Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
It will never be enough for the hard core Refukers.
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
It will never be enough for the hard core Refukers.
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
Mainly because of Rishi's raising the visa wage requirement for new immigrants and dependents, little to do with what Starmer has done beyond kicking out a few illegals for the media.
If Starmer had had his way we would also stlll be in the EU with EU free movement
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
Hopefully Elon has developed the right rocket to send up a nuke and deflect it into a different trajectory.
Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
But once Boris is back on the scene, Starmer's Farage tribute act will look irrelevant. The public will be left with a straight choice between the genuine article - Farage - and his nemesis, Boris, the scourge of Putin and champion of liberal values.
I don't think I've ever seen the words 'genuine' and 'Farage' so closely together. I can almost feel a magnetic repulsion. Though now that I've written that - I can think of a few other words which would bring them together.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
Hopefully Elon has developed the right rocket to send up a nuke and deflect it into a different trajectory.
We did test that. If it looked likely, we can deflect an asteroid of that size kinetically Doesn't need a nuke.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
Hopefully Elon has developed the right rocket to send up a nuke and deflect it into a different trajectory.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
'Wyatt wrote that she was privately "much more pro-Conservative than the Queen or the Prince of the Wales". He claimed that before Mrs Thatcher's re-election for a third term as prime minister in 1987, the Queen Mother asked him anxiously: "The coming year - will it be all right?"
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
'Wyatt wrote that she was privately "much more pro-Conservative than the Queen or the Prince of the Wales". He claimed that before Mrs Thatcher's re-election for a third term as prime minister in 1987, the Queen Mother asked him anxiously: "The coming year - will it be all right?"
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
I read Harry's book. He is very critical of the way the institution of Monachy functions, but he is not a Republican.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Wonder what Betjeman would say, seeing as Slough catches it in your scenario?
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
'Wyatt wrote that she was privately "much more pro-Conservative than the Queen or the Prince of the Wales". He claimed that before Mrs Thatcher's re-election for a third term as prime minister in 1987, the Queen Mother asked him anxiously: "The coming year - will it be all right?"
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
'Wyatt wrote that she was privately "much more pro-Conservative than the Queen or the Prince of the Wales". He claimed that before Mrs Thatcher's re-election for a third term as prime minister in 1987, the Queen Mother asked him anxiously: "The coming year - will it be all right?"
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
Supermarket bags of cash, self-exempted from employment and housing legislation and tax allergic .... clearly they're all the very feudal one's nation Conservative.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
No Trump supporters? A good reason to keep the monarchy.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
I read Harry's book. He is very critical of the way the institution of Monachy functions, but he is not a Republican.
I stand corrected. Count Binface all the way then?
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
Not a surprise. No politicians are popular, but Davey at least occupies the opposite end of the divisiveness scale to Farage.
Arguably Davey bears as much responsibility for Brexit as Farage. Had the Lib Dems honoured their manifesto pledge in 2007 and voted for a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, there were enough votes on the Labour side for a referendum that one might have been held. Instead, he led a highly-staged and disingenuous flounce of the Lib Dems in parliament, superficially at the fact that no referendum on EU membership as a whole was being offered - though really as a way for the Lib Dems not to have to vote against more Europe. And as a result Gordon Brown was able to go and sign Lisbon
Had he not done so, I would argue Lisbon would have been kicked into the long grass, the ratchet would have come to a halt, and we would be left with a Europe there was far less opposition to - here or elsewhere in the continent. We would nit have Brexited.
I would argue Davey is actually more consequential in bringing about Brexit than Farage.
There is no opposition to the Lisbon Treaty on the continent, and very little meaningful opposition to EU membership, for that matter. The EU opponents folded upon proximity to power, or died.
Brexiteers need to start taking responsibility for their decisions, not blaming bloomin' Ed Davey.
Where it WAS offered in a referendum it struggled to pass (and ISTR actually failed in places,albeit this was ignored). "More Europe" has almost never received an enthusiastic welcome at the ballot box.
But anti European parties don't get elected- I think that counts as approval at the ballot box.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
Well... as fine as it was before
(I'm an Essex boy by birth, so I think I can get away with that)
Her Majesty the Queen very wisely agreed with me on all things.
I don't have a citation for that, as the wonderful thing about her was that she was so marvellously discrete in her unwavering support. Rest in peace.
Thank goodness she wasn't continuous. But was she discreet?
When she was ambushed about Brexit by a cheeky commoner she said something like 'think long and hard about it'. I'd say that reply favoured the status quo. If she'd pronounced the regal equivalent of jfdi there'd be no doubt where her sentiments lay. Why wouldn't an octogenarian monarch favour the status quo?
That was Indyref - and Cameron let the cat out of the bag in his getting her to intervene in politics.
To continue the cat theme positively purring at the result according to Cam. They had to keep a hard watch on Trump for potential grabbing on his (first) state visit.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
'Wyatt wrote that she was privately "much more pro-Conservative than the Queen or the Prince of the Wales". He claimed that before Mrs Thatcher's re-election for a third term as prime minister in 1987, the Queen Mother asked him anxiously: "The coming year - will it be all right?"
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
The moment youy start picking and choosing which royalty meets your criteria for a True Tory you've lost - and you lost that years ago with your diatribes against H. Mountbatten-Windsor - who, in contrast to most of us, actually served in the armed forces in a combat zone (and woiuld have done more if they'd let him, as I understand it).
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
It's not a real German election campaign until a senior politician has to deny that they plagiarised their doctorate.
Surely 'recycling' an old thesis is the right thing to do if you're Green?
I've always been suspicious of such attacks ever since a Scottish Labour MSP got very excited about the SNP deleting words from inside verbatim quotations in government policy documents and putting "[...]" instead. That was real fraudulent, apparently.
In the case of degree theses and German politicians - a number of them have been caught by this already.
A journalist of enquiring mind downloaded the theses in question and ran them against plagiarism checkers….
So many were found, in fact that the institutions in question simply ignored the issue.
IIRC 40% of Ursula von der Leyen’s thesis was copy and pasta…
which institutions ignored which issues?
Well for a start, her university decided there was absolutely no problem there.
Obviously, dropping senior politicians in the crapper is bad idea if you are running a university - they might take it badly.
How long have we routinely had plagiarism checkers? I know its routine now, but 20 years ago? Also a plagiarism on technical content often throws up false hits (for instance references will appear to be plagiarised because they are formatted exactly and will be used by multiple documents.
The vaguely decent checkers look for footnoting and other reference stuff.
I've seen people caught by this - "Oh whoops, I forgot to reference all the quotes I used...."
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
The moment youy start picking and choosing which royalty meets your criteria for a True Tory you've lost - and you lost that years ago with your diatribes against H. Mountbatten-Windsor - who, in contrast to most of us, actually served in the armed forces in a combat zone (and woiuld have done more if they'd let him, as I understand it).
Which is precisely why I didn't you clueless ignoramus. If you had actually bothered to READ my reply saying I would accept even King Harry rather than cut and paste your pre conceived predicted answer!!!
That doesn't change the fact Harry would just be a lower ranked army officer living in a 3 bed semi if he wasn't royal and Meghan wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole (mind you she would still be a C- list actress too)
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
The moment youy start picking and choosing which royalty meets your criteria for a True Tory you've lost - and you lost that years ago with your diatribes against H. Mountbatten-Windsor - who, in contrast to most of us, actually served in the armed forces in a combat zone (and woiuld have done more if they'd let him, as I understand it).
Which is precisely why I didn't you clueless ignoramus. If you had actually bothered to READ my reply saying I would accept even King Harry rather than cut and paste your pre conceived predicted answer!!!
That doesn't change the fact Harry would just be a lower ranked army officer living in a 3 bed semi if he wasn't royal and Meghan wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole (mind you she would still be a C- list actress too)
You can't have it both ways. Eithewr they're royal and do the job or they're not royal and don't.
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
The moment youy start picking and choosing which royalty meets your criteria for a True Tory you've lost - and you lost that years ago with your diatribes against H. Mountbatten-Windsor - who, in contrast to most of us, actually served in the armed forces in a combat zone (and woiuld have done more if they'd let him, as I understand it).
Which is precisely why I didn't you clueless ignoramus. If you had actually bothered to READ my reply saying I would accept even King Harry rather than cut and paste your pre conceived predicted answer!!!
That doesn't change the fact Harry would just be a lower ranked army officer living in a 3 bed semi if he wasn't royal and Meghan wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole (mind you she would still be a C- list actress too)
You can't have it both ways. Eithewr they're royal and do the job or they're not royal and don't.
Harry hasn't abdicated. Neither for that matter has Andrew. They are just off the Civil List.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
I see- the minute Romford is turned into an apocalyptic wasteland, the rest of Essex isn't interested any more.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
Trump says “No,” when asked by @BretBaier if he sees JD Vance as his successor. Trump says the vice president is doing a fantastic job, but it’s too early to endorse and there are a lot of capable people.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
He's right. Although the demoralising nature of constant social media use is probably also a factor.
What's changed between 2004 and 2024? Find it hard to believe that education has changed that much. Probably a Brexit benefit.
BBC1 exposing Labour's rental sector black mould crisis
British people are paying private landlords to die in insanitary conditions.
This shouldn't be happening under a Labour Government. This is disgusting. Starmer get a grip.
AFAIK it's the Social landlords (RSL) who were the problem and not necessarily 'private' rented. RSLs should ensure their homes meet the Decent Homes Standard but a) do not always b) are slow to respond and c) are forced to rent at below market levels a.k.a. affordable. So they get caught out between lower income, higher costs, and tend to have higher levels of default.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
Britain is a great country.
But we don't get to be a great country, or remain one, by 'teaching' people that we are great.
We do it by being great.
It wouldbe nice though if we stopped teaching people that we are uniquely awful, racist and shit.
I don't think any school does that.
Is it in the National Curriculum? My boys must have missed that bit.
Perhaps Cookie's kids are privately educated.
We need to stop denying this exists.
It does occur in schools through the fulcrum of things like BHM and "values", as well as the NC. In addition, the lesson planning, the careful selection of source material, the tone set for class debate, and what the teacher looks approvingly on, all play a part in influencing attitudes.
And it doesn't end in the classroom. As an adult, I've been lectured on Britain's original sins through compulsory DEI training, one of which included a full 4-minute clip of a speech in parliament by David Lammy.
It was sufficiently bad for me to risk making a complaint about it.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
He's right. Although the demoralising nature of constant social media use is probably also a factor.
What's changed between 2004 and 2024? Find it hard to believe that education has changed that much. Probably a Brexit benefit.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
I see- the minute Romford is turned into an apocalyptic wasteland, the rest of Essex isn't interested any more.
Residents of Saffron Walden for example have as much in common with Romford as Slough does with Windsor
Whereas Brenda was always a good old one nation Tory and Keith would have voted Reform were he still around, we all had our doubts about where Brian's leftie loyalties lay.*
* With thanks to Private Eye.
The Queen Mother was a UKIP supporter allegedly, Philip was not far off Farage either, the Queen a One Nation Tory yes, Diana New Labour, Charles a LD or Green, William and Kate are One Nation Tories and Harry and Meghan Democrats who would be Starmer Labour in the UK
I don't think any of that true. It's all your fevered imagination.
The Royals all know that expressing political views would end the Monarchy. They may well be thick but they are not that foolish.
Of course, they can't even vote but in private those are clearly where the best guess of their allegiances lay (and Harry and Meghan are openly anti Trump Democrats)
Your best guesses, depending on how much you like them.
No grounding in evidence.
The Sussexes (Sussexi? Sussexen?) would perhaps be Green Party voters, given that's the only party - I believe - to have embraced republicanism
They haven't actually, Harry has kept his and his childrens place in the line of succession and they have also kept their Duke and Duchess titles. They just can't be bothered to do the work of working royals in boring parts of the provincial UK often in the rain when not on the throne when they could be in their mansion in the California sunshine with the odd trip out mainly for events with other celebs
So you're arguing that hereditary royalty is futile?
Absolutely not, far better than a politician president even in the unlikely event we ever ended up with King Harry
The moment youy start picking and choosing which royalty meets your criteria for a True Tory you've lost - and you lost that years ago with your diatribes against H. Mountbatten-Windsor - who, in contrast to most of us, actually served in the armed forces in a combat zone (and woiuld have done more if they'd let him, as I understand it).
Which is precisely why I didn't you clueless ignoramus. If you had actually bothered to READ my reply saying I would accept even King Harry rather than cut and paste your pre conceived predicted answer!!!
That doesn't change the fact Harry would just be a lower ranked army officer living in a 3 bed semi if he wasn't royal and Meghan wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole (mind you she would still be a C- list actress too)
You can't have it both ways. Eithewr they're royal and do the job or they're not royal and don't.
Unless you are reigning monarch (and I suppose their spouse) you don't need to do anything if you are royal, even if you remain in the line of succession. Working royals will probably be just cut down to William and Kate and their children once he becomes King anyway
BBC1 exposing Labour's rental sector black mould crisis
British people are paying private landlords to die in insanitary conditions.
This shouldn't be happening under a Labour Government. This is disgusting. Starmer get a grip.
AFAIK it's the Social landlords (RSL) who were the problem and not necessarily 'private' rented. RSLs should ensure their homes meet the Decent Homes Standard but a) do not always b) are slow to respond and c) are forced to rent at below market levels a.k.a. affordable. So they get caught out between lower income, higher costs, and tend to have higher levels of default.
Housing is broken.
It was an across the board critique of private, housing association and council owned properties.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
I see- the minute Romford is turned into an apocalyptic wasteland, the rest of Essex isn't interested any more.
Residents of Saffron Walden for example have as much in common with Romford as Slough does with Windsor
Romford, like Ilford, has been part of Greater London since 1965. 60 years ago!
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
I see- the minute Romford is turned into an apocalyptic wasteland, the rest of Essex isn't interested any more.
Residents of Saffron Walden for example have as much in common with Romford as Slough does with Windsor
That'll be you off Andrew Rosindell's Christmas Card list.
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
Put it this way.
If the Earth were an apple, so far we haven't drilled through the skin.
Besides, there's an awful lot we've been able to infer. Actually drilling down to the core (if it were possible) would spoil all the fun. Like looking in the back of the maths book for the answers.
The answers were in the back? Now you tell me at least 15yrs too late 😖
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
I'll have to take your word for it as I can't face it myself, so thanks.
IANAE on the Chagos Islands but the facts I have gleaned are that:
They once belonged to the French. We took them off the French in 1814 after Waterloo. For most of the 18th and 19th centuries we controlled them from Mauritius, a place that had no historical connection with them whatsoever. In the 1960s the Americans wanted a mid Indian Ocean base and chose Diego Garcia. In 1965 we, somewhat shamefully, kicked the remnants of the French, some African slaves and sundry others off the islands so the Americans could have that base without interference. Most of their descendants now live in the UK. At the same time we broke the administrative link between Mauritius and the Chagos islands. In 1968 Mauritius became independent of the UK. In 2021 the UN International Tribunal for the law of the Sea said that we should hand them back to Mauritius and that we had no sovereignty over them, despite controlling them since 1814. We are now trying to come to a "deal" by which we pay Mauritius money to take them off our hands without upsetting the Americans.
To describe the UN Tribunal decision as bizarre is to understate matters by several orders of magnitude. Mauritius never had any control of the Chagos when it was independent, either before we conquered it or at the time of their independence in 1968. If the UN is not going to recognise sovereignty after 210 years we are going to need a lot of new maps. The idea that we should pay anything to anybody for this is...words fail me.
The only real surprise, here, is that the UN is still perceived as a pure neutral arbiter.
It's about as clean as FIFA.
Nah, they make FIFA look good.
The UN Tribunal laid out their legal reasoning. If you think their answer is wrong, can you explain why with respect to the legal precedents?
See DavidL's post at 20:27
We should be invoking the legal precedence of Arkell v Pressdram to the Tribunal.
We could, as nation, make a political choice to do that. One can argue for or against that. My point is that the decision was not weird or biased or unprecedented. It concords with international law.
International law is a bad joke.
We should say piss off and move on.
That kind of behaviour is not without consequence. The question is whether doing so in this instance would have practical consequences we do not want to face. The government have done a poor job communicating those practical consequences, being a bit vague or advancing some scenarios which don't seem very likely, though a case is capable of being made at least, and the sheer rapid persistance to get it over the line has caused even some opponents to wonder if there is something to it (even if they are not yet convinced).
What's the consequence?
Countries tell "international law" to piss off all the time. As they bloody well should, its domestic law we should respect.
Russia's invasion was wrong because it was wrong to invade another country, not because it was illegal to do so.
Your example of Germany is about EU law rather than general international law, I believe.
We agree it is wrong to invade another country. Therefore, we have a rule that should govern how countries relate to each other: don’t invade another country. Great, so we’ve just re-invented international law. You are splitting hairs in your refusal to call that a law.
No we are not, we are not governed by rules on how countries relate to each other but by realpolitik and consequences.
Spend on Defence and countries won't attack you. Spend on Lawyers and they can.
So, do you believe might is right, or do you believe it is wrong to invade another country? I believe it is wrong to invade another country.
I believe that it is wrong to invade another country and that the only way to prevent invasions is deterrence.
Deterrence has to be backed up with might.
"Rules" are utterly irrelevant and ignored if deterrence is not there. They have no impact, but deterrence does.
And yet Luxembourg exists. As do loads of other countries that aren't capable of defending themselves from invasion.
Luxembourg was invaded and occupied by the Nazis, so what's your point?
The League of Nations, "rules" etc did not prevent that invasion.
Post WWII Luxembourg was a founding member state of NATO and what has prevented future invasions is that the USA, UK and France have nuclear weapons so nobody dares invade NATO nations anymore.
They're protected by our deterrence, not rules.
That proves my point.
What is NATO, if not a set of rules?
The point is that membership of a group based on mutual recognition of a set of rules is an alternative to military deterrence for many countries. What, for example, is stopping Germany or France from simply annexing Luxembourg? It's certainly not Luxembourg's military strength.
NATO is a military alliance, not a set of rules.
There is no alternative to deterrence. Luxembourg hides behind our nuclear shield, but it is there.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
With current technology sadly impossible. We can't even get the relatively short distance through the crust.
I suspect the molten rock part may proven even more challenging.
I can only imagine what our resident anti-cash campaigner on here thinks....
In the US, give a penny / take a penny has long since been common in shops so that people don't carry them around.
By the time we get round to scrapping the penny, we may as well scrap 2 pence and 5 pence at the same time.
In any case it bothers me far less than it used to as I no longer use cash (as in, I don't think I've used it once in several years) so I don't accumulate pennies. So long as we don't waste money making new ones it doesn't bother me either way.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
I skipped to a bit near the end where she started talking about Jonathan Haidt and it seemed very dull and predictable.
She just lacks any gravitas as a political leader. She doesn't represent any particular constituency or ideology and other people express the ideas that she associates herself with better than she does.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
I skipped to a bit near the end where she started talking about Jonathan Haidt and it seemed very dull and predictable.
She just lacks any gravitas as a political leader. She doesn't represent any particular constituency or ideology and other people express the ideas that she associates herself with better than she does.
IANAE on the Chagos Islands but the facts I have gleaned are that:
They once belonged to the French. We took them off the French in 1814 after Waterloo. For most of the 18th and 19th centuries we controlled them from Mauritius, a place that had no historical connection with them whatsoever. In the 1960s the Americans wanted a mid Indian Ocean base and chose Diego Garcia. In 1965 we, somewhat shamefully, kicked the remnants of the French, some African slaves and sundry others off the islands so the Americans could have that base without interference. Most of their descendants now live in the UK. At the same time we broke the administrative link between Mauritius and the Chagos islands. In 1968 Mauritius became independent of the UK. In 2021 the UN International Tribunal for the law of the Sea said that we should hand them back to Mauritius and that we had no sovereignty over them, despite controlling them since 1814. We are now trying to come to a "deal" by which we pay Mauritius money to take them off our hands without upsetting the Americans.
To describe the UN Tribunal decision as bizarre is to understate matters by several orders of magnitude. Mauritius never had any control of the Chagos when it was independent, either before we conquered it or at the time of their independence in 1968. If the UN is not going to recognise sovereignty after 210 years we are going to need a lot of new maps. The idea that we should pay anything to anybody for this is...words fail me.
The only real surprise, here, is that the UN is still perceived as a pure neutral arbiter.
It's about as clean as FIFA.
Nah, they make FIFA look good.
The UN Tribunal laid out their legal reasoning. If you think their answer is wrong, can you explain why with respect to the legal precedents?
See DavidL's post at 20:27
We should be invoking the legal precedence of Arkell v Pressdram to the Tribunal.
We could, as nation, make a political choice to do that. One can argue for or against that. My point is that the decision was not weird or biased or unprecedented. It concords with international law.
International law is a bad joke.
We should say piss off and move on.
That kind of behaviour is not without consequence. The question is whether doing so in this instance would have practical consequences we do not want to face. The government have done a poor job communicating those practical consequences, being a bit vague or advancing some scenarios which don't seem very likely, though a case is capable of being made at least, and the sheer rapid persistance to get it over the line has caused even some opponents to wonder if there is something to it (even if they are not yet convinced).
What's the consequence?
Countries tell "international law" to piss off all the time. As they bloody well should, its domestic law we should respect.
Russia's invasion was wrong because it was wrong to invade another country, not because it was illegal to do so.
Your example of Germany is about EU law rather than general international law, I believe.
We agree it is wrong to invade another country. Therefore, we have a rule that should govern how countries relate to each other: don’t invade another country. Great, so we’ve just re-invented international law. You are splitting hairs in your refusal to call that a law.
No we are not, we are not governed by rules on how countries relate to each other but by realpolitik and consequences.
Spend on Defence and countries won't attack you. Spend on Lawyers and they can.
So, do you believe might is right, or do you believe it is wrong to invade another country? I believe it is wrong to invade another country.
I believe that it is wrong to invade another country and that the only way to prevent invasions is deterrence.
Deterrence has to be backed up with might.
"Rules" are utterly irrelevant and ignored if deterrence is not there. They have no impact, but deterrence does.
And yet Luxembourg exists. As do loads of other countries that aren't capable of defending themselves from invasion.
Luxembourg was invaded and occupied by the Nazis, so what's your point?
The League of Nations, "rules" etc did not prevent that invasion.
Post WWII Luxembourg was a founding member state of NATO and what has prevented future invasions is that the USA, UK and France have nuclear weapons so nobody dares invade NATO nations anymore.
They're protected by our deterrence, not rules.
That proves my point.
What is NATO, if not a set of rules?
The point is that membership of a group based on mutual recognition of a set of rules is an alternative to military deterrence for many countries. What, for example, is stopping Germany or France from simply annexing Luxembourg? It's certainly not Luxembourg's military strength.
NATO is a military alliance, not a set of rules.
There is no alternative to deterrence. Luxembourg hides behind our nuclear shield, but it is there.
Luxembourg would be surrounded by NATO member states' territory even if it were outside NATO.
The big question regarding NATO at the moment is why has it set up shop in Jordan.
I see the chance of asteroid 2024 YR4 hitting the Earth on 22 December 2032 is now up from around 1% to 2.1%. If it does hit, the resulting explosion would have the power of around 340 times that of the Hiroshima bomb.
That's 5000KT. If it hit London it could be serious. This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
Most of Essex will be fine then
I see- the minute Romford is turned into an apocalyptic wasteland, the rest of Essex isn't interested any more.
Residents of Saffron Walden for example have as much in common with Romford as Slough does with Windsor
Romford, like Ilford, has been part of Greater London since 1965. 60 years ago!
They seem quite specific on the path over the earth's surface, just not how close that path will be. It's about 50/50 whether it'd be over land or sea.
Possible cities for localised destruction or localised tsunamis from an air burst along the route could be (one of) Bogota, Accra, Lagos, Aden, Mumbai or Dhaka, but of course the swathes of deep ocean, rainforest and desert make up the large majority of the impact probability.
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
With current technology sadly impossible. We can't even get the relatively short distance through the crust.
I suspect the molten rock part may proven even more challenging.
I can only imagine what our resident anti-cash campaigner on here thinks....
In the US, give a penny / take a penny has long since been common in shops so that people don't carry them around.
By the time we get round to scrapping the penny, we may as well scrap 2 pence and 5 pence at the same time.
In any case it bothers me far less than it used to as I no longer use cash (as in, I don't think I've used it once in several years) so I don't accumulate pennies. So long as we don't waste money making new ones it doesn't bother me either way.
Many years ago I learned from an early years teacher that the plastic pennies they used for teaching children cost more to buy than using the real thing.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
I think that probably is true.
In part it may be all the Reform and Tory voters who hate modern Britain.
Of course, it all hinges on finding something to be proud of in Britain. It doesn't have to be chocolate box royalist.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
They've been given so little stake in their society why would anyone be surprised by their lack of enthusiasm towards it? 🤨
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
They've been given so little stake in their society why would anyone be surprised by their lack of enthusiasm towards it? 🤨
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
I think that probably is true.
In part it may be all the Reform and Tory voters who hate modern Britain.
Of course, it all hinges on finding something to be proud of in Britain. It doesn't have to be chocolate box royalist.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
I think that probably is true.
In part it may be all the Reform and Tory voters who hate modern Britain.
Of course, it all hinges on finding something to be proud of in Britain. It doesn't have to be chocolate box royalist.
Quite. The heritage of the Presbyterians, Independents, Unitarians, Quakers and others who made modern Britain in the teeth of the Royalists and Tories (with some honourable and/or mixed exceptions). It's not fors nothing that key Systeme International units include such as Joule, Faraday, Kelvin, Watt ...
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
Something like this is presumably what he has in mind...
BBC news - exclusive. Bill will be changed to remove the judge being involved.
Panel of "experts" to decide - which sounds like mainly a group of social workers and medical staff like psychiatrists.
It's dead on arrival now imho.
idiots.
That's an improvement. Judge added no value. Only delay and cost. More likely to get through now. My MP, Sarah Olney, voted against 2nd reading but was opposed to a judge's involvement. She's on the Committee. I have hopes that she'll now vote in favour of the bill.
It's not a real German election campaign until a senior politician has to deny that they plagiarised their doctorate.
Surely 'recycling' an old thesis is the right thing to do if you're Green?
I've always been suspicious of such attacks ever since a Scottish Labour MSP got very excited about the SNP deleting words from inside verbatim quotations in government policy documents and putting "[...]" instead. That was real fraudulent, apparently.
In the case of degree theses and German politicians - a number of them have been caught by this already.
A journalist of enquiring mind downloaded the theses in question and ran them against plagiarism checkers….
So many were found, in fact that the institutions in question simply ignored the issue.
IIRC 40% of Ursula von der Leyen’s thesis was copy and pasta…
which institutions ignored which issues?
Well for a start, her university decided there was absolutely no problem there.
Obviously, dropping senior politicians in the crapper is bad idea if you are running a university - they might take it badly.
How long have we routinely had plagiarism checkers? I know its routine now, but 20 years ago? Also a plagiarism on technical content often throws up false hits (for instance references will appear to be plagiarised because they are formatted exactly and will be used by multiple documents.
The vaguely decent checkers look for footnoting and other reference stuff.
I've seen people caught by this - "Oh whoops, I forgot to reference all the quotes I used...."
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
My favourite Pertwee story I think. Though it's up against some stiff competition.
The green death or the daemons for me. The latter as it was filmed local to me (well same county).
It has to have the Master, it has to be set on Earth it has to have Jo Grant and the Brigadier, it has to have a Man from the Ministry being stupid so Pertwee can shout at him. Bonus points for UNIT being shooty and explosions. So it's the Sea Devils, Claws of Axos, Green Death or the Daemons. Much as I would like to include the Claws of Peladon on political grounds, it doesn't have those components. The Three Doctors is of course wonderful. Hmm. An embarrasment of riches...
BBC news - exclusive. Bill will be changed to remove the judge being involved.
Panel of "experts" to decide - which sounds like mainly a group of social workers and medical staff like psychiatrists.
It's dead on arrival now imho.
idiots.
That's an improvement. Judge added no value. Only delay and cost. More likely to get through now. My MP, Sarah Olney, voted against 2nd reading but was opposed to a judge's involvement. She's on the Committee. I have hopes that she'll now vote in favour of the bill.
I suspect its an improvement in terms of making the bill practical. But it isn't going to look good - and to be honest I'd want a bill which passes comfortably... it feels like even if it passes a future Tory/Reform govt will overturn it...
Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
It will never be enough for the hard core Refukers.
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
Mainly because of Rishi's raising the visa wage requirement for new immigrants and dependents, little to do with what Starmer has done beyond kicking out a few illegals for the media.
If Starmer had had his way we would also stlll be in the EU with EU free movement
EU free movement worked great and delivered lower immigration than the Tories’ post-Brexit immigration rules to fill the same vacancies.
I’m don’t know Badenoch is being called a “policy wonk”. There’s no evidence at all for that. At least in terms of how she presents, she comes across as a little dim.
I also keep hearing she is lazy. She certainly achieved nothing at all while holding some key ministries under Sunak.
The question is when, not if, she goes.
Yet she is still forecast to make more net gains at the next general election than Hague or Ed Miliband or Foot did when they became LOTO after their party lost power at the subsequent general election and for their to be a hung parliament.
If she went before the next GE she would only be replaced by Philp or Stride who wouldn't make much difference anyway
Not Jenrick?
I mean huzzah if that's so, but he's desperate for the job, isn't he?
He failed to win either the Tory MPs or membership vote (while Sunak at least had won the MPs vote when he replaced Truss midterm) nor does he hold a front rank top 3 Shadow Cabinet role like Michael Howard as Shadow Chancellor did when he replaced IDS midterm or as Truss held when she replaced Boris or Boris had had when he replaced May ie they had both been Foreign Secretary.
Both Stride and Philp have made next to zero impact. And they would be chucked out with the Kemi bathwater. It will be Jenrick if it's anyone before GE29.
It's not a real German election campaign until a senior politician has to deny that they plagiarised their doctorate.
Surely 'recycling' an old thesis is the right thing to do if you're Green?
I've always been suspicious of such attacks ever since a Scottish Labour MSP got very excited about the SNP deleting words from inside verbatim quotations in government policy documents and putting "[...]" instead. That was real fraudulent, apparently.
In the case of degree theses and German politicians - a number of them have been caught by this already.
A journalist of enquiring mind downloaded the theses in question and ran them against plagiarism checkers….
So many were found, in fact that the institutions in question simply ignored the issue.
IIRC 40% of Ursula von der Leyen’s thesis was copy and pasta…
which institutions ignored which issues?
Well for a start, her university decided there was absolutely no problem there.
Obviously, dropping senior politicians in the crapper is bad idea if you are running a university - they might take it badly.
How long have we routinely had plagiarism checkers? I know its routine now, but 20 years ago? Also a plagiarism on technical content often throws up false hits (for instance references will appear to be plagiarised because they are formatted exactly and will be used by multiple documents.
The vaguely decent checkers look for footnoting and other reference stuff.
I've seen people caught by this - "Oh whoops, I forgot to reference all the quotes I used...."
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
My favourite Pertwee story I think. Though it's up against some stiff competition.
The green death or the daemons for me. The latter as it was filmed local to me (well same county).
It has to have the Master, it has to be set on Earth it has to have Jo Grant and the Brigadier, it has to have a Man from the Ministry being stupid so Pertwee can shout at him. Bonus points for UNIT being shooty and explosions. So it's the Sea Devils, Claws of Axos, Green Death or the Daemons. Much as I would like to include the Claws of Peladon on political grounds, it doesn't have those components. The Three Doctors is of course wonderful. Hmm. An embarrasment of riches...
It's not a real German election campaign until a senior politician has to deny that they plagiarised their doctorate.
Surely 'recycling' an old thesis is the right thing to do if you're Green?
I've always been suspicious of such attacks ever since a Scottish Labour MSP got very excited about the SNP deleting words from inside verbatim quotations in government policy documents and putting "[...]" instead. That was real fraudulent, apparently.
In the case of degree theses and German politicians - a number of them have been caught by this already.
A journalist of enquiring mind downloaded the theses in question and ran them against plagiarism checkers….
So many were found, in fact that the institutions in question simply ignored the issue.
IIRC 40% of Ursula von der Leyen’s thesis was copy and pasta…
which institutions ignored which issues?
Well for a start, her university decided there was absolutely no problem there.
Obviously, dropping senior politicians in the crapper is bad idea if you are running a university - they might take it badly.
How long have we routinely had plagiarism checkers? I know its routine now, but 20 years ago? Also a plagiarism on technical content often throws up false hits (for instance references will appear to be plagiarised because they are formatted exactly and will be used by multiple documents.
The vaguely decent checkers look for footnoting and other reference stuff.
I've seen people caught by this - "Oh whoops, I forgot to reference all the quotes I used...."
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
My favourite Pertwee story I think. Though it's up against some stiff competition.
The green death or the daemons for me. The latter as it was filmed local to me (well same county).
It has to have the Master, it has to be set on Earth it has to have Jo Grant and the Brigadier, it has to have a Man from the Ministry being stupid so Pertwee can shout at him. Bonus points for UNIT being shooty and explosions. So it's the Sea Devils, Claws of Axos, Green Death or the Daemons. Much as I would like to include the Claws of Peladon on political grounds, it doesn't have those components. The Three Doctors is of course wonderful. Hmm. An embarrasment of riches...
The sea devils of course has no unit, but the navy as unit stand ins. But I tend to agree with your logic.
'Only 41% of 18-27 year olds are proud to be British. That is down from 80% in 2004.
Our education system is broken' says Farage. Vows to end poison from universities and ensure young people are taught Britain is a great country if Reform get into power https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1888943931154427910
It may be that only 41% of 18 year olds are British. I'm sure not of course, but the immigration numbers are huge and the birth rate differentials are substantial.
Nonetheless it'll become tricky to man the floating scrapyards (oh sorry Brown's-carriers) that we have to desperately stop sinking in order to maintain our national pride.
you think maybe 59% of 18 year olds in Britain aren't British????
I see in 2024 only 57% of 50-64 year olds say they feel proud to be British - much less than the 80% of 2004 18-30 year olds. So probably pride in being British (and why should anyone feel proud or ashamed of what nationality they are?) has fallen in all age groups.
I think that probably is true.
In part it may be all the Reform and Tory voters who hate modern Britain.
Of course, it all hinges on finding something to be proud of in Britain. It doesn't have to be chocolate box royalist.
British people are seen as having a good sense of humour - at least in the rest of Europe - so maybe that's a quality to be proud of. So long as you have one.
Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
It will never be enough for the hard core Refukers.
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
Mainly because of Rishi's raising the visa wage requirement for new immigrants and dependents, little to do with what Starmer has done beyond kicking out a few illegals for the media.
If Starmer had had his way we would also stlll be in the EU with EU free movement
EU free movement worked great and delivered lower immigration than the Tories’ post-Brexit immigration rules to fill the same vacancies.
I’d love to see a study of the respective quality (income, welfare dependency, education) of EU migration and the Boriswave.
I highly suspect EU migration trumps the Boriswave.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
I'll have to take your word for it as I can't face it myself, so thanks.
BBC news - exclusive. Bill will be changed to remove the judge being involved.
Panel of "experts" to decide - which sounds like mainly a group of social workers and medical staff like psychiatrists.
It's dead on arrival now imho.
idiots.
That's an improvement. Judge added no value. Only delay and cost. More likely to get through now. My MP, Sarah Olney, voted against 2nd reading but was opposed to a judge's involvement. She's on the Committee. I have hopes that she'll now vote in favour of the bill.
We'll see.
I think the Bill is dead now.
Wavering types will conclude a massive safe guard has been removed.
There are loads of MPs imho looking for a way to justify voting against as it seems such a big step.
Wow. The Trump reference he could probably do without, but to receive this publicity on this issue in the Mail will be music to Sir Keir's ears. If the Right aren't panicking yet they should be. This is serious tanks-on-lawn stuff.
It will never be enough for the hard core Refukers.
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
Mainly because of Rishi's raising the visa wage requirement for new immigrants and dependents, little to do with what Starmer has done beyond kicking out a few illegals for the media.
If Starmer had had his way we would also stlll be in the EU with EU free movement
EU free movement worked great and delivered lower immigration than the Tories’ post-Brexit immigration rules to fill the same vacancies.
I don't think anybody disputes this, but the latter was British Government policy that can be changed by electing a new Government, and the former was an immutable part of a permanent legal framework that could not be altered (except by leaving). So you can't really compare the two. I was fine with EU migration and thought those who came were great. But it happened that the social and economic trends (for the most part - there were some losers) worked in our favour with EU migration. To compare that with the current situation is to compare having a roof with a sunny day. The sunny day is better until it isn't and there's shit all you can do about it.
It's not a real German election campaign until a senior politician has to deny that they plagiarised their doctorate.
Surely 'recycling' an old thesis is the right thing to do if you're Green?
I've always been suspicious of such attacks ever since a Scottish Labour MSP got very excited about the SNP deleting words from inside verbatim quotations in government policy documents and putting "[...]" instead. That was real fraudulent, apparently.
In the case of degree theses and German politicians - a number of them have been caught by this already.
A journalist of enquiring mind downloaded the theses in question and ran them against plagiarism checkers….
So many were found, in fact that the institutions in question simply ignored the issue.
IIRC 40% of Ursula von der Leyen’s thesis was copy and pasta…
which institutions ignored which issues?
Well for a start, her university decided there was absolutely no problem there.
Obviously, dropping senior politicians in the crapper is bad idea if you are running a university - they might take it badly.
How long have we routinely had plagiarism checkers? I know its routine now, but 20 years ago? Also a plagiarism on technical content often throws up false hits (for instance references will appear to be plagiarised because they are formatted exactly and will be used by multiple documents.
The vaguely decent checkers look for footnoting and other reference stuff.
I've seen people caught by this - "Oh whoops, I forgot to reference all the quotes I used...."
contains this remarkable short passage, which is really impossible to characterise:
The inside of our planet is an extremely mysterious place. The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
but conveys a sort of innocence - perhaps the attempt is with a spade or a largish digger - which would immediately make sense to my six year old grandson.
But something about it is mysteriously very funny.
@viewcode Do you reckon we should be trying to drill to, or reach, the core of the earth ?
My favourite Pertwee story I think. Though it's up against some stiff competition.
The green death or the daemons for me. The latter as it was filmed local to me (well same county).
It has to have the Master, it has to be set on Earth it has to have Jo Grant and the Brigadier, it has to have a Man from the Ministry being stupid so Pertwee can shout at him. Bonus points for UNIT being shooty and explosions. So it's the Sea Devils, Claws of Axos, Green Death or the Daemons. Much as I would like to include the Claws of Peladon on political grounds, it doesn't have those components. The Three Doctors is of course wonderful. Hmm. An embarrasment of riches...
Day of the Daleks for me.
Always felt Pertwee was a bit harsh on the humans trying to save the Earth. “Sir Reginald didn’t blow up the conference- you did it yourselves!”. Yet they are just victims of a bootstrap paradox.
On topic, i couldn't get past 30 minutes of Triggernometry interview with Kemi. If she can't shine when interviewed by those guys who give you loads of time and space to get your point over, no chance with much more aggressive interviewers.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
I skipped to a bit near the end where she started talking about Jonathan Haidt and it seemed very dull and predictable.
She just lacks any gravitas as a political leader. She doesn't represent any particular constituency or ideology and other people express the ideas that she associates herself with better than she does.
She has always come across as being a bit meandering and inexact. There was a chance that she would grow into the role and discover a bit more discipline, edge, and clarity of thought but it feels like she hasn’t been able to rise to meet it. A shame - I think that when she is at her best she is an interesting, articulate politician, but I don’t think she is a leader or election winner on current form.
BBC news - exclusive. Bill will be changed to remove the judge being involved.
Panel of "experts" to decide - which sounds like mainly a group of social workers and medical staff like psychiatrists.
It's dead on arrival now imho.
idiots.
That's an improvement. Judge added no value. Only delay and cost. More likely to get through now. My MP, Sarah Olney, voted against 2nd reading but was opposed to a judge's involvement. She's on the Committee. I have hopes that she'll now vote in favour of the bill.
We'll see.
I think the Bill is dead now.
Wavering types will conclude a massive safe guard has been removed.
There are loads of MPs imho looking for a way to justify voting against as it seems such a big step.
They just got given one.
We'll see
As a matter of interest, are you in favour or against the bill?
Comments
But with the steep drop in immigration in the next figures, it is qoing to be a sharp contrast with the last government.
If Starmer had had his way we would also stlll be in the EU with EU free movement
The actual survey is far more interesting.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/gen-z-survey-police-racism-crime-nhs-hlghh0pxw
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/apr/01/queenmother.monarchy3
This is the impact of a 5000KT on Westminster.
https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
(I'm an Essex boy by birth, so I think I can get away with that)
*ELON MUSK-LED GROUP MAKES $97.4B BID FOR CONTROL OF OPENAI: WSJ
TSE is a tedious republican on this issue
It's hard to see a downside.
That doesn't change the fact Harry would just be a lower ranked army officer living in a 3 bed semi if he wasn't royal and Meghan wouldn't have touched him with a bargepole (mind you she would still be a C- list actress too)
I can only imagine what our resident anti-cash campaigner on here thinks....
In the US, give a penny / take a penny has long since been common in shops so that people don't carry them around.
It was terrible stuff....i was great in government, i personally did loads, everybodies fault, but don't ask me for any ideas now, as i'm an engineer we do lots of planning first.
Trump says “No,” when asked by @BretBaier if he sees JD Vance as his successor. Trump says the vice president is doing a fantastic job, but it’s too early to endorse and there are a lot of capable people.
This
https://natcen.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2024-09/british-social-attitudes-41-|-national-identity-1377.pdf
has pride in Britain rising between 1995 and 2013, and falling between 2013 and 2023
Housing is broken.
It does occur in schools through the fulcrum of things like BHM and "values", as well as the NC. In addition, the lesson planning, the careful selection of source material, the tone set for class debate, and what the teacher looks approvingly on, all play a part in influencing attitudes.
And it doesn't end in the classroom. As an adult, I've been lectured on Britain's original sins through compulsory DEI training, one of which included a full 4-minute clip of a speech in parliament by David Lammy.
It was sufficiently bad for me to risk making a complaint about it.
I shall exile myself to TwiX in penance (for a few minutes).
You lucky thing.
There is no alternative to deterrence. Luxembourg hides behind our nuclear shield, but it is there.
The molten metal part even more so. By the time we get round to scrapping the penny, we may as well scrap 2 pence and 5 pence at the same time.
In any case it bothers me far less than it used to as I no longer use cash (as in, I don't think I've used it once in several years) so I don't accumulate pennies. So long as we don't waste money making new ones it doesn't bother me either way.
She just lacks any gravitas as a political leader. She doesn't represent any particular constituency or ideology and other people express the ideas that she associates herself with better than she does.
The big question regarding NATO at the moment is why has it set up shop in Jordan.
Panel of "experts" to decide - which sounds like mainly a group of social workers and medical staff like psychiatrists.
It's dead on arrival now imho.
idiots.
"The £3,800 secret lounge in Heathrow where you can buy a Hockney
The £3m refurbishment is intended to set ‘a new benchmark for luxury travel’"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/10/ultra-exclusive-secret-lounge-heathrow-buy-a-hockney/
Possible cities for localised destruction or localised tsunamis from an air burst along the route could be (one of) Bogota, Accra, Lagos, Aden, Mumbai or Dhaka, but of course the swathes of deep ocean, rainforest and desert make up the large majority of the impact probability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_YR4?wprov=sfla1
Many years ago I learned from an early years teacher that the plastic pennies they used for teaching children cost more to buy than using the real thing.
Your useless factoid for the day.
In part it may be all the Reform and Tory voters who hate modern Britain.
Of course, it all hinges on finding something to be proud of in Britain. It doesn't have to be chocolate box royalist.
Somewhat ironic.
Oh well. Only another ten years to wait until the next attempt at reform.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/09/many-teachers-dont-want-to-do-this-but-theyre-trapped-film-shows-extent-of-putin-indoctrination-in-russian-schools
My MP, Sarah Olney, voted against 2nd reading but was opposed to a judge's involvement. She's on the Committee. I have hopes that she'll now vote in favour of the bill.
“Trump to pause enforcement of law banning bribery of foreign officials”
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/10/trump-doj-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-pause.html
But it isn't going to look good - and to be honest I'd want a bill which passes comfortably... it feels like even if it passes a future Tory/Reform govt will overturn it...
I highly suspect EU migration trumps the Boriswave.
She just came across as someone who has just discovered Politics 101.
I know it’s popular to bash PPEs, but presumably they at least get a chance to figure out not just what they’re for, but why, at a formative age.
I think the Bill is dead now.
Wavering types will conclude a massive safe guard has been removed.
There are loads of MPs imho looking for a way to justify voting against as it seems such a big step.
They just got given one.
Because I was totally wrong.
As a matter of interest, are you in favour or against the bill?