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ce6lsy9IxY
This classic blooper/blunder was committed by Harry von Zell, a prominent singer, actor and especially professional announcer (from 1920s through 1960s)
from his wikibio:
As a young announcer, von Zell made a memorable verbal slip in 1931 when he referred to then U.S. President Herbert Hoover as "Hoobert Heever" during a live tribute on Hoover's birthday. Hoover was not present at this tribute. Von Zell's blooper came at the end of a lengthy summation of Hoover's career, during which von Zell had pronounced the President's name correctly several times
SSI - No need to wonder at such spoonerisms, especially when they involve rhymes & the like, methinks.
Zero charm, zero persuasiveness, just a quietly truculent rant; he's not used to being the subject of interrogation and he is very bad at it
It wasn't a wholesome look at life
Not sure how much that is admirable and how much it is foolish. On either side.
British conservatives would have done better had more people spoken Ill of Boris and Liz and sooner.
I never say it to anyone who might be Pakistani, just in case they mishear and think I've abbreviatied their nationality
PS - You & your little dog too, keep an ear & eye out for weather news. Hurricane Helene is a serious storm, getting ready to slam into the Florida Panhandle then may (emphasis on conditional) be headed your general direction. Danger on Gulf Coast is wind & storm surge; further inland rain & flooding.
It will open up new opportunities for fraud based around aflse claims of having had money removed. Removing all responsibility from someone who clicked on a phishing email and gave out their numbers could blow up the FSCS.
Potentially this is in the "tragedy of the commons" category.
UK banks must refund fraud victims up to £85,000 within five days under new rules.
Most High Street banks and payment companies voluntarily compensate customers who are tricked into sending money to scammers.
But in a world first, these refunds will become mandatory from 7 October, the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) has announced.
The watchdog has reduced the maximum compensation from a previous proposal of £415,000. It said the new cap of £85,000 would cover more than 99% of claims.
It also announced that once a bank or payment company had refunded a customer, it could claim half back from the financial institution the fraudster used to receive the stolen money.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy94vz4zd7zo
https://x.com/disclosetv/status/1839003757943615589
"So, imagine if the pacman - the poor little paci man - hits a wall..."
Middle aged asian dude across the aisle looks over, daggers.
I think about it and cringe at least once a year.
The point is not whether Guido is biased, it's why has Starmer given him massive ammunition.
Putting a family photo up in a borrowed penthouse and pretending you're at home isn't normal. There is a bigger explanation, and a bigger story here, than freebies.
I believe I said as much - that this was all about the accommodation, some days ago.
It’s just so *utterly stupid.*
There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. When someone does you a big favour, you incur an obligation to that person. Morally speaking. Tit for tat is at the heart of all social obligations.
As Vito Corleone put it, maybe that debt will never be called in. But if it is, it must be paid.
Your council can decide to give you a discount - it’s up to them how much you get. Contact your council to ask about a discount."
So was there a second home discount?
The ITV national news presented it as the watchdog going easy on the banks because the cap,was reduced.
If people are stupid enough to be tricked into sending money to scammers especially to the point of deceiving bank staff why should they get a penny back ?
https://x.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1839006159866306667?t=LS0D9oez-qVIGbbTU1Qwow&s=19
When I flew in, two flights a day in, two out.
Modern Airbus from Lima. With every seat a wide, business class style seat.
You walked off the plane and your luggage appeared on the single carousel thing. In about 5 min. You see through the flaps to see that your luggage was actually being hoiked out of the containers straight onto the carousel.
You could be in and out of the airport in 10 min or less.
Clean and not even the beginnings of a crowd.
This is suddenly quite acute
https://x.com/kelvmackenzie/status/1838961806103949741?t=drfk08HYxuXZeB_SM0TdTg&s=19
For the time being Starmer is fine.
So I was in the market for a new wire. Happened, atound 7pm, to be driving up Great Ducie Street in Strangeways. 12 months ago, this was Counterfeit Alley - anonymous shop after anonymous shop with Asian men hovering watchfully outside. Used to be busy with people emerging with armfuls of knock-off clothing and covered in litter. It's been marginally cleaned up and is now the territory of not-obviously-horrible takeaways, but also, happily, a shop selling mobile phone accessories. I turned into a sidestreet to park, which was lined by nothing - nothing - but vape shops. Over 50 of them, if you take in the units in the mini retail park at the end. Nothing but vape shops as far as the eye could see. Half of them closed - understandably, given the hour - but half open - staffed by Asian men underneath bright neon signs and utterly devoid of customers. What the bloody hell is going on there then? Nothing legitimate, surely.
I mean, the dodgy counterfeit shops were clearly selling illegal goods, but I could at least understamd how their businesses worked.
Anyway, the phone shop - also staffed by Asian men - were able to cheerfully solve all my phone problems and I went on my way.
On the other, that's not the line that the British system has had. Until about ten days ago, the line was "take what you like, as long as you declare it." The trouble for the last government was how often they struggled to clear even that hurdle.
And on the third hand (don't worry, I don't teach biology any more), then the boring stuff that donations currently funds has to be paid for some other way, and we're collectively allergic to putting our hands in our pockets.
I don't know what the answer is, except that it will work to the opposition's disadvantage. Which is why they're largely avoiding the story.
Maybe we should have a register of interests for newspapers?
I suspect SKS will be replaced by another Labourite - we can hardly have another GE.
I vaguely recall a time when the press had a role beyond continual attempted destabilisation of the realm.
Also, he is perpetually on the back foot, the prime minister having to explain every day - in an awkward way - why is not actually a lying thief
Folks my age still recall THAT far more than far more important details re: Nixon Presidency and Watergate.
Were you calling it 'destabilisation of the realm' when parts of the media were after Boris? Or Truss? Or Sunak?
Or are we all two-state-solution Zionists?
If chanting From The River To The Sea is cool, you're anti-Zionist
This - even in my public sector blobby organisation - was met with a lot of laughter.
Trotting out that blatant lie about the Covent Garden penthouse - "for my son's GCSE study" - even tho they kept the flat almost a month after the exams ended - has got everyone looking at the penthouse. Now it turns out Starmer has been using it for multiple purposes for years, and during lockdown, when he was hysterically lecturing the Tories about breaking lockdown
This is now deeply perilous for Skyr Toolmakersson
https://x.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1838918540100841932
Lazy to just give a massive lump sum on the day after donations are declarable before the election - at least Lord Ali but the effort in spreading his goodies around bit by bit.
Mostly such press is entirely justified, and the press have often been a great pillar of our society in calling out behaviour that is unacceptable. Finding and highlighting fault as a modus operandi is a bit different.
https://x.com/freddiesayers/status/1838918847954301362
If their sales tank after all Nelson's years of hard work...
Also do photos exist of him with lord Alli, before generative AI? Do the math, people.
And one of the healthy things that Starmer did in opposition was to not particularly genuflect to the shrines of Murdoch and Rothermere. Not completely, he's not the Messiah, but he didn't grovel anything like as much as, say, Blair did.
(That, of course, is one reason the press don't like him.)
He has started poorly. Whether that's inevitable in a PM, I don't know. But if by buggering on, he gives a polite, stilted, two fingers to the frothers and curtain-twitchers looking to depose people they don't like every five minutes, he will have done the nation a service. Much like his de-Corbyning of the Labour Party.
Even if he fails at everything else.
@Samfr
·
2h
One of the biggest challenges in trying to interpret the US race is the sheer amount of poor quality polling, which gets added into the various models.
'Interesting. Labour's new climate envoy Rachel Kyte is co-chair of climate advisory board of Quadrature Climate Foundation, linked to Quadrature hedge fund based in the Cayman Islands which invests in fossil fuel firms. Quadrature gave Labour £4m on 28 May, at the start of the election campaign, a fact which only emerged a week ago'
Martin Williams:
SCOOP: The Labour peer at the centre of the donations row, Lord Alli, failed to declare interests in a tax haven firm.
@openDemocracy
What were the odds on Starmer not making it to the end of the year again?